HomeMy WebLinkAboutADOPTED Iowa City Bicycle Master PlanBICYCLE MASTER PLAN
IOWA CITY, IOWA
SUMMER 2017
Acknowledgements
Iowa City City Council
Jim Throgmorton, Mayor
Kingsley Botchway II, Mayor Pro Tem
Rockne Cole
Terry Dickens
Susan Mims
Pauline Taylor
John Thomas
Iowa City Staff
Kent Ralston, AICP, Transportation Planner
Sarah Walz, Associate Planner
Technical Advisory Committee
Jeff Barnes, Director of Facilities, Iowa City Community School District
Jay Geisen, GIS Analyst, University of Iowa
Zac Hall, Parks Superintendent, Iowa City Parks and Recreation
Jason Havel, City Engineer, Iowa City
Darian Nagle-Gamm, Senior Transportation Engineering Planner, MPOJC
Jon Resler, Superintendent of Streets and Traffic Engineering, Iowa City
David Ricketts, Director of Parking and Transportation, University of Iowa
Juli Seydell-Johnson, Director of Parks and Recreation, Iowa City
David Schwindt, Officer, Downtown Liaison, Iowa City Police Department
Bicycle Advisory Committee
Kris Ackerson, Community Development Planner, Iowa City
Ben Anderson, Iowa City Bicycling Club
Anthony Branch, Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County and Youth Off-Road Riders
Wayne Fett, Goosetown/New Pioneer Racing Team
Cody Gieselman, Iowa City Bike Library
Brian Loring, Blue Zones and Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County
Benjamin Nelson, University of Iowa Student Government
Susie Poulton, Iowa City Community School District, Safe Routes to School
Emily Robnette, University of Iowa Bicycle Advisory Committee
Jennifer Selby, Think Bicycles of Johnson County
Jacob Simpson, University of Iowa Student Government
Consultant Team:
Alta Planning + Design, Inc.
Cynthia Hoyle, Project Manager
Paul Wojciechowski, Principal
Kevin Neill
RDG Planning & Design
Marty Shukert, Principal
Cory Scott
Table of Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Vision and Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
The Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
Needs Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Vision and Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
Existing System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
The Six Es Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
The Bike Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Building a Culture of Bicycling . . . . . . . . . .35
Existing Plans and Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
Needs Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49
Types of Bicyclists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49
Demand for Bicycling Facilities . . . . . . . . .50
Community Input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58
Online Mapping Tool Input . . . . . . . . . . . . .64
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
The Iowa City Bikeway Network . . . . . . . . .69
Programs and Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90
Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107
Going for Gold: Immediate Actions . . . . .107
Corridor and Project Prioritization . . . . .108
Cost Estimate Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . .109
Project Phasing Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111
Funding Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114
Ongoing Maintenance and Operations . .119
Plan Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . .121
Table of Maps
Map 1. Existing Bike Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Map 2 . Bike Network Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
Map 3 . Barriers to Bicycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Map 4. Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress for Arterial
and Collector Streets in Iowa City . . . . . . . . . .28
Map 5 . Bicycle Crash Clusters, 2011-2015 . . . .31
Map 6 . Bicycle Crashes by Severity, 2011-2015 .
32
Map 7 . Bicycle Parking and Repair Stations . .34
Map 8 . Population-Based Demand . . . . . . . . .51
Map 9 . Employment-Based Demand . . . . . . . .52
Map 10 . Recreation-Based Demand . . . . . . . .53
Map 11 . School-Based Demand . . . . . . . . . . . .54
Map 12 . Retail-Based Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . .55
Map 13 . Transit-Based Demand . . . . . . . . . . . .56
Map 14 . Composite Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57
Map 15 . Current Bicycling Route Density . . . .64
Map 16 . Desired Bicycling Route Density . . . .65
Map 17 . Combined Bicycling Route Density . .66
Map 18 . Community Destination Density . . . .67
Map 19. Functional Bicycle Network . . . . . . . .72
Map 20. Functional Bicycle Network:
Northwest Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73
Map 21. Functional Bicycle Network: Northeast
Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74
Map 22. Functional Bicycle Network:
Southwest Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75
Map 23. Functional Bicycle Network: Southeast
Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76
Map 24. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility
Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79
Map 25. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility
Types: Northwest Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80
Map 26. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility
Types: Northeast Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81
Map 27. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility
Table of Tables
Table 1. Bicycle Friendly Designations . . . . . . .15
Table 2. Segment Scoring Matrix for Bicycle
Level of Traffic Stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
Table 3 . Relevant Plans and Policies . . . . . . . .41
Table 4. Mileage by Bicycle Facility . . . . . . . . . .78
Table 5. Characteristics of Short- and Long-
Term Bicycle Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88
Table 6 . Recommended Programs and Policies .
90
Table 7 . Prioritization Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . .109
Table 8. Cost Estimates by Facility Type . . . .111
Table 9 . Immediate-Term Projects (2017-2018) .
112
Table 10 . Near-Term Projects (2019-2022) . .113
Table 11 . Planning-Level Maintenance Costs 120
Table 12. Implementation Performance
Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122
Types: Southwest Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82
Map 28. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility
Types: Southeast Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83
Map 29 . Bikeway Project Prioritization . . . . .110
Map 30 . Project Phasing Strategy . . . . . . . . .115
Section 1
Executive Summary
6 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Executive Summary
Bicycling is an integral part of the character and
identity of Iowa City. From families traveling on the
city’s scenic greenways and trails, to children and
young adults bicycling to school, to adults trav-
eling to work and running errands, people of all
ages and backgrounds are traveling throughout the
city by bike . In recent years, Iowa City has demon-
strated its commitment to making bicycling a safer,
easier, and more convenient form of transportation
and has earned the League of American Bicyclists’
(LAB) Silver Bicycle-Friendly Community (BFC)
designation . This Bicycle Master Plan provides the
framework and recommendations for the city to
become a Gold-Level BFC.
The plan is divided into five chapters. The first
chapter outlines the plan and states the vision,
goals, and objectives to guide the planning process
and subsequent implementation . The second
chapter describes the current bicycling environ-
ment, characteristics of the transportation system,
programs and activities to encourage bicycling and
raise awareness for all road users, and plans and
policies that impact bicycle transportation . The third
chapter focuses on bicycling needs and includes an
examination of demand for bicycling facilities and a
summary of the public engagement activities and
community input that shaped the plan recommen-
dations. The fourth chapter outlines the physical
and programmatic recommendations to achieve
the vision of a more bikeable community. The fifth
and final chapter provides a framework for imple-
menting the plan and includes early implementation
actions, cost estimates for bicycle facilities, funding
sources, a project phasing strategy, and mainte-
nance considerations .
Process
The planning process, which took place over the
course of eight months from December 2016 to
July 2017, is grounded in objective analysis and best
practices in bicycle network and facility design, and
driven by the vision and ideas of the many commu-
nity residents and stakeholders who participated
in the process . Key engagement events, including
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings,
1st RoundCommunityWorkshops
TAC / BAC 2
Project Webpage, Survey, Online Mapping Tool, Comment Form
TAC / BAC 1 TAC / BAC 3 TAC / BAC 4 TAC / BAC 4
2nd RoundCommunityWorkshops
Pop-UpMeeting / CommunityEvent
FinalPresen-tations
Project
Initiation
Exisitng
Conditions
Analysis
Vision
and Goals /
High Priority
Areas
Draft
Bicycle
Facility
Plan
Policy,
Programs, &
Implemen-
tation
Draft and
Final Plan
DataCollection
BeginFieldReview
DevelopWebsite,Map Tool,Survey
December2016 January2017 February2017 March2017 April2017 May2017 June2017 July2017
CommunityEngagement
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
on-street network, which lacks in both connectivity
and coverage, does not support bicycling activity to
a similar degree . While many local roads throughout
Iowa City offer quiet, comfortable corridors for
bicycling, major barriers like difficult intersections,
major highways, and the Iowa River limit people’s
ability to travel by bicycle to everyday destinations
like parks, schools, places of employment, shopping,
and entertainment. Iowa City is aware of these chal -
lenges to bicycling and has been actively addressing
them through continued bikeway development and
through planning and policy tools to direct munic-
ipal resources and support bicycle-friendly private
and public development .
Needs Assessment
An assessment and understanding of community
needs for bicycle transportation and recreation is
necessary to effectively direct local resources and
investments, Iowa City and its community partners .
Through an objective analysis of trip origins and
destinations and a broad range of feedback gener-
ating through various public engagement activities
and tools, a clearer picture of bicycle-related needs
began to emerge . While the trip origin and desti-
nation analysis painted a general picture of high
concentrations of land uses that are generating
bicycle trips, the public input provided more specific
detail about desired routes, barriers to bicycling,
corridors in need of improvement, popular destina-
tion in need of bicycle parking, and other valuable
information to guide the plan recommendations.
Recommendations
Plan recommendations focus on both building the
physical bike network and creating an underlying
support system through strategic programs and
policies. There are over 100 miles of recommended
bikeways in the plan, including 72 miles of on-street
facilities—like bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, bicycle
boulevards—and 28 miles of off-street facilities,
such as trails and sidepaths. When complete, the full
bike network will offer residents and visitors oppor-
tunities to travel by bicycle and access everyday
Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) meetings, and
public open houses, were scheduled to share infor-
mation and garner feedback at critical stages during
the eight-month planning period .
Vision and Goals
The plan’s vision reflects Iowa City’s needs, values,
and aspirations for bicycling by depicting the commu -
nity’s desired future for bicycling. Supporting goals
and objectives provide clear paths to achieve this
vision .
The Vision
Iowa City is a bicycle-friendly
community in which bicycling is
a safe, comfortable, convenient,
and preferred mode of travel and
recreation for people of all ages and
abilities. Iowa City residents and
leaders value bicycling as a means
to support a strong and diverse
economy, foster healthy and active
lifestyles, promote transportation
equity, advance environmental
sustainability, and enhance quality
of life.
The Goals
Six goals provide general themes that mirror the
LAB’s Building Blocks of a BFC. Together, these six
goals provide a comprehensive approach to creating
social and physical environments that welcome and
support bicycling by people of all ages and abilities.
Existing Conditions
Iowa City’s existing bikeway system consists of
more than 85 miles of off-street trails and sidepaths
and on-street bike lanes, marked and signed routes,
and wide shoulders . The city’s linear trails and
greenways provide excellent recreational oppor-
tunities for people of all ages and abilities, but the
8 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
destinations safely and comfortably, regardless of
age or ability . Recommended programs and poli-
cies help to build a culture of bicycling by engaging
residents through fun and exciting bicycling events,
providing education opportunities for both youth
and adults, and creating systems to measure and
monitor bicycling activity, safety, and other key
variables .
Implementation
Implementing the plan recommendations begins
even before the plan is complete. Seven imme -
diate actions provide the foundation for long-term
commitment to the plan and set the stage for
progressive network growth .
Immediate Action Steps
■Adopt the plan
■Establish standing Bicycle
Advisory Committee
■Create a bicycle coordinator
position
■Complete immediate-term
bikeway projects
■Apply for BFC designation
■Collect baseline on-street bicycle
counts
■Establish baseline measurements
and set target benchmarks
Project prioritization assigns value to project recom-
mendations based on key metrics established with
guidance from advisory committees and public feed-
back. Prioritization results in turn effect the project
phasing schedule, which groups the recommended
bikeways into four phasing groups: immediate
term (2017-2018), near term (2019-2022), long term
(2023-2027), and unscheduled . Cost estimates and
potential funding sources support capital improve-
ment planning, project financing, and project
development . General maintenance considerations
reinforce the commitment required to effectively
maintain the bikeway network as a valuable asset to
Iowa City and its residents .
As the plan is implemented, it will be critical to
monitor the progress of Iowa City and its community
partners and periodically reevaluate the commu-
nity needs and update this plan document . The plan
concludes with monitoring and evaluation metrics
to guide the city towards its goal of becoming a
Gold-Level BFC.
Section 2
Vision, Goals, and Objectives
10 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Vision and Goals
Bicycling is an integral part of the character and
identity of Iowa City. From families traveling on the
city’s scenic greenways and trails, to children and
young adults bicycling to school, to adults traveling
to work and running errands, people of all ages and
backgrounds are traveling throughout the city by
bike . In recent years, Iowa City has demonstrated its
commitment to making bicycling a safer, easier, and
more convenient form of transportation through
the development of trails, bike lanes, designated
bicycle routes, bicycle-supportive policy changes,
and programs in partnership with local advocacy
organizations and community groups . In its 2016-
2017 Strategic Plan, the City Council stated its intent
to raise Iowa City’s BFC status from Silver to Gold
by 2017, and to aspire toward Platinum status in the
future. This Bicycle Master Plan provides the frame -
work and recommendations for the city to become
a Gold-Level BFC.
The Iowa City Bicycle Master Plan establishes a
strategy to support bicycling as a viable and inclu-
sive mode of transportation. Over the course of the
planning process, community residents, businesses,
institutions, and other stakeholders have shared
their hopes and ideas for bicycling in Iowa City, and
these hopes and ideas are encapsulated in the plan
vision, goals, and objectives that will guide the city’s
actions for bicycling for years to come. The plan
vision is aspirational and ambitious, representing
the desired future for bicycling. The plan goals are
broad, value-based expressions of the community’s
desires that can guide decision-making and bring
the plan vision to life. Goals give direction to the
plan as a whole and are concerned with the long-
term. As a core foundation of the plan, the LAB’s
Building Blocks of a BFC organizes the goals into a
clear and comprehensive “Six Es” framework based
on proven elements of great bike plans. Multiple
objectives have been identified to add measurable
actions to each goal . The plan vision, goals, and
objectives are firmly rooted in input from commu-
nity members, guidance from the BAC and TAC, and
detailed analysis of existing conditions. Enfo r cementEnforcement
Build safe and responsible
behaviors on the road and
build respect among all
road users Ed u c ationEducation
Equip people with the
knowledge, skills and
confidence to bike and walk
Encou r agem
e
n
tEncouragem
e
n
tFoster a culture that
supports and encourages
active transportationEngineeringEngineering
Create safe, connected,
and comfortable places
for bicycling and walking
E q uityEquity
Increase access and
opportunity for all residents,
including disadvantaged,
minority, and low-income
populations Eva l uationEvaluation
Monitor efforts to active
transportation and plan for
the future
VISION AND GOALS 11
The Vision
Iowa City is a bicycle-friendly
community in which bicycling is
a safe, comfortable, convenient,
and preferred mode of travel and
recreation for people of all ages
and abilities. Iowa City residents
and leaders value bicycling as a
means to support a strong and
diverse economy, foster healthy
and active lifestyles, promote
transportation equity, advance
environmental sustainability,
and enhance quality of life.
Goals and Objectives
Goal 1: Engineering. Implement safe, comfort-
able, and convenient travel for people of all ages
and abilities through an interconnected network
of low-stress bicycling facilities.
■Objective 1.1: Increase total bicycle network
miles .
■Objective 1.2: Increase network connectivity by
reducing gaps between existing facilities.
■Objective 1.3: Increase network connectivity by
expanding facilities into underserved areas.
■Objective 1.4: Increase bicycling safety through
improvements to existing bicycle facilities and
network expansion .
■Objective 1.5: Meet or exceed minimum design
standards and incorporate best practices in
facility design, utilizing national resources
including the latest editions of the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development
of Bicycle Facilities, the National Association of
City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban
Bikeway Design Guide, and the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) Small Town and Rural
Multimodal Networks Guide .
■Objective 1.6: Preserve the safety and quality of
existing and newly installed bikeways through
ongoing facility evaluation and maintenance.
■Objective 1.7: Coordinate with adjacent munici-
palities and other local and state agencies to
increase regional connectivity, particularly for
projects that extend to the city limits or connect
with bicycle facilities outside the city’s jurisdiction.
■Objective 1.8: Balance bicycle mobility needs with
pedestrian, motorist, and transit needs through
implementation of the city’s Complete Streets
policy .
■Objective 1.9: Maximize bicycle amenities at
transit stops and centers to support multimodal
transportation .
■Objective 1.10: Utilize the zoning ordinance,
subdivision regulations, and other policy tools to
create a bicycle-supportive built environment .
■Objective 1.11: Provide support facilities to
enhance the bicycle network in the form of short-
and long-term bicycle parking, bicycle repair
stations, bike share stations, and wayfinding
signage .
Goal 2: Education. Provide educational opportu-
nities that teach roadway safety for all roadway
users in Iowa City, including practical skills for
bicycling, awareness of bicycle facilities and how
to use them, and the rules of the road for people
driving and bicycling.
■Objective 2.1: Increase opportunities for adults,
college students, teens, and youth to learn basic
bicycle skills and traffic safety through regularly
offered courses and training.
■Objective 2.2: Work with private and public
schools to increase bicycle skills and traffic
instruction as a part of school curricula.
12 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
■Objective 2.3: Support community part-
ners’ bicycle-related education initiatives to
reach targeted populations and the broader
community .
■Objective 2.4: Incorporate multi-pronged
outreach efforts into bicycle project develop -
ment to increase understanding of new bicycle
facilities and raise awareness for the diversity of
road users in Iowa City .
Goal 3: Encouragement. Offer diverse and
inclusive programs, events, and activities that
encourage all Iowa City residents and visitors to
enjoy bicycling.
■Objective 3.1: Support community partners’
bicycle-related encouragement initiatives to
reach targeted populations and the broader
community .
■Objective 3.2: Use the City’s various social media
platforms to promote bicycling.
■Objective 3.3: Work with local businesses and
the chamber of commerce to create incentive
programs for bicycling to work, to shop, and to
community events .
■Objective 3.4: Work with the university and local
schools to create incentive programs for students
and employees to bicycle to and from school.
Goal 4: Enforcement. Establish a shared under-
standing of and respect for bicycling among
all road users through enforcement activities
that promote responsible travel behavior and
help educate the entire community on roadway
safety.
■Objective 4.1: Support law enforcement with
training opportunities to address the needs of
bicyclists and other road users .
■Objective 4.2: Develop law enforcement
programs and activities to promote safe and
responsible travel behavior .
Goal 5: Evaluation. Define measurable mobility
targets and provide routine evaluation of the
state of bicycling in Iowa City to monitor plan
implementation progress, identify opportunities
for improvement, and address bicycling-related
needs and issues as they arise.
■Objective 5.1: Create an annual implemen-
tation agenda to guide bicycle project and
program development and delivery within
budgetary constraints established in the Capital
Improvement Plan .
■Objective 5.2: Establish a bicycle or active
transportation advisory committee to support
evaluation, data collection, and implementation
tracking efforts.
■Objective 5.3: Use evaluation and implementa-
tion tracking measures to highlight plan-related
accomplishments and communicate the impor-
tance of bicycling to the community.
■Objective 5.4: Encourage community participa-
tion and feedback through ongoing engagement
activities and open communication channels .
■Objective 5.5: Achieve Gold-Level BFC status.
Goal 6: Equity. Contribute to a more equitable,
affordable, and accessible transportation
system in Iowa City by ensuring bicycling is a
viable choice for all people throughout the entire
city, with special focus on underserved popula-
tions, including youth, the elderly, people with
disabilities, racial and ethnic minorities, immi-
grants, and low-income households.
■Objective 6.1: Increase bicycle network coverage
to underserved populations .
■Objective 6.2: Develop programs and materials
that increase access to bicycling and bicycle-
related information for underserved populations.
Section 3
Existing System
14 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Existing System
Take a ride through Iowa City on any given day, and
it quickly becomes clear: Iowa City is a bicycling city.
From the scenic trail system to the busy streets and
paths in and around Downtown and the University
of Iowa, people of all ages and backgrounds are
using the bicycle for transportation and recreation.
The culture of bicycling in Iowa City is the result of
concerted efforts by city and state governments,
local bike shops, citizen advocacy groups, bike clubs,
schools, and individual residents—all committed to
supporting bicycling as a means of connecting to
people and places in Iowa City . This chapter exam-
ines the current state of bicycling in Iowa City, with
a focus on existing bicycle facilities and network
characteristics, relevant plans and policies, and
supporting programs and initiatives offered by Iowa
City and its many community partners . These are
features that have helped Iowa City earn Silver-Level
BFC (BFC) designation as defined by the LAB.
The Six Es Framework
Building a culture of bicycling that will take Iowa City
to the next level takes more than bike lanes and
trails. It will require the addition of low-stress bike-
ways that support bicycling by people of all ages and
abilities; programs, training, and organized rides to
give people the skills and confidence to travel by
bike; enforcement programs and laws that create
an environment of mutual respect among all road
users; and guidelines and policies to guide city staff
and elected officials to enable smart, responsible
choices . It takes a comprehensive approach, and,
above all, it takes ambition, will, and perseverance .
Iowa City has many of these assets and character-
istics already. In recognition of the city’s efforts,
the LAB designated Iowa City a Silver-Level BFC in
2013, improving on the Bronze-Level designation
awarded in 2009. The LAB’s Bicycle Friendly America
program acknowledges the efforts of communities,
Figure 1. The building blocks of a BFC
EXISTING SYSTEM 15
universities, and businesses to institutionalize bicy-
cling as a viable form of transportation. The program
measures success using five key indicators, often
referred to as the “Five Es” or the building blocks
of a BFC: education, encouragement, engineering,
enforcement, and evaluation. LAB is currently
working to incorporate equity as a sixth key indi-
cator, thereby creating the “Six Es” that were used
for this planning process. These six indicators are
used throughout this plan as a framework for evalu -
ating the current state of bicycling and developing
recommendations that can help Iowa City reach its
goal of becoming a Gold-Level BFC.
BFC Feedback
When awarding a BFC designation, the LAB provides
applicants with detailed feedback about strengths,
weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement.
Much of Iowa City’s success in achieving Silver-Level
BFC was due to the large network of shared-use
paths and the thriving bike culture strengthened by
community partners like the University of Iowa and
Think Bicycles Coalition, and through annual events
like Bike to Work Week. One of the major weak-
nesses was the lack of dedicated on-street bicycle
facilities, particularly on arterial and collector
roadways. The LAB provided the following recom-
mendations in its feedback report to enhance the
bicycling environment:
■Engineering: Provide bicycle facilities on arte-
rial and collector roads to help bicyclists of all
skill levels reach their destinations quickly and
safely. Consider protected infrastructure like
cycle tracks and buffered bike lanes on roads
with posted speed limits over 35 miles per hour .
■Education: Develop public education campaigns
to encourage respectful and responsible travel
behavior among all road and trail users .
■Enforcement: Use targeted information and
enforcement to encourage all road users to
safely and respectfully share the road and
provide information about road users’ rights and
responsibilities. Make information available in
both English and Spanish .
■Encouragement: Continue to coordinate with
the University of Iowa to promote cycling in and
around the campus and educate students on
safe cycling practices.
■Evaluation & Planning: Have the BAC meet
monthly to support plan implementation and
build broad public support for bicycle improve-
ments. Encourage law enforcement to participate
on the BAC .
Additional recommendations were divided into
the “Five Es” categories and subdivided into “low-
hanging fruit” (short-term actions) and long-term
goals. Early action recommendations ranged from
offering more training opportunities for engineering
and planning staff on accommodating bicyclists, to
hosting a “Summer Streets” or “Sunday Parkway”
event in which a major corridor is closed to auto
traffic and programmed for bicycling, walking,
group exercises, and other outdoor fun and games.
The full feedback report is included in the appendix
of this plan.
Area Bicycle Friendly Designations
Other municipalities, institutions, and businesses
in Iowa City and the surrounding region have also
received recognition for their efforts to support
bicycling . These community partners are listed in
the table below .
Name Designation Year
Bicycle Friendly Communities
City of Coralville Bronze BFC 2016
City of University
Heights
Bronze BFC 2016
City of Iowa City Silver BFC 2013
Bicycle Friendly Universities
University of Iowa Silver BFU 2014
Bicycle Friendly Businesses
World of Bikes Gold BFB 2010
ACT, Inc .Bronze BFB 2014
Neumann Monson
Architects
Bronze BFB 2013
The Broken Spoke Bronze BFB 2009
Table 1. Bicycle Friendly Designations
16 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
The Bike Network
While people in Iowa City are legally permitted to
bicycle on all public roadways except interstate
highways, most people bicycling prefer to travel
on the trails, designated on-street bikeways, and
low-speed local streets. This national preference
for separated facilities and calm local streets was
echoed by Iowa City residents during the initial open
house for the planning process. Together, these trails
and on-street bikeways comprise the bike network,
which is shown in Map 1 on the following page. To
better understand how the existing bike network
functions in Iowa City, it is important to understand
the different types of bicycle facilities.
Facility Types
For the purposes of establishing the existing
network in Iowa City, bicycle facilities are broken
into two categories: off-street trails and paths, and
on-street bikeways. Off-street trails and paths are
generally located along natural features like rivers
and streams or along other transportation infra-
structure like arterial roads and railroad corridors .
On-street bikeways are located on the roadway pave -
ment itself, often in the form of bike lanes, marked
shared lanes (also called sharrows), or simply iden-
tified as signed bike routes. The following bicycle
facility types are present in and around Iowa City.
Shared-Use Paths (Trails)
A shared-use path, also called a multi-use trail,
allows for two-way, off-street bicycle use and may
be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users,
joggers and other non-motorized users. These facili -
ties are frequently found in parks, along rivers, and
in greenbelts or utility corridors where there are few
conflicts with motorized vehicles, except at roadway
crossings. Because of their separation from motor
vehicle traffic, shared-use paths appeal to the widest
variety of user types, from families with children to
adult recreational riders to everyday commuters .
When these linear shared-use paths lead to popular
destinations or connect to the on-street bikeway
network, their utility expands greatly, offering a
comfortable, low-stress bicycling environment for
people to use for everyday trips.
Currently, there are over 37 miles of shared-use
paths in Iowa City and over 35 more throughout
Johnson County . The signature Iowa River Trail is
the backbone of the Iowa City bike network and
draws hundreds of recreational riders and bike
commuters every day . Other popular shared-use
paths include the Clear Creek Trail, the Willow Creek
Trail, the Sycamore Greenway Trail, and the Court
Hill Trail. While most of these trails are designed
to current standards, there are some sections of
the trail system that are sub-standard, mostly due
to narrow widths in constrained environments .
A prime example of this is along Iowa River Trail
between Riverside Drive and the Iowa River from
Iowa Avenue south to Burlington Street, where
widths as narrow as 6 feet and the presence of utili-
ties in the sidewalk create potential obstacles for
trail users .
Figure 2. Shared-use paths offer people of all ages and
abilities a comfortable bicycling experience.
EXISTING SYSTEM 17
Map 1. Existing Bike Facilities
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Pa rk
Villa Park
Whispering
Mea dows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Pa rk
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranc h
Terry
Trueblood
Recreation Area
Thornberry
Dog Park
Pen insula
Park
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Park
Wetherby
Pa rk
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
P ar k12
Co u rt
Holiday
LucasDodgeJohnsonHighland
Mu sc ati n e
Fo st e r
Villa g e
Frie ndship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertDodgeGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJ
a
mes
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMar ket
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDu
C
hi
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLower Wes t B ranch
Lake side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKir kwood
S andusk y
340
ScottMadison7
Daven portFairchild
Herb ert H oover
Jeffers onCampCardinalNorthRidge Roch e s t e rSandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsWa shin gt o nDubuque
College
DoverOs age
Lin de r
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13 DubuqueSlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
SoccerParkHawkeyeP ark
Osage
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestIowa
IowaRi
verTrai
l
Willo
w
Cre
e
k
Trail
N o r t h R id g eTrailIowaRiverTrailIowaRiverT r a ilCour t H illT r ailSy c am
o
r
e
GreenwayTrailClearCreekTrail
So urce: Esri, Digita lGlob e, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping , Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and
the GIS User Community
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 in ch = 0 .75 m iles
Existing Bicycle F acilities
Legend
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Shared-Use Path (Trail)
Sidepath (Wide Sidewalk)
Bike Lane
Paved Shoulder / Shoulder Bikeway
Marked Shared Lane
Mountain Bike Trail
Other Map Elements
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Roa d
Railroad
K-12 School
Park
Iowa C ity Boundary
[
EXISTING SYSTEM 18
Wide Sidewalks/Sidepaths
Wide sidewalks along arterial and collector road-
ways in Iowa City combine the design characteristics
of a shared-use path with the directness and conve -
nience of the roadway system. Also referred to as
sidepaths, these wide sidewalks are separated from
the road by a curb and a planting strip, providing
at least a minimum separation from adjacent motor
vehicles .
Wide sidewalks (sidepaths) are an integral compo -
nent of the bike network in Iowa City. Nearly 52
miles of sidepaths provide a comfortable, low-
stress bicycling environment for people of all ages
and abilities, and expand the off-street trail system
into neighborhoods, schools, and other commu-
nity destinations. Examples of wide sidewalks that
support bicycle activity can be found on Mormon
Trek Boulevard, McCollister Boulevard, Scott
Boulevard, Lower West Branch Road, North Dodge
Street, North 1st Avenue, Camp Cardinal Boulevard,
and Highway 1 and Highway 6 in south Iowa City .
Sidepath widths in Iowa City vary from 6 to 10 feet.
Current design guidelines in the Iowa Department
of Transportation’s (Iowa DOT) Statewide Urban
Design and Specifications Manual (SUDAS) manual
recommend a minimum width of 10 feet. Greater
widths should be considered where large volumes
of trail users and/or larger maintenance vehicles
are anticipated . Consistent with the AASHTO Guide
for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Ed., the
SUDAS manual does state that path width can be
reduced to 8 feet but only where specific conditions
prevail, such as minimal expected bicycle traffic,
minimal pedestrian use, or the presence of physical
constraints for short distances. Paths with widths
below 8 feet should be identified and examined for
their potential to be widened to minimum standards
or greater if they are to remain a part of the bikeway
network .
Bike Lanes
Bicycle lanes designate an exclusive space for bicy-
clists with pavement markings and signage . The
bicycle lane is located adjacent to motor vehicle
travel lanes, and bicyclists ride in the same direction
as motor vehicle traffic. Bicycle lanes are typically
on the right side of the street (on a two-way street)
between the adjacent travel lane and curb, road
edge, or parking lane . Standard bicycle lanes can
be found on Sycamore Street south of Highway 6,
Rohret Road from Mormon Trek Boulevard to the
western city limits, and on Melrose Avenue from the
University of Iowa Campus westward into University
Heights . On one-way streets, bicycle lanes may be
located on either the right or left side of the street.
Left-side bicycle lanes are present on both Market
and Jefferson Streets. In total, there are approxi-
mately 6 miles of bicycle lanes in Iowa City. Bike
lanes can also include travel-way or parking-side
buffers to add a level of comfort for people bicy-
cling. There are no buffered bike lanes in Iowa City.
Figure 3. Sidepaths like the one shown here on Highway
1 function like an extension of the trail system, providing
low-stress, all-ages connections to important commu-
nity destinations.
19 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Signed Routes
Shared streets in Iowa City are where bicyclists
and motor vehicles use the same roadway space .
Most signed shared roadways use warning signs to
provide to alert people driving motor vehicles to be
aware and respectful of other road users. Signed
routes can also include wayfinding signage to guide
bicyclists to important community destinations .
Typical wayfinding signage in Iowa City includes
route destinations, as well as distances and travel
times. Signed shared roadways are often installed
on streets that have constraints prohibiting a
more separated bikeway type, but are essential for
addressing a gap in the bikeway network or serving
as the final leg of a bicycle route on a low-volume,
low-speed roadway . In Iowa City, signed routes
comprise a significant portion of the on-street bike
network. While many of these signed routes are
located on low-speed, low-volume local roadways,
they would benefit from additional traffic calming
and diversion measures to increase bicycle comfort
and prioritize bicycle traffic.
Figure 4. The left side bike lanes on Market and Jefferson Streets provide a convenient connection between Central
and East Iowa City.
Figure 5. Warning signage on Prairie du Chien Road
raise the street’s visibility as a popular bicycling
corridor.
EXISTING SYSTEM 20
drivers and other road users, they do not offer an
added degree of safety or separation and there-
fore are limited in their impact on bicycle networks
beyond assisting in wayfinding.
Paved Shoulders
Paved shoulders on rural roadways can accommo-
date bicycle travel . Paved shoulders are generally
used by commuter and long-distance recreational
riders, rather than families with children or less
experienced riders . Paved shoulders can incorpo-
rate bicycle lane markings and signage to increase
visibility and support safe and responsible roadway
use by people on bicycles and people driving motor
vehicles . In Iowa City, paved shoulders on Prairie Du
Chien Road, Highway 1, Sand Road, and Oak Crest
Hill Road increase access to numerous regional rural
cycling routes that are well used by recreational
riders and area cycling clubs .
Marked and Signed Routes
A marked and signed shared roadway builds on
the basic signed shared roadway described above
by incorporating shared lane markings (sharrows) .
Sharrows are road markings used to indicate a
shared lane environment for bicycles and automo -
biles. Sharrows remind drivers of bicycle traffic on
the street and recommend proper bicyclist posi-
tioning within the travel lane . Shared lane markings
are often accompanied by wayfinding signage to
direct people bicycling to both local and cross-town
destinations . In Iowa City, shared lane markings
are located on a number of streets, mostly in and
around the Central District . Key streets with shared
lane markings include Gilbert Street, Dodge Street,
College Street, Market Street, and Jefferson Street
(west of Dubuque Street). While shared lane mark-
ings provide a degree of awareness to motor vehicle
Figure 6. College Street combines shared lane markings
and warning signage to alert motorists and reinforce
the street’s designation as a cycling route.
Figure 7. Cyclists riding on one of many paved shoulders
in the region (Source: Iowa City Womens Cycling Club)
21 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Pavement quality on the road network and asso-
ciated on-street bikeways is more variable . Road
surfaces in poor condition can deter bicycle activity
and create safety hazards. Notable wear on existing
shared lane markings and bike lane striping points
to the importance of durable marking and striping
products and the need for routine scheduled
maintenance to extend the life cycle for on-street
bikeways .
Connectivity
Strong network connectivity is critical to the success
of any bike network. Intersecting trails and low-stress
bikeways can extend the distance that people feel
comfortable bicycling and can better help people
reach nearby destinations . While still growing,
the Iowa City bike network has notable linear and
area gaps that limit opportunities for bicycling. For
Network Characteristics
Together, the trails, wide sidewalks, and on-street
bicycle facilities described above make up the Iowa
City bike network . To better understand how the
network currently functions, the plan examines the
key network characteristics of quality, connectivity,
comfort, safety, wayfinding, and support facilities.
Quality
The quality of roadway and trail surfaces, pavement
markings, wayfinding signage, and bicycle parking
facilities is critical to the safety of people bicycling
and the functionality of the bicycle transportation
system . Network quality varies throughout Iowa
City. Shared-use path and wide sidewalk surfaces
are in generally good condition and offer smooth,
accessible surfaces for bicycling, walking, skate -
boarding, inline skating, and other trail activity .
Figure 8. Cracks, debris and potholes like the one seen here on College Street represent significant hazards to
bicyclists.
EXISTING SYSTEM 22
where bicycle facilities are desired but do not
currently exist .
■System gaps: Larger geographic areas (e .g ., a
neighborhood or business district) where few or
no bikeways exist are identified as system gaps.
System gaps exist in areas where a minimum of
two intersecting bikeways would be required to
achieve the target network density .
Gaps typically exist where physical or other
constraints impede bikeway network development .
Example constraints may include bike lanes “drop-
ping” at an intersection to provide space for vehicle
turn lanes, narrow bridges on existing roadways,
severe cross-slopes, or limitations of pavement
width due to environmental impacts associated
with the roadway. Traffic mobility standards and
other policy decisions may also lead to gaps in a
network. For instance, a community’s strong desire
for on-street parking or increased vehicle capacity
may hinder efforts to install continuous bicycle
lanes along a major street . Map 2 on page 24 high-
lights gaps in the Iowa City bike network .
In some cases, a formalized bikeway itself may
represent a gap despite its status as part of a desig-
nated network . This condition typically occurs when
a corridor (often a major street) lacks the type of
bicycle facilities to comfortably accommodate a
broader usage by a range of bicyclist skill levels,
including infrequent or less confident cyclists. Some
signed routes that lack dedicated bicycle facilities
represent gaps in the bike network, especially for
less experienced riders . Other examples include
roadway corridors lacking formalized facilities (e.g.,
bike lanes) where conditions such as higher vehicle
speeds and volumes would otherwise justify greater
separation between motorists and cyclists .
A network in early stages of development is likely
to have more system and linear gaps, indicative
of a lack of bikeways. Gaps in a more mature bike
network are likely to be spot and linear in nature, a
reflection of a more complete network with short
example, there are bike lanes present on seven
different streets in Iowa City, yet none of these
bike lanes intersect . In addition, major barriers like
the Iowa River, Highway 6, and the Iowa Interstate
Railroad create challenges to bicycle mobility . Major
gaps and barriers are described below .
Network Gaps
Bikeway gaps exist in various forms, ranging from
short “missing links” on a specific street or path
corridor, to larger geographic areas with few or no
facilities at all. Gaps are organized based on length
and other characteristics and may be classified into
five main categories:
■Spot gaps: Spot gaps refer to point-specific
locations lacking dedicated facilities or other
treatments to accommodate safe and comfort-
able bicycle travel . Spot gaps primarily include
intersections and other areas with potential
conflicts with motor vehicles. Examples include
bicycle lanes on a major street “dropping” to
make way for right turn lanes at an intersection
without guidance for the bicyclists on how to
travel through the intersection .
■Connection gaps: Connection gaps are missing
segments (1/4 mile or less) on a clearly defined
and otherwise well-connected bikeway . Major
barriers standing between destinations and
clearly defined routes also represent connection
gaps . Examples include bicycle lanes on a major
street “dropping” for several blocks to make way
for on-street parking, or a freeway standing
between a major bicycle route and a school .
■Linear gaps: Similar to connection gaps,
linear gaps are 1/4 to 1/2 mile long missing link
segments on a clearly defined and otherwise
well-connected bikeway .
■Corridor gaps: On clearly defined and other-
wise well-connected bikeways, corridor gaps are
missing links longer than 1/2 mile. These gaps will
sometimes encompass an entire street corridor
23 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
challenges to cross-city bicycling .
Spot barriers are location-specific impediments that
deter bicycling activity or create additional hard-
ships for people who bicycle. The following examples
of spot barriers were identified by community
members through the online mapping tool:
■Difficult to traverse intersections, including:
■Benton Street at Riverside Drive
■Grand Avenue and Burlington Street at
Riverside Drive
■Newton Road and Iowa Avenue at Riverside
Drive
■Gilbert Street and Benton Street
■Burlington Street and Muscatine Avenue
■Pinch points and narrow facilities like the
Burlington Street Bridge
■Wide sidewalks that terminate abruptly
Linear barriers like the Iowa River and Highway 6
divide the community and isolate residents from
even the closest destinations by increasing real and
perceived distance . These barriers can also present
safety challenges by funneling bicycle travel onto
higher-stress roadways like major collector and
arterial roads in order to cross from one side to
the other . In most cases, these intersecting roads
lack dedicated bicycle facilities that support a wide
range of bicycling skill and confidence levels. The
Iowa Interstate Railroad functions in much the same
way as the major highways, bisecting the street grid
as it travels east to west through the heart of the
city . Most local roads do not cross the railroad, and,
as a result, all traffic—including motor vehicles, bicy -
cles, and pedestrians—are funneled onto larger and
busier roads in order to cross .
segment gaps, difficult intersections along existing
bikeways, and difficult transitions between facility
types. Most identified gaps in the Iowa City bike
network are linear in nature—segment, linear, and
corridor—reflecting the current state of network
growth and development . Many segment and linear
gaps represent missing links in the trail and wide
sidewalk/sidepath system. Addressing these gaps
can increase connectivity for less skilled and less
confident system users. Many system gaps that
cover larger areas are in well-established neighbor-
hoods and industrial developments . In the absence
of additional right-of-way for sidepaths or off-street
trails, on-street bikeways like dedicated bike lanes,
separated bike lanes, and bike boulevards can serve
most bicyclist types .
Barriers
Natural barriers, major land uses, and even trans-
portation corridors like interstates and railroads
present challenges to bicycling activity in Iowa City .
Through input provided at the first open house
and online via the online mapping tool, commu-
nity members shared their concerns about specific
barriers they face while bicycling in and around Iowa
City. Barriers identified through the online mapping
tool are presented in Map 3 on page 25. Many of
these barriers are located close to the center of the
city and along major highways, and point to the
Figure 9. Despite the presence of shared lane markings,
many people in Iowa City find Gilbert to be a barrier to
bicycling and choose to alternative, lower-stress routes.
EXISTING SYSTEM 24
Map 2. Bike Network Gaps
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Pa rk
Villa Park
Whispering
Meadows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Pa rk
Sturgis
Ferry
Pa rk
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranch
Terry
Trueblood
Recrea tion Area
Thorn berry
Dog Park
Pen insula
Park
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Pa rk
Wetherby
Park
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hi ckory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
Par k12
Co u rt
H oliday
LucasDodgeJohnsonHigh la nd
Musc ati n e
Fo s t er
Villa g e
Frie ndship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertDodgeGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJ
a
mes
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMarke t
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDu
C
h
i
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLowe r West B ranch
Lake side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKirkwood
Sandus k y
340
ScottMadison7
Dav enpor tFairchild
Herb ert H oover
Jef fers onCampCardinalNorthRidge Roch e s t e rSandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsWa shin gt o nDubuque
College
DoverOsage
Linde r
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13 DubuqueSlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
SoccerParkHawkeyeP ark
Os age
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestIowa
IowaRi
verTrai
l
Willo
w
Cr
ee
k
Trail
N o r t h R id g eTrailIowaRiverTrailIowaRiverT r a ilCour t H illT r ailSy c am
o
r
e
GreenwayTrailClearCreekTrail
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 inch = 0 .75 m iles
Bicycle Network Gaps
Legend
Bike Networ k Gap s
Spot Ga p
Segment, L inear & Corridor Gap
Area Gap
Existin g Bicycle Facilities
Shared-Use Path (Trail)
Sidepath (Wide Sidewa lk)
Bike Lane
Paved Shoulder / Shoulder Bikeway
Marked Sh ared Lane
Mountain Bike Trail
Othe r Map Elem ents
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Road
Railroad
K-12 School
Park
Iowa City Boundary
[
EXISTING SYSTEM 25
Map 3. Barriers to Bicycling
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Pa rk
Villa Park
Whispering
Mea dows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Pa rk
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranc h
Terry
Trueblood
Recreation Area
Thornberry
Dog Park
Pen insula
Park
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Park
Wetherby
Pa rk
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
P ar k12
Court
H oliday
LucasDodgeJohnsonHighland
Mu sc ati n e
Fo st e r
Villa g e
Frie ndship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertDodgeGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJ
a
mes
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMar ket
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDu
C
h
i
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLower Wes t B ranch
Lake side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKir kwood
S andus k y
340
ScottMadison7
Daven portFairchild
Herb ert H oover
Jeffers onCampCardinalNorthRidge Roch e s t e rSandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsW as hi n gt o nDubuque
College
DoverOs age
Lin de r
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13 DubuqueSlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
SoccerParkHawkeyeP ark
Osage
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestIowa
IowaRi
verTrai
l
Willo
w
Cr
ee
k
Trail
N o r t h R id g eTrailIowaRiverTrailIowaRiverT r a ilCour t H illT r ailSy c am
o
r
e
GreenwayTrailClearCreekTrail
So urce: Esri, Digita lGlob e, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping , Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and
the GIS User Community
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 inch = 0 .75 m iles
Barriers to Bicycli ng
Legend
Community-Identified Barriers to
Bicycling
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Shared-Use Path (Trail)
Sidepath (Wide Sidewalk)
Bike Lane
Paved Shoulder / Shoulder Bikeway
Marked Shared
Mountain Bike Trail
Other Map Elements
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Roa d
Railroad
K-12 School
Park
Iowa C ity Boundary
[
EXISTING SYSTEM 26
Connectivity published in 2012, the plan analyzes
levels of bicycle traffic stress on arterial and
collector roads in Iowa City . While many routes on
the existing bike network are located on local road-
ways, sidepaths, and off-street trails, most people
bicycling in Iowa City must travel on or across these
major roadways to reach their destinations . The
analysis combines individual roadway characteris-
tics, like the presence of dedicated bicycle facilities,
number of travel lanes, presence of parking, and
posted speed limit, to assign a level of traffic stress
to the roadway. Definitions for each of the four
levels of traffic stress, as defined in the MTI Report
11-19, are as follows:
■BLTS 1: Presenting little traffic stress and
demanding little attention from cyclists, and
attractive enough for a relaxing bike ride. Suitable
for almost all cyclists, including children trained
to safely cross intersections. On links, cyclists are
either physically separated from traffic, or are in
an exclusive bicycling zone next to a slow traffic
stream with no more than one lane per direction,
or are on a shared road where they interact with
only occasional motor vehicles (as opposed to a
stream of traffic) with a low speed differential.
Where cyclists ride alongside a parking lane, they
have ample operating space outside the zone
into which car doors are opened . Intersections
are easy to approach and cross .
While the linear barriers mentioned above create
crossing difficulties for people bicycling, other linear
barriers present challenges for those bicycling along
the barrier itself. These linear barriers are primarily
busy roadways that lack dedicated bicycle facilities
to support safe and comfortable travel. Specific
corridors identified by community residents include
2nd Avenue from Coralville to the Iowa River Trail,
Gilbert Street from downtown south to Highway
6, Benton Street west of Riverside Drive, and
Burlington Street, which has been noted as one
of the most direct east-west routes, yet one of the
most difficult and uncomfortable to ride.
Major land uses like the Iowa City Municipal Airport
can create long, circuitous routes for bicyclists,
which are unavoidable. The University of Iowa, on
the other hand, has multiple routes by which riders
can travel through campus, yet the lack knowledge
of these routes or wayfinding signs to guide people
across campus limit east-west bicycle traffic.
Comfort
An analysis of Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (BLTS)
on arterial and collector roadways in the study area
reveals the extent to which the current bike network
is limited in its accessibility for a wide variety of
bicyclist types . Using the BLTS methodology estab -
lished by the Mineta Transportation Institute’s (MTI)
Report 11-19: Low-Stress Bicycling and Network
Number of
Lanes
Traffic
Volume
Mixed Traffic Street with Bike Lane
<= 30 mph >= 35 mph <= 30 mph 35 mph >= 40 mph
2-3 lanes <=3k 1 .5 2 .5 1 2 2 .5
3k - 10k 2 3 1 .5 2 .5 3
10k - 20k 3 3 .5 2 3 3 .5
>20k 3 .5 4 2 .5 3 .5 4
4 lanes <=3k 2 .5 3 .5 1 .5 2 .5 3
3k - 10k 3 4 2 3 3 .5
10k - 20k 3 .5 4 2 .5 3 .5 4
>20k 4 4 3 4 4
6+ lanes All volumes 4
Table 2. Segment Scoring Matrix for Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
27 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
that the presence of wide sidewalks along arterial
and collector roadways was not factored into this
analysis in order to represent on-road level of traffic
stress for bicycling. Wide sidewalks and shared-use
paths along roadways generally earn higher scores
than adjacent on-street facilities, but those higher
scores are often reduced when the path crosses a
busier roadway with a lower BLTS score, reflecting
the impact of major roadway crossings on a facility’s
safety and comfort.
Map 4 on page 28 displays the level of travel stress
scores for arterial and collector roadways in Iowa
City. Lowest levels of traffic stress are shown in
yellow, while highest levels of traffic stress are
shown in dark brown .
The highest levels of traffic stress are located along
major highways that bisect the city . Highway 1 and
Highway 6 bisect the city north and south, and
Riverside Drive bisects the city east and west . Other
major arterials and collectors outside the core of the
city—like Mormon Trek Boulevard, Melrose Avenue,
and North Dubuque Street—present significant chal -
lenges for bicycling as well. These roads carry larger
volumes of motor vehicle traffic at higher speeds
than most roadways in Iowa City . Most arterials and
collectors in the core of the city and to the east have
lower posted speed limits and fewer travel lanes,
and carry fewer motor vehicles. However, at a BLTS
3, many of these roads provide a level of comfort
only accessible to more confident adults. Numerous
BLTS 3 roadways function as signed roadways
within the bike network . Roadways characterized
by low levels of traffic stress for bicyclists include
streets like Market and Jefferson Street, both with
dedicated bike lanes, and roadways on the perim-
eter of the city with relatively low traffic volumes. By
addressing level of traffic stress along key corridors
and at major intersections, the city can enhance
network connectivity and increase bicycling acces-
sibility to a larger, more diverse segment of the
population .
■BLTS 2 : Presenting little traffic stress and there -
fore suitable to most adult cyclists but demanding
more attention than might be expected from
children . On links, cyclists are either physically
separated from traffic, or are in an exclusive bicy -
cling zone next to a well-confined traffic stream
with adequate clearance from a parking lane,
or are on a shared roadway where they interact
with only occasional motor vehicles (as opposed
to a stream of traffic) with a low speed differen-
tial . Where a bike lane lies between a through
lane and a right-turn lane, it is configured to
give cyclists unambiguous priority where cars
cross the bike lane and to keep car speed in the
right-turn lane comparable to bicycling speeds .
Crossings are not difficult for most adults.
■BLTS 3 : More traffic stress than BLTS 2, yet mark-
edly less than the stress of integrating with
multilane traffic, and therefore welcome many
people currently riding bikes in American cities .
Offering cyclists either an exclusive riding zone
(lane) next to moderate-speed traffic or shared
lanes on streets that are not multilane and have
moderately low speed . Crossings may be longer
or across higher-speed roads than allowed by
BLTS 2, but are still considered acceptably safe to
most adult pedestrians .
■BLTS 4: A level of stress beyond BLTS 3.
At its core, the BLTS scoring decreases in comfort (1
is the highest comfort level) as the number of lanes,
posted speed limit, and traffic volumes increase.
Scoring in BLTS is based off of the four basic cate -
gories defined in the MTI report. This scoring
methodology is summarized in Table 2 on page 26 .
The BLTS scoring decreases comfort (1 is the highest
comfort level) as the number of lanes, posted speed
limit, and traffic volumes increase. Traffic volumes
reduce comfort more where bicyclists share the
road with motorized vehicles, but comfort also
decreases in bicycle lanes as traffic volumes next to
those bicycle lanes increase . It is important to note
EXISTING SYSTEM 28
Map 4. Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress for Arterial and Collector Streets in Iowa City
Kiw anis
Pa rk
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Park
Villa Park
Whispering
Meadows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Pa rk
Sturgis
Ferry
Park
Willow
Creek
Park
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranch
Terry
Trueblood
Recrea tion Area
Th ornberry
Dog Park
Pen insula
Park
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Pa rk
Wetherby
Pa rk
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
Par k12
Co u rt
H oliday
LucasDodgeJohnsonHighland
Musc at in e
Fo st e r
Villa g e
Frie ndship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertDodgeGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJames
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMarke t
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDu
C
hi
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLower Wes t Branch
Lake side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKirkwood
S andus k y
340
ScottMadison7
DavenportFairchild
Herbert H oover
Jef fersonCampCardinalNorthRidge Roch e s t e rSandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsW as hin g t o nDubuque
College
DoverOsage
Linde r
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13
SlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
SoccerParkHawkeyeP ark
Os age
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestC o r al R idge
MallIowa
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AE X, Getmapping, A er ogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the GIS User Community
0 1 20 .5 Mile s
1 inch = 0 .75 m iles
Bicy cle Level of Tra ffic Stres s
Legend
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
BLTS 1.5 (Lowe st Traffic Stress)
BLTS 2
BLTS 2.5
BLTS 3
BLTS 3.5
BLTS 4 (Highest Traffic Stress)
Other Map Elements
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Roa d
Railroad
K-12 School
Park
Iowa City Boundary
[
EXISTING SYSTEM 29
Time of Day
Much like motor vehicle crashes, bicycle crashes
generally occur during peak travel periods . However,
it is important to note that many people bicycling
in Iowa City are children, whose afternoon “peak
period” corresponds with school dismissal and late
afternoon play. The figure below shows crashes by
time of day. The greatest number of crashes per
hour occurred in the 6 p .m . evening rush hour (20),
followed by the 3 p.m. school dismissal hour (16),
and the 4 p.m. afternoon hour (10). The evening rush
hours (5 p.m. to 8 p.m.) accounted for 28 percent of
all crashes, while the school dismissal hours (2 p .m .
to 5 p.m.) accounted for 23 percent.
Safety
The analysis of reported bicycle and pedestrian
related collisions can reveal patterns and potential
sources of safety issues, both design and behavior-
related. These findings can provide Iowa City with a
basis for infrastructure and program improvements
to enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety.
Bicycle and pedestrian related collisions and colli-
sion locations in Iowa City were analyzed over the
most recent five-year period of available data,
2011 through 2015 . It is important to note that the
number of collisions reported is likely an underes-
timate of the actual number of collisions that take
place because some parties do not report colli-
sions to law enforcement, particularly collisions not
resulting in injury or property damage . Although
under-reporting and omissions of “near-misses”
are limitations, analyzing the collisions can reveal
spatial and behavioral trends or design factors that
may contribute to collisions in Iowa City .
Number of Crashes
During the five-year period from 2011 to 2015, there
were a total of 138 bicycle-related collisions in within
the Iowa City limits. The data shows a significant
increase in the number of crashes during this period,
growing by 187 percent from fifteen crashes in 2011
to forty-three crashes in 2015. It is important to note
that this increase in crashes corresponds with an
estimated 21 percent increase in bicycle commute
mode share in the metro area from 2010 to 2015, as
well as a 12 percent increase in population for the
entire metro area from 2010 to 2014. While the lack
of reliable exposure and bicycling activity data limits
the ability to draw a direct relationship between
the corresponding rises in bicycle commute mode
share and bicycle crashes, these corresponding
increases highlight the importance of bicycle facili-
ties and bicycle crash countermeasures to support
the growing number of bicyclists in Iowa City.
Figure 10. Bicycle crashes by year, 2011-2015
Figure 11. Bicycle crashes by time of day
30 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Crash Location
Bicycle collisions were clustered along major thor-
oughfares and popular bicycling routes, including
Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Madison Street,
College Street, Clinton Street, and Highway 6/2nd
Street leading into Coralville . As displayed in Map
5 on page 31, which groups collisions that occurred
within 100 feet of one another, most clusters are
located in Downtown and the Central District where
a significant portion of the city’s bicycling activity
takes place .
Crash Severity
While none of the reported crashes involving people
bicycling were fatal, 67 percent resulted in injury,
and an additional 32 percent resulted in possible
injury. Of the 102 crashes resulting in injury, only
seven were incapacitating. The locations of bicycle
crashes by severity type are displayed in Map 6 on
page 32. It is important to note six of the seven the
crashes resulting in incapacitating injury occurred at
intersections along or across major thoroughfares,
including Burlington Street (2), 2nd Avenue (2),
Highway 6, and Mormon Trek Boulevard. This fact
highlights both the existing level of bicycling activity
along and across arterial and collector roadways,
and the need for dedicated bicycle facilities and
intersection treatments to reduce bicycle crashes .
Time of Year
Bicycle crash data during this five-year period also
highlights seasonal variations in bicycling activity
corresponding to daylight, presence of college
population, and temperature . Months with the
highest volumes of crashes generally correspond
to favorable weather conditions, average to above
average daylight, and spring and fall semesters for
college students who represent a significant portion
of the city’s population and are more likely to travel
by bicycle. Forty-six percent of all crashes occurred
in the months of April, September, and October, and
an additional 40 percent occurred during the late
spring and summer months of May, June, July, and
August . Conversely, colder winter months experi-
enced the lowest number of bicycle crashes, with
only one crash in February and zero crashes in
January .
Figure 12 displays crashes for each month by time of
day, as well as sunrise and sunset times for the first
day of each month. According to crash report data,
77 percent of all crashes occurred during daylight
conditions, while 15 percent occurred under dark
conditions . An additional 8 percent occurred during
dusk, and 1 percent at dawn .
Figure 12. Bicycle crashes by month and time of day
EXISTING SYSTEM 31
Map 5. Bicycle Crash Clusters, 2011-2015
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Pa rk
Villa Park
Whispering
Mea dows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Park
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranch
Terry
Trueblood
Recrea ti on Area
Th ornberry
Dog Park
Pen insu la
Pa rk
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Pa rk
Weth erby
Park
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
Par k12
Court
H oliday
LucasDodgeJohnsonHighla n d
Mu sc atine
F o s t er
Villa g e
Frie ndship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertDodgeGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJ
a
mes
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMarke t
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDuC
h
i
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLowe r West B ranc h
Lake side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKir kwood
Sandusk y
340
ScottMadison7
Da venpor tFairchild
Herb ert H oover
Jeffers onCampCardinalNorthRidge Roch e s t e rSandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsW as hing t o nDubuque
College
DoverOs age
Linder
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13 DubuqueSlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
SoccerParkHawkeyeP ark
Osage
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestIowa
IowaRi
verTrai
l
Willo
w
Cree
k
Trail
N o r t h R id g eTrailIowaRiverTrailIowaRiverT r a ilCour t H illT r ailSy c am
o
r
e
GreenwayTrailClearCreekTrail
Source: Esri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmap ping, Aerog rid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the GIS User Commun ity
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 inch = 0 .75 miles
Bicycle C ra sh C lusters
Legend
Bicycle Crash Clusters
1
2
3
4 - 5
6 - 7
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Shared-Use Path (Trail)
Sidepath (Wide Sidewalk)
Bike Lane
Paved Shoulder / Shoulder Bikeway
Marked S hared Lane
Mountain Bike Trail
Other M ap Elements
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Road
Railroad
K-12 S chool
Park
Iowa City Boundary
[
EXISTING SYSTEM 32
Map 6. Bicycle Crashes by Severity, 2011-2015
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Pa rk
Villa Park
Whispering
Mea dows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Park
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranch
Terry
Trueblood
Recrea ti on Area
Th ornberry
Dog Park
Pen insu la
Pa rk
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Pa rk
Weth erby
Park
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
Par k12
Court
H oliday
LucasDodgeJohnsonHighla n d
Mu sc atine
F o s t er
Villa g e
Frie ndship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertDodgeGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJ
a
mes
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMarke t
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDuC
h
i
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLowe r West B ranc h
Lake side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKir kwood
Sandusk y
340
ScottMadison7
Da venpor tFairchild
Herb ert H oover
Jeffers onCampCardinalNorthRidge Roch e s t e rSandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsW as hing t o nDubuque
College
DoverOs age
Linder
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13 DubuqueSlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
SoccerParkHawkeyeP ark
Osage
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestIowa
IowaRi
verTrai
l
Willo
w
Cree
k
Trail
N o r t h R id g eTrailIowaRiverTrailIowaRiverT r a ilCour t H illT r ailSy c am
o
r
e
GreenwayTrailClearCreekTrail
Source: Esri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmap ping, Aerog rid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the GIS User Commun ity
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 inch = 0 .75 miles
Bicy cle Crash Seve rity
Legend
Bicycle Crashes b y Severity
Incapacitating Injury
Non-Incapacitating Injury
Possible Injury
No Injury
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Shared-Use Path (Trail)
Sidepath (Wide Sidewalk)
Bike Lane
Paved Shoulder / Shoulder Bikeway
Marked S hared Lane
Mountain Bike Trail
Other M ap Elements
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Road
Railroad
K-12 S chool
Park
Iowa City Boundary
[
EXISTING SYSTEM 33
water damage from rain and snow. There are nine
bicycle repair stations in Iowa City, eight of which
are located on University of Iowa campus.
Map 7 on page 34 displays bike parking and repair
station locations throughout Iowa City . While the
data for bike parking locations (not repair stations)
dates from 2011, the relative concentrations of bike
parking reveal the extent to which investments in
bike parking have focused on high-density destina-
tions, including the university, downtown, schools,
and commercial nodes .
Despite these efforts, many people biking in Iowa
City have pointed to a lack of secure parking options
throughout the community as a deterrent to bicy-
cling . Bicycle parking ordinances, which are already
in place in the city code, and incentive programs can
increase the bicycle parking supply and reduce this
perceived barrier to bicycling .
Wayfinding
Landmarks, destinations, neighborhood business
districts, natural features and other visual cues help
bicyclists navigate through Iowa City and reach their
destination. However, many of the recommended
bicycle routes rely on lower-volume roadways that
may not be as familiar to many people, who may
typically use an alternate route when traveling by
bus or car. Iowa City has installed wayfinding signs
along most on-street bikeways and shared-use
paths .
Support Facilities
End-of-trip facilities like short-term bike racks, bike
lockers, and long-term secure bike parking areas are
essential to the success of the bike network. A lack
of secure parking can deter people from bicycling
to destinations, even for short trips. Iowa City and
major institutions like the University of Iowa and
the Iowa City Community School District (ICCSD)
provide bicycle parking at popular destinations like
the university campus, Downtown Iowa City, and
public schools. The city has made a concerted effort
in recent years to incorporate additional bicycle
parking into streetscape projects and new develop -
ments in and around downtown . In addition, the city
maintains ten bike lockers for secure bike storage
at the Court Street Transportation Center . Locker
rooms and showers are located at many sites across
the city as well, but many are located in University
buildings and open only to staff, faculty, and
students. Bicycle repair stations, or “fix-it” stations,
have become an important part of the bicycle
landscape in recent years . Each station provides a
bike stand, tools, and in most cases tire pumps for
people to fix a flat or make other basic adjustments
to their bikes. Many bicyclists have noted ineffec-
tive pumps at numerous stations, likely a result of
Figure 13. Public bike repair locations provide tools for
minor bicycle maintenance.
Figure 14. The University of Iowa has multiple bicycle
parking and fixit stations on campus.
EXISTING SYSTEM 34
Map 7. Bicycle Parking and Repair Stations
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Pa rk
Villa Park
Whispering
Mea dows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Park
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranch
Terry
Trueblood
Recrea ti on Area
Th ornberry
Dog Park
Pen insu la
Pa rk
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Pa rk
Weth erby
Park
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
Par k12
Court
H oliday
LucasDodgeJohnsonHighla n d
Mu sc atine
F o s t er
Villa g e
Frie ndship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertDodgeGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJ
a
mes
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMarke t
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDuC
h
i
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLowe r West B ranc h
Lake side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKir kwood
Sandusk y
340
ScottMadison7
Da venpor tFairchild
Herb ert H oover
Jeffers onCampCardinalNorthRidge Roch e s t e rSandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsW as hing t o nDubuque
College
DoverOs age
Linder
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13 DubuqueSlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
SoccerParkHawkeyeP ark
Osage
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestIowa
IowaRi
verTrai
l
Willo
w
Cree
k
Trail
N o r t h R id g eTrailIowaRiverTrailIowaRiverT r a ilCour t H illT r ailSy c am
o
r
e
GreenwayTrailClearCreekTrail
Source: Esri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmap ping, Aerog rid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the GIS User Commun ity
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 inch = 0 .75 miles
Bic ycle Suppor t Facil ities
Legend
Bicycle Support Facilities
Bike Rack
Bike Repair Station
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Shared-Use Path (Trail)
Sidepath (Wide Sidewalk)
Bike Lane
Paved Shoulder / Shoulder Bikeway
Marked S hared Lane
Mountain Bike Trail
Other M ap Elements
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Road
Railroad
K-12 S chool
Park
Iowa City Boundary
[
35 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Building a Culture of Bicycling
Creating a bicycle friendly community does not
happen overnight . The strong bicycling culture in
Iowa City is the result of decades of determina-
tion, perseverance, and hard work by community
businesses, non-profit organizations, advocates,
institutions, civic leaders, and public agencies . That
bicycling culture continues each day with every
single person who walks out their door, hops on
her or his bike, and rides . Whether large or small,
the contributions of those who have made bicy-
cling safer, easier, more enjoyable, accessible, and
more liberating are meaningful and important. The
community partners listed below have been instru-
mental in building a culture of bicycling and will
continue to be so in the years to come .
Community Partners
University of Iowa
The University of Iowa is a Silver-Level BFU, as
awarded by the LAB . The University has a strong
online presence for bicycling and organizes a wide
array of bicycle-related education and encourage-
ment programming, including the Winter Warrior
Bike Challenge and spring and fall bike tune-ups.
As the name suggests, the challenge aims to inspire
university faculty and students to use bicycles as
year-round transportation options . The university’s
online transportation cost calculator helps students
understand the financial costs associated with
driving alone by car. Students, faculty, staff, and
local bicycle advocates make up the University’s
BAC. The group advocates for improved bicycling on
campus, in the city, and throughout the county .
In May 2016, university students from the College
of Public Health led a demonstration project to test
temporary bicycle facilities on College Street. The
route included a painted bike lane, a protected bike
lane, a bike boulevard, and shared lane markings .
More Information:
■University of Iowa Bicycle Transportation:
https://sustainability.uiowa.edu/initiatives/
transportation/biking/
These signs provide critical information to people
bicycling, including directional guidance to key desti-
nations and districts, as well as distance and time
to reach these locations by traveling the designated
route. The addition of travel times to wayfinding
signage is more common in cities across the country
for its ability to counter the perception of travel
times as a significant barrier to bicycling, especially
for utilitarian and commuter purposes.
Figure 15. Wayfinding confirms locations of bicycle
infrastructure and provides directions to local
destinations.
EXISTING SYSTEM 36
Iowa City Bike Library
The Iowa City Bike Library began in 2004 by a
group of local volunteers. The group continues
its mission of encouraging more people to ride
bicycles by repairing donated bikes and offering
them for six month checkout periods. Community
members receive their initial deposit once the bike
is returned in good condition within the checkout
period . System patrons may choose instead to keep
the bicycle for themselves in lieu of obtaining the
deposit. Children’s bicycles are available for sale.
The Iowa City Bike Library offers a Rent-a-Bench
(RAB) program for members of the public to repair
their bicycles by gaining access to the shop’s tools
and repair stands . RAB operates according to a low
hourly fee. Patrons who check-out a bicycle from the
■University of Iowa Drive Alone Cost Calculator:
https://transportation.uiowa.edu/cost-calculator
■Iowa City Bike Boulevard Project:
https://sustainability.uiowa.edu/news/
student-group-tests-iowa-city-bike-boulevard/
Think Bicycles of Johnson County
Think Bicycles is a non-profit organization that
brings bicycle shops and other community organi-
zations together to advocate for improved bicycling
in Johnson County . Think Bicycles helps organize
Bike Month, held in May, with events throughout
the county. The website also offers resources such
as links to other organizations’ group bicycle rides .
More Information:
■Think Bicycles: http://www.thinkbicycles.org/
Figure 16. The annual spring and fall bike tune-ups help university students keep their bikes in good working order.
(Source: University of Iowa)
37 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
More information:
■https://www.facebook.com/
ICORR-105507021120/
Bicyclists of Iowa City
With over 450 members from the Iowa City area,
Bicyclists of Iowa City (BIC), organizes multiple
group recreational bicycle rides per week . Group
rides are available at multiple speeds and distances .
Shorter, slower rides help people who are new to
bicycling gain confidence. Longer rides are available
for those training for RAGBRAI (Register’s Annual
Great Bicycle Ride Across Iowa), the renowned long-
distance bicycle event . The group’s weekly rides
foster camaraderie by ending with a social event,
such as dinner or ice cream . BIC also works with
organizes bike rodeos each spring at local elemen-
tary schools to teach children basic bicycling skills
and safety tips.
library have access to repairs during their checkout
period. The Iowa City Bike Library covers the cost of
minor repairs and adjustments .
More Information:
■Iowa City Bike Library: http://www.bikelibrary.
org/
Iowa Coalition of Off-Road Riders
Mountain bicycling is an important element of Iowa
City’s bicycling culture, and the Iowa Coalition of
Off-Road Riders is leading the charge to promote,
preserve and improve mountain bike trail access .
The volunteer-based non-profit organization
focuses on maintaining and activating the Sugar
Bottom Trails and other mountain biking facilities in
the Iowa City area and also hosts numerous rides
and events throughout the year in partnership with
local bike shops, clubs, and other organizations .
Figure 17. Staff at the Bike Library help instill area residents with basic bike maintenance skills and provide tools.
(Source: Iowa City Bike Library)
EXISTING SYSTEM 38
about basic repairs in hopes that participants are
empowered and excited to ride more often. Events
and rides use World of Bikes as starting locations
and bicycle rentals are available .
More information:
■https://www.meetup.com/
ICA-WOW-Iowa-City-Area-Women-On-Wheels/
BIKEIOWA
BIKEIOWA has connected community members
with resources about bicycling for sixteen years.
BIKEIOWA is an online compendium designed to
help residents stay knowledgeable about upcoming
rides and events including bicycle-friendly city
designations, organized rides, new infrastructure
updates, advocacy and legislative news, and more .
An online user can create a membership to add or
update event information and interact with other
users’ online content . The website was created in
2001 and now has over 70,000 unique visitors per
month . Over 4,500 opt-in e-mail addresses receive
biweekly ride reminder e-mails .
More information:
■http://www.bikeiowa.com/
Iowa Bicycle Coalition
The Iowa Bicycle Coalition (IBC) provides statewide
advocacy, events, rides, and online resources to
further its mission to “build partnerships, educate
Iowans, and help to establish safe and enjoyable
bicycle transportation and recreation networks
throughout Iowa .” The organization supports
community design, facility design and maintenance,
and public policy goals to help make Iowa the most
bicycle-friendly state in the country. The IBC also
works to increase youth bicycling by offering bike
training to area children through the school district’s
physical education program and by providing Safe
Routes to School assistance . Other events and
activities led by the IBC include the annual Iowa Bike
Summit, Bike Expo, the RAGBRAI ride announce-
ment party, and numerous group rides throughout
More information:
■http://bicyclistsofiowacity.org/
Iowa City Cycling Club
The Iowa City Cycling Club works to advance the sport
of cycling in the region through race promotions,
team sponsorship, training, mentoring programs,
and women-only rides, clinics, and race series . The
organization also promotes cycling through advo -
cacy, safety, and community involvement efforts.
More information:
■http://iowacitycyclingclub.com
Goosetown Racing Club
Goosetown Racing is an Iowa City race team that
participates and encourages others to enjoy cycling,
running, skiing, and triathlons .
More information:
■https://www.facebook.com/
Goosetown-Racing-204841488525/
Iowa City Womens Cycling
Developed as an initiative of the Iowa City Bicycling
Club in 2009, Iowa City Womens Cycling provides
a positive environment to encourage women to
ride and race . The group hosts numerous events
throughout the year, including weekly rides and the
popular Chamois Time race series . Other regular
activities include social events and racing and main-
tenance clinics .
More information:
■https://www.facebook.com/
iowacitywomenscycling/
Iowa City Women on Wheels
Iowa City Women on Wheels (ICA-WOW) was
founded by a group of women who work at the
local bicycle shop, World of Bikes. ICA-WOW offers
no-drop, social rides twice a week during the
summer . Women-only bicycle maintenance clinics
and social gatherings offer women a chance to learn
39 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
or leisure . Youth receive coaching and meet new
friends as they learn new skills. Yellow Velo Bikes and
Food is part of Neighborhood Centers of Johnson
County’s youth employment program . Youth sell
healthy food and operate hourly, daily, and weekly
bicycle rentals .
More information:
■Yellow Velo Bikes and Food: http://www.ncjc.
org/yellow-velo.html
■Youth Off-Road Riders: http://www.ncjc.org/
youth-off-road-riders.html
■Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County:
http://www.ncjc.org/
the year to encourage all skill levels to get out and
ride a bike .
More information:
■http://iowabicyclecoalition.org/
Iowa City Community School District
The ICCSD supports active transportation and
encourages children and families to walk and bike
to school. The school district has a Safe Routes to
School Coordinator who provides support to indi-
vidual schools and their PTOs to organize local
programs and events . The ICCSD also partners with
organizations like the IBC and BIC to offer bicycle
safety and skills training to children.
Safety Village
Located at Grant Wood Elementary School, Safety
Village is a child-size town that uses pedal-driven
cars to teach children about real-life traffic situa-
tions and safety measures. Annual camps hosted
by Mercy Hospital are available to children who
have finished kindergarten. The program regularly
attracts over 200 children a year .
More information:
■Safety Village: http://www.mercyiowacity.org/
safety-village
Neighborhood Centers of Johnson
County
The human services agency called Neighborhood
Centers of Johnson County serves local schools
and neighborhoods including Broadway, Pheasant
Ridge, and Breckenridge . The agency is community
based and focuses on bringing resources to under-
served families by offering programs and activities.
The two community centers are located in Iowa City
and act as common space for neighbors to gather.
In addition the other services, Neighborhood
Centers of Johnson County operates Youth Off-Road
Riders Cycling Program (YORR) . The program intro -
duces youth to recreational cycling for competition
Figure 18. Children learn about the basics of traffic
safety while pedaling through Safety Village. (Source:
Iowa City Safety Village)
EXISTING SYSTEM 40
area’s signature events, and providing comprehen-
sive information to visitors. The CVB has been a
major proponent of bicycling in Iowa City through
both the promotion of bicycling activities, bicycle
facilities, local bike shops, and events. The bureau’s
support of regional events like the granGABLE and
international events like Jingle Cross and the 2016
Telenet UCI Cyclo-Cross World Cup have helped to
establish Iowa City’s reputation as a bicycling desti-
nation . The 2016 UCI World Cup event, which was
estimated to have brought 10,000 visitors, including
professional and amateur racers from across the
globe, was so successful that the UCI has announced
that Iowa City will open the 2017 UCI World Cup
series, and local organizers are expecting more than
15,000 visitors and $1 .2M in local revenue .1
More information:
■http://www.iowacitycoralville.org/
Local Bicycle Shops
Local bicycle shops are essential to bicycling in
Iowa City, not just for the products they sell, but
for their classes and events that instill confidence
in new riders and build relationships around bicy-
cling. Programs offered by Iowa City bicycle shops
offer basic bicycle skills and safe maneuvering
courses, bicycle repair courses, regularly-scheduled
group rides, bicycle rodeos in partnership with local
schools and organizations, and bike races .
1 Davis, Andy . “Iowa City selected to host another cyclo -
cross World Cup race .” Iowa City Press Citizen, January 27, 2017 .
http://www.press-citizen.com/story/news/2017/01/27/iowa-
city-uci-cyclo-cross-world-cup-jingle-cross/97141576/ (accessed
March 13, 2017) .
Iowa City Blue Zones Project
Sponsored by Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield,
the Iowa City Blue Zones Project began in 2011 as a
catalyst for healthy and active living through direct
interventions and policy changes that support
physical activity and healthy eating . The project
has impacted more than 67,000 individuals and has
helped lower the city’s obesity rate from 18.7 percent
in 2014 to 15 .8 percent in 2015 . The project has
been supportive of Safe Routes to School programs,
complete streets projects, and other initiatives that
encourage residents to make physical activity a part
of their daily routines.
More information:
■Iowa City Blue Zones Project: https://www.face-
book.com/pg/IowaCityBlueZonesProject
■Iowa City Blue Zones Project: http://explore.
bluezonesproject.com/iowa-city/
■Press: http://www.press-citizen.com/story/
news/2016/02/03/iowa-city-earns-blue-zones-
certification/79765076/
Iowa City/Coralville Area Convention
& Visitors Bureau (CVB)
The Iowa City/Coralville Area Convention & Visitors
Bureau (CVB) works to increase visitor volume and
spending to the region by attracting and operating
conventions and events, supporting many of the
Figure 19. The 2016 Telenet UCI Cyclo-Cross World Cup
drew thousands of visitors and contributed to the local
economy.
41 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Existing Plans and Policies
From long-range plans to statewide facility design
standards, Iowa City staff and elected leaders rely
on many existing plans, policies, and regulations
to inform their decisions relating to bicycling infra-
structure planning, funding, design, construction,
and maintenance. The following list of existing
documents and resources were reviewed early
in the planning process to better understand the
regulatory and policy environments and to identify
common themes and goals on which the Bicycle
Master Plan can expand or improve. A brief over-
view of key findings from these documents are
described below .
Plans
Local Plans
Iowa City and other local agencies in the metro-
politan area have developed comprehensive plans,
sub-area plans, and bicycle and trail plans that
have impacted and will continue to impact bicycle
facility development and supporting programs.
Transportation-focused plans like the Metropolitan
Bicycle Master Plan (2009), the Future Forward 2045
Long Range Transportation Plan (2017 draft), and
the Johnson County Bicycling & Multi-Use Trails Plan
(2012) include recommendations for the installation
of bicycle facilities on local roadways, the devel-
opment of additional trail corridors along riparian
Plan/Policy/Regulation Agency Year
IC2030: Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Update Iowa City 2013
2016-2017 Strategic Plan Update Iowa City 2016
South District Plan Iowa City 2015
Central District Plan Iowa City 2012
Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan Iowa City 2013
City Code (including bicycle regulations, parking standards, subdivision
design standards, and
Iowa City Updated 2016
Complete Streets Policy Iowa City Updated 2015
Metropolitan Bicycle Master Plan MPOJC 2009
Future Forward 2045 (Long-Range Transportation Plan)MPOJC 2017 (Draft)
Complete Streets Policy MPOJC 2015
Coralville Community Plan Coralville 2014
Bicycling & Multi-Use Trails Plan Johnson
County
2012
Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS)Iowa DOT 2017 Edition
Iowa in Motion 2040, Iowa In Motion 2045 (Draft)Iowa DOT 2012, 2017
(Draft)
Iowa Trails 200 Iowa DOT 2000
Table 3. Relevant Plans and Policies
EXISTING SYSTEM 42
and other undeveloped corridors, the evaluation of
some roadways for travel lane conversions or road
diets, maintenance and sweeping of trails and high-
priority bike corridors, bicycle parking ordinances
for commercial and multi-family properties, and
additional bicycle parking in downtown and other
popular destinations . The Metropolitan Bicycle
Master Plan provides the most detailed history,
analysis, and recommendations pertaining to bicy-
cling in Iowa City and applicable to this bicycle
master planning process. Recommendations for
on-street bikeways, trails, supporting programs
and policies, and plan evaluation create a compre -
hensive and robust strategy to increase bicycling
activity and enhance bicycling safety in Iowa City
and surrounding communities . Like this current
bicycle master planning process, the Metropolitan
Bicycle Master Plan also utilizes the LAB’s building
blocks of a BFC to frame existing conditions inven-
tory and plan recommendations .
Comprehensive and sub-area plans like IC2030:
Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Update (2013), the
South District Plan (2015), and the Downtown and
Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (2013) also stress
the importance of bicycling as a desired transporta -
tion mode for transportation and recreation and an
integral component of future growth and redevel-
opment . The city’s 2016-2017 strategic plan update
points to the importance of bicycling as a means of
promoting environmental sustainability . The city set
an ambitious goal of earning a Gold-Level BFC desig -
nation in 2017 .
State Plans
At the state level, bicycle transportation and
recreation are addressed in both the statewide
transportation plan, Iowa in Motion 2040, and in
the statewide trails plan, Iowa Trails 2000 . The state
also commissioned a statewide bicycle and pedes-
trian plan which included multiple public meetings
across the state in 2013 and an anticipated release
of the draft report in 2015. However, no documents
are made available on the project website as of
February 2017.
Iowa in Motion 2040’s broad scope encompasses
active transportation and includes considerable
focus on the state’s growing trail system. The plan’s
three broad-based and far-reaching goals of safety,
efficiency, and quality of life provide significant
latitude for Iowa Department of Transportation to
address unique statewide, regional and local chal-
lenges and opportunities . With regard to bicycling,
key findings include the need for bicycle system
funding, complete streets policies, increased coor-
dination to connect local and regional trail systems,
and more education and encouragement programs .
An update to the plan is currently underway and is
expected to be completed in 2017. Draft documents
released so far build on these same key findings and
include greater focus on the prevalence of bicycle
and pedestrian injuries and fatalities.
Iowa Trails 2000 is a resource document devel-
oped to assist local governments, non-profits, and
other trail developers in achieving a shared vision
of an interconnected, multi-modal, easily accessible
statewide trails system . The plan provides the over-
arching vision for a statewide trails system, guidance
for facility planning and design, and enunciates the
benefits of trails as valuable recreation, transpor-
tation, and quality of life assets. The plan stresses
the importance of local agencies as “the primary
developers and owners of specific trail projects at
the local level…. They are responsible for local coor-
dination, public involvement, and final trail design,
including alignment determination . They are also
usually responsible for seeking funding through
federal, state, local, and private sources; contracting
with appropriate consultants; and operation and
maintenance of the completed trail.”
The diversity of planning documents that address
bicycling is a reflection of local, regional, and even
state interest to diversify transportation choices,
increase safety for road users, utilize bicycling
and bicycle infrastructure as a catalytic tool for
economic development, support community health
and physical activity, and enhance quality of life.
The following recommendations emerge from these
43 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
planning documents for consideration in this plan-
ning effort:
■Acknowledge that the needs and abilities of all
people bicycling differ and that different strate -
gies and facility types are necessary to support
this wide target audience .
■Develop cross-city routes that combine
wayfinding, off-street trails, and on-street bike -
ways to guide people bicycling to key community
destinations and adjacent municipalities .
■Raise Iowa City’s BFC status from Silver to Gold in
2017 and aspire for Platinum in the future.
■Construct additional wide sidewalks along key
arterial corridors to extend the off-street network,
connect the trail system to nearby destinations,
and provide facilities appropriate for younger
and less experienced people bicycling .
■Expand bicycle parking in high-demand areas
and create policies and ordinances to standardize
bicycle parking in future commercial and multi-
family residential developments.
■Expand the trail network with extensions to the
Iowa River and Willow Creek Trails and additional
trails along other riparian corridors, including
Ralston Creek from the future Riverfront Park
northeast through downtown .
■Apply complete streets principles to all roadway
projects to ensure the needs of bicyclists are
considered and multi-modal infrastructure is
included in roadway improvement projects and
development projects .
■Incorporate bicycle facilities into district and
area development and infrastructure projects
to better link neighborhoods to key community
destinations .
■Encouragement and education programs are crit-
ical to the success of bicycling as a viable mode of
transportation .
The Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson
County (MPOJC) maintains a GIS data layer of
existing and planned bikeways that includes many
(but not all) of the recommendations included in the
plans referenced above. These recommended facili-
ties, as well as all recommended facilities referenced
in these planning documents, will be screened and
analyzed in this planning process for their potential
to contribute to the future Iowa City bike network.
Policies and Legislation
Existing policies and legislation have a significant
impact on the development of trails and bikeways
in Iowa City . State and local regulations determine
the design, construction specifications, and safe use
of trails, sidewalks and on-street bicycle facilities.
The current regulatory environment in Iowa City is
similar to other municipalities of similar character in
Iowa .
Local Policies and Regulations
Local regulations and policies impact the presence
and character of bicycling facilities in new develop-
ment, provide procedures and design guidance for
roadway design and traffic calming additions, and
support safe and responsible use and enjoyment
of public roadways by all road users. The City Code
includes bicycle parking ordinances to integrate
bicycle parking into new commercial and multi-
family residential developments; subdivision design
standards to incorporate trails, bikeways, and traffic
calming into new subdivisions; and traffic-related
regulations to encourage safe bicycling and restrict
motor vehicle use of dedicated bicycle lanes. A
summary of some of these regulations and policies
is provided on the following pages.
EXISTING SYSTEM 44
Complete Streets Policy
Iowa City has adopted a complete streets ordinance
that establishes the city’s commitment to designing,
building, operating, and maintaining public streets
that accommodate people of all ages and abili-
ties, regardless of their mode of travel. The city’s
complete streets policy stresses the importance
of context within the street network and requires
that capital projects incorporate complete street
facilities like sidewalks and bicycle facilities set forth
in City Council-adopted plans like the comprehen-
sive plan, district plans, and bicycle and pedestrian
plans. The ordinance references a number of design
manuals to be used for design guidance, ranging
from traditional sources like the AASHTO Green Book
and the SUDAS manual, to more innovative publica-
tions like the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide and
the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide . The ordi-
nance includes exceptions to the use of complete
streets principles and performance measures to
evaluate its effectiveness and impact. The MPOJC
adopted a complete streets policy in 2015 to ensure
that projects receiving federal funds through
the MPO-administered Surface Transportation
Block Grant Program (STBG) and Transportation
Alternatives Program (TAP) adhere to complete
streets principles and apply context sensitive design .
Subdivision Regulations
The layout of the street network exerts the
most profound influence upon how the commu-
nity develops and the opportunity for safe and
active transportation between neighborhoods
and to various parts of town. Streets are also the
most unalterable element in development . Once
constructed, for better or worse, the street system,
which includes block lengths and intersections,
will remain unchanged for decades if not centu-
ries. Except for arterial streets, most roadways are
designed and constructed by private developers to
meet city standards .
The goal of Iowa City’s current subdivision regula-
tions (updated in 2008) is for each new subdivision
to contribute to the larger interconnected street
pattern to ensure:
■Street connectivity between neighborhoods
■Multiple travel routes resulting in the diffusion
and distribution of traffic
■Efficient routes for public and emergency services
■Provide direct and continuous vehicular and
pedestrian travel routes to neighborhood
destinations
It is a requirement that “all streets, sidewalks, and
trails should connect to other streets, sidewalks,
and trails within the development, and to the prop-
erty line to provide for their extension to adjacent
properties .” Iowa City’s subdivision regulations
restrict the use of cul-de-sacs and other roadways
with a single point of access and, when unavoidable
due to topography or other constraints, limit their
length .
Along local and collector streets block lengths are
to be between 300 and 600 feet in length. Blocks
longer than six hundred feet (600’) must have
midblock pedestrian connections between adjacent
streets .
Zoning Code
Iowa City plans for and encourages commercial
nodes located at key intersections throughout the
community to provide opportunities for basic retail
uses and services close to where people live . All
commercial zones require pedestrian access routes
from the public sidewalk/street to the building
entrance. All multi-family uses must have facades
and entrances oriented to the street with vehicle
parking to rear of the building or underground. All
commercial and multi-family residential uses have
minimum bicycle parking requirements .
45 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code
also encourage mixed use development in the
Downtown and Riverfront crossings but also in the
Neighborhood Commercial and Mixed Use zones
dispersed throughout the community . Olde Towne
Village at the intersection of Rochester Avenue and
Scott Boulevard is an example of this sort of mixed
use in a more suburban context .
The form-based code that is now in place for the
Riverfront Crossings and Downtown focus on the
pedestrian aspects of the street:
■Building facades and entrances are oriented
toward the street .
■Building placement is located close to the
sidewalk .
■Sidewalks are wider with space for landscaping
(trees) .
■Driveways/curb cuts are minimized with alley
access or cross access/coordinated access
preferred.
■Pedestrian streets, especially on existing long
blocks are encouraged .
■Parking is located behind buildings or
underground .
Traffic Calming Policy
To address the need for traffic calming for streets
not programmed for improvements in the near
future, the city developed a policy and procedures
for traffic calming driven by neighborhood request.
The policy, which applies to local and collector
streets, establishes a process for neighborhood
engagement, corridor study, design considerations,
and final approval of the installation. The traffic
calming program has resulted in a variety of
improvements on local and collector roadways,
Figure 20. The raised crosswalk and speed humps along Shannon Drive calm traffic and increase safety for bicyclists.
EXISTING SYSTEM 46
recent inclusion of an entire chapter for complete
streets (Chapter 5) expands bicycling-related infor-
mation beyond design details and establishes a
more comprehensive context for the inclusion of
bicycling facilities and impact of general geometric
design principles on non-motorized transportation .
Key themes and considerations from this review of
existing policies and legislation include the following:
■Through numerous ordinances, regulations and
policies, Iowa City has established a layered
system of safeguards to ensure that bicycle
transportation is considered in all transporta-
tion investments, land subdivisions, and future
developments .
■The city code requires people to park their bicy-
cles at bike racks if they are within 300 feet of
thebuilding entrance of the intended destination.
While this encourages bike rack usage, it can be
difficult to abide by this law when bike racks in
dense, high-traffic areas are full and no other bike
parking is available, which indicates the need to
expand the presence of bike parking.
■Bicycle parking regulations lack the level of
design detail necessary to ensure that private
developers provide secure and functional bike
racks . Additional language regarding design spec-
ifications in accordance with the Association of
Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals’ Essentials
of Bike Parking (2015) should be referenced and
provided to developers at the initiation of the site
planning process .
■Design guidance for bicycle facility development
relies heavily on AASHTO design manuals that do
not incorporate recent developments and inno-
vations in facility design, such as buffered bike
lanes, separated bike lanes, and cycle tracks . This
is especially apparent at the state level .
including Morningside Drive, College and Summit
Streets, Shannon Drive, and Kimball Road . These
installations create a safer environment for all road
users, especially people bicycling and walking .
Bicycle Parking Policy
Bicycle parking codified in the city’s zoning ordi-
nance as part of the off street parking and loading
standards . Like motor vehicle parking require -
ments, minimum bicycle parking requirements vary
for different land uses. Bicycle parking minimums
are calculated as a percentage of motor vehicle
parking spaces, usually between five and twenty-
five percent, or as a fixed number per dwelling unit.
In all cases in which bicycle parking is required, a
minimum of four spaces shall be provided. The ordi -
nance also includes general design standards that
focus on parking area surface type, rack design, and
rack placement . Parking may also be provided in
the form of bicycle lockers or secure indoor storage
facilities, but does not define conditions under
which these parking facilities should be used, nor
does it require their use .
State Policies and Regulations
The Iowa State Code acknowledges and supports
trail development as a catalyst for economic
development and improved community health .
The adoption of sections of the Iowa State Code
pertaining to pedestrian, bicycle and motorist
movement and operation on public roadways also
promotes behavior in conformance with statewide
regulations .
The SUDAS manual provides detailed design
guidelines and standards for the development of
consistent non-motorized transportation facili-
ties . Design guidance is heavily dependent on the
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle
Facilities (2012 draft) and discusses traditional
facility types such as shared-use paths, shared
roadways, paved shoulders, bike lanes, and bicycle
boulevards . The document does not include design
guidance for newer, more innovative bicycle facili-
ties such as separated bike lanes or cycle tracks . The
47 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
This page left blank intentionally.
Section 4
Needs Assessment
49 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Needs Assessment
There is no single formula for building a bicycle-
friendly community. Each community has unique
values and needs with respect to bicycling . The
needs and values of Iowa Citians shape the content
and character of this plan, from the overarching
vision and goals to the detailed facility and program
recommendations . This chapter assesses the needs
of the community with regard to bicycling and
includes the following key elements:
■A description of bicyclist types
■Demand for bicycling facilities based on land use,
population, and destination densities
■Public engagement processes and feedback,
which consisted of an online survey, open house
events, an online mapping tool, and a survey
distributed to junior high school students
Types of Bicyclists
Similar to motor vehicles, bicyclists and their bicy-
cles come in a variety of sizes and configurations.
This variation ranges from the type of bicycle a
bicyclist chooses to ride to the behavioral charac-
teristics and comfort level of the bicyclist. Bicyclists
by nature are much more sensitive to poor facility
design, construction, and maintenance than motor
vehicle drivers .
Bicyclist skill level also leads to a dramatic variance
in expected speeds, traffic tolerance, and behavior.
Several methodologies for classifying bicyclists are
currently in use within the bicycle planning and
engineering professions. These classifications can
be helpful in understanding the characteristics and
preferences of different bicyclists. Historically, the
most conventional framework classified the “design
bicyclist” as advanced, basic, or child .
In 2012, the AASHTO Guide for the Development of
Bicycle Facilities consolidated these three catego -
ries to into two: “Experienced and Confident,” and
“Casual and Less Confident.” Both of these meth-
odologies at the federal level consider only existing
bicyclists and do not examine the American popu-
lation as a whole, particularly those who do not
currently bicycle but have interest .
A third methodology has been developed by
planners in the City of Portland, Oregon and is
supported by data collected nationally since 2005 .
This methodology identifies four types of bicyclists
and describes their preferences and needs:
Strong and Fearless: These users will typically
ride anywhere regardless of roadway conditions or
weather. These bicyclists can ride faster than other
user types, prefer direct routes, and will typically
choose roadway connections .
Enthused and Confident: This user group encom-
passes “intermediate” bicyclists who are fairly
comfortable riding on all types of bicycle facilities,
but usually choose lower-volume streets or shared-
use paths when available . These users may choose
a longer route to ride on a preferred facility.
Interested but Concerned: This user type
comprises the bulk of the cycling population and
represents bicyclists who typically only ride a
bicycle on low traffic streets or shared-use paths
under favorable weather conditions. These bicy-
clists perceive significant barriers to their increased
use of cycling.
No Way, No How: (approximately 30-35 percent of
population): Persons in this category do not bicycle,
either because of general lack of interest or percep-
tion of severe safety issues with riding in traffic.
Bicyclist type within a city varies widely based on
residents’ previous bicycle facility exposure and
experience and city population makeup . University
cities, such as Iowa City, offer a special environ-
ment that varies significantly from the rest of the
nation and even the general population within the
same city. Students, faculty, and staff on university
campuses typically walk and bicycle in much higher
numbers than their counterparts elsewhere .
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 50
Demand for Bicycling Facilities
Determining geographic demand for bicycle facili-
ties requires a layering and analysis of diverse
inputs, from population and employment density
to schools and parks to input gathered through the
public engagement process . This memorandum
compiles and synthesizes these diverse inputs to
create a comprehensive picture of demand for
bicycle facilities in Iowa City.
The Live/Work/Play Demand Model provides a
general understanding of expected bicycling activity
by combining individual spatial analyses represen-
tative of where people live, work, play, shop, access
public transit, and go to school into a composite
sketch of demand for bicycle facilities throughout
Iowa City .
Methodology
Categorical data representing each demand factor
(e .g ., live, work, play) are processed individually .
The resulting values for each category are spatially
joined to a uniform point grid that is used to develop
a visual representation of category density using
GIS-based kernel density tools . The result is a model
of demand for bicycle facilities accounting for the
impacts of destination proximity and density.
Scores increase for areas that have a high density
of destinations that are close together, like a down-
town . Scores decrease in areas with lower densities
of destinations that are further apart such as fringe
strip commercial . On the maps shown in this section
of the plan, the highest density/usage/activity loca-
tions (shown in brown) do not represent specific
physical facilities, but rather represent relative
higher use zones as calculated .
Categories are scored on a scale of 1 to 5 based on
density and proximity and then combined with equal
weighting to develop a composite Live/Work/Play
score. This composite representation of demand
for bicycling facilities is an important factor that will
inform bikeway network development.
STRONG & FEARLESS
INTERESTED BUT CONCERNED
NO WAY, NO HOW
ENTHUSED & CONFIDENT
1-3 %
%
50-60
%5-10
%30
51 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Results
Live
Population density is based on 2010 decennial census
block level population information. Population
distribution and density represent potential trip
origin locations . More trips can be made in areas
with higher population density . Student housing,
multi-family housing complexes, and compact
single family subdivisions are concentrated close to
Downtown and the University of Iowa. The Central
District, Southwest District, the South District, and
the eastern end of the Northwest District have some
of the greatest concentrations of residential popula-
tions in the city . Newer residential developments in
the Northeast and Southeast will drive demand for
quality of life amenities, including bicycle facilities
to increase access to nearby destinations . It is also
important to note the many residential communi-
ties immediately adjacent to Iowa City that rely on
the local transportation network, as well as goods
and services within the city. While not reflected in
the population-based demand assessment, connec-
tions to the adjacent municipalities of University
Heights and Coralville, as well as residential neigh-
borhoods in unincorporated Johnson County, such
as Sunrise Village and Lake Ridge, will increase
regional access to destinations throughout Iowa
City .
Map 8. Population-Based Demand
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 52
Work
Employment density mainly represents trip destina-
tions for people working in Iowa City, regardless of
their place of residency. This data layer is based on
2014 total employment by census block . Depending
on the type of job, this category can represent both
trip attractors, like retail stores and cafes, and
trip generators, like office parks and office build-
ings. Hot spots for the “work” analysis include the
University of Iowa, Downtown Iowa City, the Iowa
City commercial developments along Highway 1
and Highway 6, the industrial corridor north of
Highway 6 from Sycamore Street to the eastern
city limits, and various employment sectors along
North Dodge Street surrounding Interstate 80 . As
shown in the map below, the density of employ-
ment in Downtown and at the University of Iowa far
outweigh all other employment concentrations in
Iowa City. Their importance as two of the greatest
trip generators in the city will be critical to future
network development .
Map 9. Employment-Based Demand
53 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Play
Recreation-based demand represents a combination
of parks and linear trails that support recreational
activities in Iowa City . Much like schools and other
neighborhood amenities, many of the “play”
hotspots are scattered throughout the community .
As Map 10 illustrates, much of the demand gener-
ated by trails and parks is located adjacent to the
Iowa River, from the Waterworks Prairie Park north
of Interstate 80 south along the Iowa River Trail to
the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area, with numerous
parks in between. Future development of a regional
riverfront park, as identified in the Downtown
and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, will further
strengthen the Iowa River as the primary recreation
corridor in Iowa City and will increase recreation
opportunities in the core of the city.
Other high-demand areas include Hickory Hill Park,
Sycamore Greenway, Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park,
Scott Park, Court Hill Trail, Mormon Handcart Park,
and the Willow Creek Trail . The map illustrates the
importance of trails and greenways as links between
city parks and other major land uses .
Map 10. Recreation-Based Demand
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 54
Learn
School-based demand represents where students
K-12, at community college, or at university go to
school . K-12 schools are distributed across the
entire city and generally reflect residential popu-
lation distribution . Iowa City High School, West
High School, and Regina Catholic Education Center
generate a large number of trips, but their atten-
dance zones are much larger than most middle and
elementary schools. An increased focus on bicycle
infrastructure surrounding elementary and middle
schools, which have smaller attendance zones and
shorter average distances from home to school, may
yield a greater increase in youth bicycle trips . A new
ICCSD elementary school, Hoover Elementary, is
slated to open in the fall of 2017. While not reflected
on this map, the new elementary school, which will
be located at the intersection of American Legion
and Barrington Roads, will impact student atten-
dance zones, travel routes, and mode choices .
University and community college demand is
concentrated at the University of Iowa Campus. This
overlaps with other demand factors like employ-
ment, residential, and retail, all of which stress
the importance of the urban core as the area with
highest demand for infrastructure supporting
bicycle mobility .
Map 11. School-Based Demand
55 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Shop
Retail-based demand is calculated using a combi-
nation of retail, arts, entertainment, food services,
and accommodation employment sectors from
the North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) . Together, these sectors provide a rough
sense of shopping and entertainment destinations
in Iowa City. In addition to a high density of retail
employment in the Downtown, smaller nodes of
retail and shopping destinations are located along
Gilbert Street south of Downtown, along Highway
1 and Highway 6, at First Avenue and Muscatine
Avenue, at First Avenue and Lower Muscatine Road,
and at North Dodge Street and North Summit Street .
Map 12. Retail-Based Demand
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 56
Transit
Transit-based demand is assessed by the location of
bus stops in Iowa City operated by the region’s three
transit providers: Iowa City Transit, Coralville Transit
System, and Cambus (University of Iowa). The city
as a whole is generally well served by public transit .
The high density of transit stops in Downtown and
through the University of Iowa campus reflect the
high number of routes that service the urban core.
Additional corridors like Muscatine Avenue and
Melrose Avenue are served by multiple routes as
well . By improving bicycle access to these transit
hotspots, the city can effectively increase bicyclists’
ability to travel longer distances and access destina-
tions outside comfortable bicycling range.
Map 13. Transit-Based Demand
57 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Composite Demand
The composite is determined by overlaying the indi-
vidual density maps and applying standard weights
to each factor. This composite demand analysis
shows that the areas of Iowa City with the highest
potential for bicycle travel demand are dispersed in
clusters throughout the city, often surrounding land
uses that generate high volumes of trips, bicycle or
otherwise. Downtown and the University of Iowa
campus generate the most demand for bicycle facil-
ities, followed by major commercial corridors and
nodes, trails and recreation areas, and clusters of
schools .
Map 14. Composite Demand
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 58
Community Input
Iowa City residents have played an active role in
shaping the character and content of this plan
through multiple on-line and in-person engagement
activities and events. The following section of this
chapter summarizes the process and input received
through these engagement opportunities, including
two open houses, an online survey, and an online
mapping tool .
Junior High Survey
Iowa City reached out to students at South East
Junior High to learn more about their experiences
bicycling in the community . Nearly three hundred
students shared information about their riding
preferences, helmet usage, interest in earn-a-bike
classes or mountain biking classes, and what they
like and do not like about riding a bike . Over three
hundred students completed the survey, providing
valuable information about the bicycling habits,
preferences, and desires of Iowa City’s junior high
students . The input is incorporated into recommen-
dations for programs and network improvements
to support bicycling by people of all ages, especially
children and young adults. The results of this survey
are shown in the figures below.
59 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Open House Events
The community engagement process included two
open houses. The first of these, held at the begin-
ning of the planning process on January 26, 2017,
provided the more than 120 attendees with an
overview of the planning process and focused on
collecting information, ideas, and inspiration to
guide plan development . On display were boards
illustrating different bicycle facility types and
maps and displays of specific geographic sectors,
asking participants to identify key issues for each
area as well as more general citywide issues . Their
comments proved very important in the planning of
the overall network. Frequently mentioned issues
by sector follow:
East of the Iowa River
■Gilbert Street, include the possibility of a road
diet with bike lanes
■Highway 6 corridor, including both paths along
the corridor and better accesses across it
■Kirkwood Avenue
■An east-west quiet street route incorporating an
improved Sheridan Avenue
■Downtown commuter routes using the Muscatine
and Lower Muscatine corridors
■East-west route using Glendale Boulevard, and
improvements of transition to the Market/
Jefferson pair
■Rochester Road
Downtown/Campus
■Burlington Street (Highway 1) Bridge and connec-
tion to Downtown campus
■River crossings in general, with connections to
rest of a system
■Continuity and safety of Melrose
■More direct routes to Coralville
Figure 21. Participants at the first open house
commented on key issues related to biking in Iowa City.
Figure 22. Community members discuss existing
barriers and desired routes during the first open house.
Figure 23. Community members review potential
facility types at the first open house.
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 60
■Facility improvement of the Market/Jefferson/
Glendale corridor
■Bicycle boulevard on College Avenue
West of the River
■Improved facilities on Benton Street
■Melrose continuity as principal east-west route
■River crossings
■Completion and connectedness to Clear Creek
Trail
General Issues
■Wayfinding
■Bicycle boulevards and commuter routes radi-
ating from Downtown
■Good north-south bicycle arterial
■Protected bike lanes on bridges
■More effective pavement markings than sharrows
■Better law enforcement and education
■Protected lanes downtown
■Better maintenance of streets and bike lanes
The second open house was held on May 25th,
2017 to share initial plan concepts and recom-
mended bikeways and solicit input from community
residents . Residents viewed project boards that
displayed results of previous engagement activities,
illustrated different facility types, outlined the plan
vision and goals, and described different supporting
programs to help build a culture of bicycling in Iowa
City . More than 40 residents attended the open
house . The comments and themes presented below
highlight the diversity of input and ideas shared by
attendees:
■Willow Creek Trail extension to Hunters Run Park
■Bike lane markings on outer lanes/shoulders of
Highway 6/Riverside Drive
■Links to schools, especially West High
■Hawkins and Melrose are hilly, need traffic
calming
■Myrtle-Riverside intersection is dangerous
■Improved connection from Hwy 1 to Iowa River
Trail
■Jefferson problem crossing 2 lanes from left
side bike lane; variety of other comments about
speeds on Jefferson and Market Streets
Figure 24. Network recommendations were discussed
during the second open house.
Figure 25. Community members reviewed potential
supporting programs during the second open house.
61 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Online Survey
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Survey helps define
the preferences and opinions of these prospective
cyclists and pedestrians, and provides important
guidance for designing the network.
Who are Iowa City’s Cyclists?
While the Bikeway Survey was not a scientific survey,
the number and diversity of responses suggested
that it represented a fairly representative sample
of citizens with interest in urban bicycling. The first
questions explored the characteristics of these
responses, and found that:
■Survey respondents represent all parts of the city
but were most concentrated in the central part of
the city. While residents in all parts of the city are
clearly interested in active transportation, about
40% of survey respondents live in the central
part of the east bank between the river and 1st
Avenue. Almost 60% were from areas east of the
river, although central west bank neighborhoods
also were well represented .
■Central Iowa City destinations – Downtown and
University of Iowa campuses and facilities –are
dominant. Over 3/4 of respondents reported
that their most frequent destination was in the
central part of the city on both banks of the river.
Of the two, the east bank (Downtown Iowa City
and the downtown campus) represented the
greatest share of destinations.
■Most survey respondents are frequent bicyclists.
A large majority (about 77%) of participants
reported riding at least once or twice weekly,
with 53% riding several times per week to daily .
By way of contrast, 65% report walking for enjoy-
ment or transportation on at least a weekly basis;
and 17% report at least weekly use of public
transportation .
■Exercise and commuting are the most frequent
reasons mentioned for bicycling. Notably, 72%
of respondents commute by bicycle, suggesting
a highly committed survey sample . But people
bike for a variety of reasons – over half of respon -
dents reported biking for routine errands, social
visits, and trips to parks and recreational facilities.
■The largest group of respondents are cyclists
most interested in improved infrastructure. The
largest group, over 60%, were committed urban
cyclists comfortable in streets, but recognizing
and supporting new facilities to expand rider-
ship and improve safety. The next largest group
at over 31% of respondents characterized them-
selves as interested cyclists who are capable of
using low-volume streets, but concerned about
riding in mixed traffic. Very small groups were
at the edge of the interest spectrum. Only 2%
viewed themselves as comfortable in every situ-
ation and seeing no reason for infrastructure
development, and less than 1% were unlikely to
ride under any circumstances .
0 100 200 300 400 500
Exercise
Commuting
Parks
Social visits
Errands
Touring
Library
Family outings
Shopping
Business
Other
Do not ride
Number of responses
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Central
Central-West
West
Coralville North
East
Southeast
North Liberty
Rural Northeast
Outside Boundaries
Rural Southwest
Tiffin
Number of responses
Trail development
Protected bike lanes
Safe routes to schools
Bicycle parking
Bicycle access design
Bike lanes
Strong bicycle advocacy
Wayfinding
Designated bicycle routes
Bike safety for kids
Showers/changing facilities
Clubs, events, programs
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Completely ineffectiveRelatively ineffectiveNeutralEffectiveVery effective
Figure 26. Bicycle activity by type.
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 62
Destinations
A bicycle transportation network should get people
where they want to go . The survey listed a number
of different community destinations or destina-
tion types, and asked respondents to rank them
based on the importance of good bicycle access to
them. Figure 27 describes the results, indicating the
percentage of participants who considered good
access important or very important . These in turn
suggest the places that the network should serve .
The top five destinations reported as “important” or
“very important” by respondents were:
■The University of Iowa Downtown campus
■Downtown Iowa City
■The University of Iowa West Campus
■Trails
■Iowa City Public Library
Next in this ranking were parks (notably Terry
Trueblood, City Park, and neighborhood parks) and
schools at all levels . The lowest ranking destinations
in terms of importance were shopping centers or
office parks on the periphery of the city.
Trail Use
The survey showed that trails, a key part of a bicycle
transportation network, are also a top destination .
To go deeper, the questionnaire asked respondents
to rate the frequency of their use of individual
principal trails. The most frequently used trails
(measured by largest percentage of respondents
using the facility at least weekly) were:
■Iowa River Trail (36% of respondents)
■Dubuque Street (29%)
■Clear Creek (21%)
■North Liberty (19%)
■Highway 6/Highway 1 (18%)
Infrastructure Types
Much of the survey was designed to assess the
comfort of current and prospective bicyclists with
different types of bicycle environments. The survey
asked participants to respond to a gallery of photo-
graphs of streets and facilities. Most of the images
for evaluating streets were local to Iowa City, while
infrastructure solutions typically came from other
cities. Favorable ratings for these examples included:
■This presents a very safe route that can be used
by all people. (2X weighting factor)
■This is a comfortable cycling route for most users.
(1.5X weighting factor)
■I am comfortable using this street myself, but do
not advise it for inexperienced cyclists or younger
riders. (1X weighting factor)
The facilities were grouped on the basis of a weighted
score, calculated by multiplying the percentage of
favorable participant responses by each weighting
factor for individual responses and adding the
results .
■The top-rated settings include completely sepa-
rated paths, both along roads and on exclusive
0100200300400500
Exercise
Commuting
Parks
Social visits
Errands
Touring
Library
Family outings
Shopping
Business
Other
Do not ride
Number of responses
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Central
Central-West
West
Coralville North
East
Southeast
North Liberty
Rural Northeast
Outside Boundaries
Rural Southwest
Tiffin
Number of responses
Trail development
Protected bike lanes
Safe routes to schools
Bicycle parking
Bicycle access design
Bike lanes
Strong bicycle advocacy
Wayfinding
Designated bicycle routes
Bike safety for kids
Showers/changing facilities
Clubs, events, programs
0100 200 300 400 500 600
Completely ineffectiveRelatively ineffectiveNeutralEffectiveVery effective
Figure 27. Destinations.
63 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
right-of-way), or a bike route with a physical sepa -
ration from travel lanes. Given the importance
of sidepaths in Iowa City’s existing system, the
high rating for an enhanced sidepath with clearly
marked crossings may be of special interest. Iowa
City’s Court Hill Trail was placed in this top group .
■The next highest-rated group included buffered
bike lanes, high quality sidepaths with bike lanes,
and quiet local streets . Iowa City’s 7th Avenue
was included in this group .
■The third highest rated group included conven-
tional bike lanes and bicycle boulevards, as well
as the very unconventional median cycle track on
Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC . Three
local settings (Camp Cardinal, Highland Avenue,
and the Jefferson Street bike lane) were included
in this group .
■Next in preference order were conventional bike
lanes on arterial streets and collectors with no
markings or shared lane markings .
■The lowest rated settings were arterial streets
with no markings shared lane markings .
Importance of Various Actions
Responses to a list of possible actions to improve
Iowa City’s bicycle environment indicated a strong
priority for infrastructure programs. Initiatives
that ranked highest (over 2/3 of respondents rating
the initiative as either effective or very effective)
included:
■Buffered bike lanes (rated effective or very effec-
tive by 94% of respondents)
■Trail development (88%)
■Bike lanes (85%)
■Safe routes to schools (86%)
■Better project design for bicycle access (80%)
■Strong bicycle advocacy organization (75%)
■System of destination-based on-street routes
(73%
■Law enforcement (71%)
■Bike safety activities designed for kids (69%)
■Showers and changing facilities at workplaces
(69%)
■Widened sidewalks or sidepaths along major
streets (68%)
■Better crossings/intersection controls at major
streets (68%)
0 100 200 300 400 500
Exercise
Commuting
Parks
Social visits
Errands
Touring
Library
Family outings
Shopping
Business
Other
Do not ride
Number of responses
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Central
Central-West
West
Coralville North
East
Southeast
North Liberty
Rural Northeast
Outside Boundaries
Rural Southwest
Tiffin
Number of responses
Trail development
Protected bike lanes
Safe routes to schools
Bicycle parking
Bicycle access design
Bike lanes
Strong bicycle advocacy
Wayfinding
Designated bicycle routes
Bike safety for kids
Showers/changing facilities
Clubs, events, programs
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Completely ineffectiveRelatively ineffectiveNeutralEffectiveVery effective
Figure 28. Community preference for actions to improve bicycling
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 64
Online Mapping Tool Input
More than seventy individuals shared their ideas for
bicycling in Iowa City using the online mapping tool
developed specifically for this planning process. The
feedback provided using this online mapping tool
included current bicycling routes, desired bicycling
routes, and community destinations, among others .
These three categories of input expand the analysis
for high demand areas by supplementing the Live
Work Play Analysis with community-driven data
that combines route selection with trip destination
information.
Current Bicycling Routes
Map 15 depicts the density of current bicycling
routes identified via the online mapping tool. Blue
lines indicate more heavily traveled trail and street
segments. Yellow lines also indicate the presence of
bicycling activity, but to a lesser extent . The results
show that people are bicycling on roads of all sizes
from state highways and country roads to local and
neighborhood streets . Many people also travel on
the city’s extensive trail system . High concentra-
tions of bicycling activity are present in the Central
District, most notably on east-west corridors such
as College Street, Washington Street, Market Street,
Jefferson Street, Rochester Avenue, Glendale Road,
and Bowery Street . This concentrated activity in the
Central District stresses the need for quality facili-
ties to support travel to Downtown Iowa City and
the University of Iowa campus, as well as cross-city
routes that connect to west Iowa City and neigh-
boring Coralville .
Map 15. Current Bicycling Route Density
65 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Desired Bicycling Routes
Desired bicycling routes provide critical information
regarding trip destinations, existing corridors in
need of physical improvements to support bicycle
activity (corridors that people would use if not for the
current lack of bicycle infrastructure), and new trail
corridors in undeveloped areas and along riparian
or other corridors. Iowa City residents identified 121
desired routes using the online mapping tool . Map
16 displays the density of these desired routes. The
majority of desired routes are shown in yellow on
the map, indicating lower density . Road segments
and trails shown in blue indicate a higher density and
a corresponding need for improvements to facilitate
safe and convenient bicycle travel. Higher density
routes include Muscatine Avenue, Burlington Street,
Second Street (Highway 6) leading into Coralville,
North Dodge Street, Prairie Du Chien Road, and
Highway 1 West / Highway 6 across the Iowa River
from Hudson Avenue to Gilbert Street. The higher
density corridors east to west, as indicated by
Second Street, Burlington Street, and Muscatine
Avenue, point to the need for a cross-city route to
support longer distance trips and supporting access
to high demand areas like Downtown Iowa City and
the University of Iowa.
Map 16. Desired Bicycling Route Density
NEEDS ANALYSIS AND METHODS 66
Combined Route Density
When existing and desired route densities are
combined, a more complete picture emerges that
combines commonly traveled, lower-stress corri-
dors and trails with busier thoroughfares that
provide more direct routes to cross-town destina-
tions. Map 17 highlights a two-fold need to both
improve existing bicycle routes and develop new
bicycle routes .
Map 17. Combined Bicycling Route Density
67 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Community Destinations
Eighty-nine individual destination points were
added to the online mapping tool during the plan-
ning process. Map 18 displays high-density areas of
Iowa City destinations using a similar technique to
the Live Work Play analysis . The blue areas repre -
sent either concentrations of adjacent destinations,
or a single destination identified by more than one
map user. The results of this spatial analysis overlap
with many high-demand areas identified in the Live
Work Play analysis . Major destinations and desti-
nation areas include Downtown, the University of
Iowa, the University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics,
the Sycamore Mall, Mercer Park and Southeast
Junior High School, Iowa City High School, West High
School, and Terry Trueblood Recreation Area .
Conclusion
The combination of data-driven analysis with
community input creates a compelling case for a
complete bicycle network that serves all of Iowa
City, not just the urban core surrounding Downtown
and the University of Iowa. While these two destina -
tions generate the highest demand for facilities to
support bicycling activity, the series of maps in this
chapter highlight the need to serve other significant
destinations as well. The diversity of destinations
for bicycling trips reflects the diversity of bicyclists
themselves . People shopping, running errands,
going to school, commuting to work, catching the
bus, cruising along the trails and to the parks—
everyone can and does travel by bicycle . By creating
a complete, interconnected, and comfortable bike
network, more and more Iowa Citians can enjoy the
benefits of bicycle travel.
Map 18. Community Destination Density
Section 5
Recommendations
69 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Recommendations
Iowa City’s target of becoming a Gold-Level BFC will
be achieved in large part due to expansion of and
improvements to the bikeway network . This memo -
randum outlines the principles, attributes, and
structure for bicycle network development, followed
by recommendations for specific infrastructure
improvements. At full build-out, the envisioned
bikeway network will support bicycle transportation
and recreation for people of all ages and abilities.
The memorandum concludes with recommenda-
tions for support systems that enhance the bicycle
network, including wayfinding systems, bicycle
parking facilities, bike share, and integration with
transit .
The Iowa City Bikeway Network
Network Principles
An effective bicycle network for Iowa City should
follow specific principles and performance measure-
ments. Some of the world’s best work in identifying
design principles was done by the Netherlands
Centre for Research and Contract Standardization
in Civil and Traffic Engineering. This plan adapts the
Netherlands concepts to medium-sized American
cities like Iowa City, identifying six guiding elements
for an effective active transportation network:
■Integrity. The ability of a system to link starting
points continuously to destinations, and to be
easily and clearly understood by users .
■Directness. The capacity to provide direct routes
with minimum misdirection or unnecessary
distance .
■Safety. The ability to minimize hazards and
improve safety for users of all transportation
modes .
■Comfort. Consistency with the capacities of
users and avoidance of mental or physical stress.
■Experience. The quality of offering users a
pleasant and positive experience .
■Feasibility. The ability to maximize benefits and
minimize costs, including financial cost, inconve-
nience, and potential political opposition .
These six elements express the general attributes of
a good system, but must have specific criteria and
measurements that both guide the system’s design
and evaluate how well it works. More information
about these network principles can be found in the
plan appendix .
Attributes of the Network
Based on this development of the six elements
presented above, the Iowa City network design
follows the following major attributes:
Tailored to User Groups. Planning a bicycle network
for Iowa City, with a geography that includes signifi-
cant grades, the meandering Iowa River that creates
some relatively isolated areas, and the University
of Iowa campus on both sides of that river, requires
an understanding of the specific user groups for
the system . In addition, Iowa City’s street and trail
system is integrated into the networks of Coralville,
North Liberty, and University Heights . These user
groups include:
■Commuters traveling to the city’s (and metro-
politan area’s) core destinations – Downtown
Iowa City and the University of Iowa campuses.
The central location of these districts keeps most
trip distances within very manageable ranges,
although community expansion to the west and
east also increase their length .
■Cyclists making utilitarian trips to other desti-
nations outside of the two core districts. In
Iowa City, where an unusual number of people
use bicycles for basic urban transportation, the
ultimate system must serve a variety of desti-
nations, including schools, commercial clusters
and corridors, and employment centers. From
a framework point of view, this requires a grid
of routes that complement a radial approach to
Downtown and campuses .
RECOMMENDATIONS 70
■Travelers to parks and trails . Iowa City’s bicycle
network should be integrated with its park
system, which also went through a master
planning process in 2017 . Additionally, trails
themselves are both facilities and popular desti-
nations, so on-street routes from neighborhoods
to trails are important .
■Recreational users . The Iowa River, Clear Creek,
North Liberty, Court Hill, and Dubuque/Mehaffey
Bridge Trails are major elements of the regional
trail system, and receive heavy use. These facili-
ties serve both recreational users and cyclists
bound for specific destinations. A number of Iowa
City residents also travel by bike or on foot within
the city for recreational purposes, from serious
road cycling to comfortable in-city workouts.
■Users out of necessity. Many people in Iowa
City depend on active transportation for basic
travel. This is especially true of individuals or
families with limited incomes who may not have
regular access to cars. For these residents, the
bicycle offers an invaluable tool, connecting
them to economic opportunities and commu-
nity resources that might otherwise be difficult
to reach . A transportation system that serves the
interest of social equity must also expand options
and access to these areas of affordable housing.
■Iowa City youth . Children, teens, and young
adults in Iowa City can be grouped into most of
the categories described above; however, these
younger residents are unique in both their lack
of experience with motor vehicle traffic and
ability to anticipate and negotiate interactions
with other road users . In addition, this group
represents the future of Iowa City, and their
potential to influence transportation behavior
and patterns is tremendous . Building a bicycle
network that supports Iowa City youth, including
safe routes to school and parks, will help to build
an appreciation for and commitment to active
transportation for future generations.
Destination-Based. A key market for the Iowa City
network is people headed for specific destinations.
Destinations that the community and both existing
and potential users identify as important contribute
powerfully to the structure of the network. The
proposed network is more than a system of bicycle-
friendly streets. It is instead a transportation system
that takes people to specific places.
Function Model. Several reasonable models for
network planning exist, with choices dependent on
the nature of the city. The Iowa City system identifies
principal routes that offer long-distance continuity
along destination-rich corridors, somewhat analo-
gous to transit lines. Other types of facilities such
as bicycle boulevards and connecting links serve
specific functions, such as neighborhood connec-
tivity or short links to specific destinations.
Incremental Integrity. Incremental integrity – the
ability of the network to provide a system of value at
each step of completion – is an important attribute.
The first step in completion should be valuable and
increase bicycle access even if nothing else is done.
Each subsequent phase of completion follows the
same principle of leaving something of clear value
and integrity, even if it were the ultimate stage of
completion .
Evolution. As part of the concept of incremental
integrity, the system is designed to evolve and
improve over time. For example, a relatively low-
cost project or design element can establish a
pattern of use that supports something better in
the future. Independent segments should connect
with other segments by means of an interim signing
or marking strategy so it is not isolated .
Conflict Avoidance. Projects should demon-
strate the multiple benefits of street adaptations.
On many streets, traffic calming and signage can
provide satisfactory facilities that focus on the
positive and minimize divisive conflicts. On others,
upgraded facilities can be provided with minimum
impact on traffic operations. For example, bikeway
71 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
design elements such as speed tables and traffic
diverters can slow motorists and keep unwanted
through traffic out of neighborhoods, benefiting
both cyclists and neighbors .
Use of Existing Facilities. Existing features like the
Court Hill and Iowa River Trails, major sidepaths,
and existing bike lanes are integral to the bikeway
system. Of special importance is the emergence of
the Outer Loop, combining facilities along Mormon
Trek Boulevard, McCollister Boulevard, and Scott
Boulevard to provide a multi-modal peripheral
route. “Found” but underused features such as the
Longfellow Tunnel, the Ridgewood alley, and short
existing walkway links can also be very useful.
Fill Gaps. In many cases, the most important parts
of a network are small projects that complete
connections . These short links can knit street or trail
segments together into longer routes or provide
access to important destinations . These gaps may
include a short trail segment that connects two
continuous streets together, or an intersection
improvement that bridges a barrier . The devel-
opment of the overall network is strategic, using
manageable initiatives to create a comprehensive
system .
Low-Stress Facilities. The Iowa City Bikeways
Survey showed that much of the city’s potential
urban cycling market is comfortable in on-street
situations, but understandably prefers separa-
tion from moving motor vehicles, through physical
buffers or using quiet streets or corridors separated
from heavy traffic. For example, bicycle boule -
vards—lower volume streets that parallel major
arterials —satisfy the comfort requirement success-
fully. However, some important destinations,
including major employers and shopping facilities
are served by major arterials . Here, Iowa City policy
incorporates bicycle and pedestrian accommoda-
tions in new major street projects . Along Mormon
Trek Boulevard, First Avenue, and Clinton Street, the
City is also implementing road diet programs that
both accommodate bike traffic and manage traffic
speeds. Many of these complete street treatments
provide users with the choice of on- and off-street
facilities within the same corridor. This provides
choices to cyclists with different capabilities and
levels of comfort with on-street riding.
Regional Connectivity. The Iowa City network
must also connect to regional facilities, including
trail and on-street routes in Coralville, North Liberty,
University Heights, Tiffin, and rural Johnson County.
Network Structure
Map 19 on page 72 illustrates the proposed func-
tional bicycle network for Iowa City, consistent with
information gathered through the citizen engage-
ment process, analysis of existing conditions and
demands, and the guidelines and criteria described
previously in this chapter. The functional network
map displays the ultimate build-out by component
type. Maps 20 through 23 display this functional
network in greater detail. The components of the
system include the facilities details below.
On-Street Facilities
Principal Bikeways
These corridors are the spines of the system, and
are generally oriented in ordinal east-west and
north-south directions. They often follow arterial
and collector corridors and have good crosstown
continuity. They form the bike “arterials” that lead to
the core destinations and many other key locations
around the city and have the capability of connecting
to on- and off-street systems in other metropolitan
area communities . The principal bikeways also
direct users to crossings of major potential barriers:
the Iowa River, Highways 1 and 6, and other major
arterial intersections .
Infrastructure for these routes typically use more
separated types of bicycle facilities, including
existing and proposed bike lanes, buffered bike
lanes, cycle tracks, enhanced sidepaths, and short
segments of multi-use trail. However, in some cases,
they may include segments of relatively low-volume
local streets. These facility types are described
RECOMMENDATIONS 72
Map 19. Functional Bicycle Network
Kiwanis
Pa rk
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Park
Villa Park
Whispering
Mea dows Wetlands
Napoleon
Pa rk
Sturgis
Ferry
Pa rk
Willow
Creek
Pa rk
Scott Park
Rita's Ranch
Th ornberry
Dog Park
Peninsula
Park
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Park
Wetherby
Park
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤6
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
C
l
e
ar
Creek
Trail
TerryTrue b l o o d RecreationTrailMarke t
Kirkwo odClintonBentonMadison Wi
ndsorRi
dgeTrailGrand
J St
Jefferso n
3rdKeokukH ighlan d
Myr tle GovernorR o c h esterDodgeMelrose
SanduskyS
y
c
a
moreGr
eenwayTrailArlingtonWoolfAveGilbertLo
w
er
M
uscatin
eIow
aRiverTrail
Burn s 7th/Win s tonIow
aRiverTrail
DeforestGreenwood
Prentiss
Cour t
W e llington
Duck
Cree
k
M
uscatine
EmeraldBradford
F /5th
/G
Southg ate
Hickory
Bowe ry
She ridanFersonRiver St
1stSandusky /TaylorCampCardinalDov
er/MeadowWindsorRidg e T r a ilExtensionChu rc h
Park Road
SunsetSummitF o s te rWeth
erby Park Trail E x t e n sionWestminster/TetonLakeside
McCollister7thHickoryHillPa rk T ra i l
Jefferson /Glendale /H e ath erp a th
Newton
P
r
a
iri
e
DuChienWa shin gto n
American Legion
He rbert Hoove r
Lower West Branch
Hollywood
Davenport
College
W hisperi
ngMeadow /Pinto /Pad d ockR o h re t
M o r m o n Tr e k
Court H il l TrailSycamoreK
e
n
n
e
dyWill ow C reek T r ail
Friendsh ip /Ridgewood
SandTaftSource: Esri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA , USGS, AEX, Getmap ping , Aer ogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the G IS User Co mmunity
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 inch = 0 .75 miles
Function al B ikeway Net work
Legend
On-Street Bikeways
Princ ipal Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
Neighborhood Connector
Under Study/Furth er Study Needed
Off-Street B ikeways
Princ ipal Multi-Use Trail
Secondary Multi-Use Trail
Sid epath
[
The Functional Bikeways Network Map illustrates
the complete future network of on-street and off-
street bikeways as envisioned in this plan. This
bikeway network provides Iowa City residents
and visitors with a comprehensive,
interconnected, and all-ag es system for bicycle
transportation and recreation.
The on-street and off-street bikeways
complement each other by expanding network
coverage, increasing access to destinations not
served by off-street paths, and offering dual
facilities along many arterial and collector
roadways in order to provide a safe and
enjoyable travel for a diverse range of skill,
experience, and comfort levels.
RECOMMENDATIONS 73
Map 20. Functional Bicycle Network: Northwest Quadrant
¥80
¥80¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤6
£¤218
Villa Park
Willow
Creek
Park
Th ornberry
Dog Park
Pen insula
Pa rk
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Park
Hunter 's
Run Park
Park12
WestwindsK e n n e d y
Shannon WoolfMormon TrekFo st er
CampCa rdinalWalker
Ri
versideMelros e
OrchardD
eer Creek
5Coral RidgePrairi
eMeadow
H o l i d a y
James
WestgateGalwayMacbrideBurlington
2
Holiday
Ben ton
C o m m e r c e
102
Idyllw ildBoston
Gree n w oodClintonHeartland9
Mel ros e
Linder
DubuqueForest V i e w
WashingtonLaurenceMackinawL
a
u
r
a
FinkbineCommuterMadisonRiv erFerson
George23Grand
PrairieG ra s s
7
Prentiss
Ha rrisonCampCardinal
SunsetW ild PrairieNorth R id ge
9
19M a n o rDubuqueSouthRidgeK o s er
Court
H ig hlandOzark
Duck Creek Tipperary
Ta f t S p e e d w a y
8
N e w to n
1 0
KeswickValleyVi
ew2220Normand y
Sierra
Donegal
CapitolHighl
andPark14W
ood
s
i
deW o olridg e
Marietta
13 Dub
u
q
u
e
CityPark Roads
Buttern u t
M
anitou
RockyShoreDeer CreekMagowanLexington18O a k crest
HawkinsRyan
Iwv
Hawkeye P ark
SlothowerLimeKilnH awk R idg eHawkeyeEmeraldHurtRedtailCoral
R
i
dgeMallClear CreekTrail
U of IIntera
l
Ca
m
pu
sTr
ai
l
I
o
waRi
ver
T
r
a
il
I
owaRi
verTrai
l
U
ofIInternalCampus Path
Iowa River TrailW illo w Cre e k T rail
Clear C r e ek Trail
Source: Esri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA , USGS, AEX, Getmap ping , Aer ogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the G IS User Co mmunity
0 0 .55 1 .10 .275 Miles
Function al B ikeway Net work
Legend
On-Street Bikeways
Princ ipal Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
Neighborhood Connector
Under Study/Furth er Study Needed
Off-Street B ikeways
Princ ipal Multi-Use Trail
Secondary Multi-Use Trail
Sid epath
[
The Functional Bikeways Network Map illustrates
the complete future network of on-street and off-
street bikeways as envisioned in this plan. This
bikeway network provides Iowa City residents
and visitors with a comprehensive,
interconnected, and all-ag es system for bicycle
transportation and recreation.
The on-street and off-street bikeways
complement each other by expanding network
coverage, increasing access to destinations not
served by off-street paths, and offering dual
facilities along many arterial and collector
roadways in order to provide a safe and
enjoyable travel for a diverse range of skill,
experience, and comfort levels.
Northwest
RECOMMENDATIONS 74
Map 21. Functional Bicycle Network: Northeast Quadrant
¥80
¥80
Scott Pa rk
Rita's
Ranc h
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Park
Hickory
Hill
Park
Park
Co urt
Dubuque
LucasDodgeArlingtonJohnsonMus catin e
Foster
V illa g e
FriendshipWoodridgeBurlington
R ochesterRi
versideGi nterOrchard DodgeN
orthgat
e
GovernorVanBuren1stAmerican Legion
Glendale
Mark et
7thPrairieDuChi
enIdyllw ild
GilbertClinton4thChurch
DubuqueHickory
WestminsterPrinceton
Lower West Bran chBloomington
B e n to n
3rdKirkw ood
Washington
ClarkSummitLau r enc
eWestbury
340
S
c
ott
RenoPrentiss
L
a
u
r
a
MadisonRiverFerson
KennethR o c h e s te rCam
denBrown
LindemannOaklandDavenport
Fairchild
Harrison
Herbert Hoover
Unbridled
Court
Jefferson
Sheridan
Wayn e Ober
linBarringtonHun tingtonBu ckinghamLyndenH
eig
ht
sWash in gt onDubuque
College
Whiting
BrentwoodOakes
Brooksi d e
DearbornChadwickKim ballColchesterDubuqueAshfordRundellDevon
MtVernonLin der
Ta f t S p e e d w a y BureshHanksGrantBanburyAnnaRidgeway
A
mhurstA rb orEversullRavenScottPark
L o w e rWest Branch
H 2ndGreenMountainCum be r la n dPostMornings
i
deCapitolBower y
Long fellowDoverWal nut TaftGLinnRonalds
Rapid Cree k
FairwayCity ParkRoads
K y le
Rid
g
e
TaftLimeKilnMo ss R idgeA c t
HarvestTyl erC a t
skillIowa
Shared UsePathWin
ds
o
r
Ri
dgeTrailI
owaRi
ver
T
r
ail
I
owaRi
verTrai
l
H ic k o ry H illP a r k T r a i l
CourtHill Tr a ilSource: Esri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA , USGS, AEX, Getmap ping , Aer ogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the G IS User Co mmunity
0 0 .55 1 .10 .275 Miles
Function al B ikeway Net work
Legend
On-Street Bikeways
Princ ipal Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
Neighborhood Connector
Under Study/Furth er Study Needed
Off-Street B ikeways
Princ ipal Multi-Use Trail
Secondary Multi-Use Trail
Sid epath
[
The Functional Bikeways Network Map illustrates
the complete future network of on-street and off-
street bikeways as envisioned in this plan. This
bikeway network provides Iowa City residents
and visitors with a comprehensive,
interconnected, and all-ag es system for bicycle
transportation and recreation.
The on-street and off-street bikeways
complement each other by expanding network
coverage, increasing access to destinations not
served by off-street paths, and offering dual
facilities along many arterial and collector
roadways in order to provide a safe and
enjoyable travel for a diverse range of skill,
experience, and comfort levels.
Northeas t
RECOMMENDATIONS 75
Map 22. Functional Bicycle Network: Southwest Quadrant
£¤218
£¤1
£¤218
£¤1
£¤218
Kiwanis
Park
Ryerson Woods
Napoleon Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Park
Willow
Creek
Park
Terry Trueblood
Recrea tion Area
Hunter 's
Run
Pa rk
SharonCenterWestSideRiversi
deWyldeGreenRuppert
MaierSundownR o h r e tNaplesM o r m o n T r e kSunset
MccollisterMo
r
mo
n
T
r
e
k WeeberDaneT
e
g
LakeBend
Benton
NaplesPhoe
n
i
x Prairi
e
Grass
WildPrairieLakeS
h
ore
Freund
Powes hi ek
Duck Creek
Os age
S
h
a
nn
onDenbighFoxana
OakCrestHi
l
l
Me a d o wviewLandon OldHighway218Plaen
ViewMaierPheasantValleyIzaak WaltonSlothowerGoldenrodSpring Ri dg e
S an ta
F
eBay R id ge
B ass wo od
D
u
nley
GilbertF50Kitty LeeRiversidePenfro
R ohretH awk R id
geSchuchert
La cin aDolenRanierWi
l
l
owCreek
T
r
a
i
l
Io
w
a
Riv
er
Trail
Source: Esri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA , USGS, AEX, Getmap ping , Aer ogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the G IS User Co mmunity
0 0 .55 1 .10 .275 Miles
Function al B ikeway Net work
Legend
On-Street Bikeways
Princ ipal Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
Neighborhood Connector
Under Study/Furth er Study Needed
Off-Street B ikeways
Princ ipal Multi-Use Trail
Secondary Multi-Use Trail
Sid epath
[
The Functional Bikeways Network Map illustrates
the complete future network of on-street and off-
street bikeways as envisioned in this plan. This
bikeway network provides Iowa City residents
and visitors with a comprehensive,
interconnected, and all-ag es system for bicycle
transportation and recreation.
The on-street and off-street bikeways
complement each other by expanding network
coverage, increasing access to destinations not
served by off-street paths, and offering dual
facilities along many arterial and collector
roadways in order to provide a safe and
enjoyable travel for a diverse range of skill,
experience, and comfort levels.
Southwest
RECOMMENDATIONS 76
Map 23. Functional Bicycle Network: Southeast Quadrant
£¤6
£¤6
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Park
Whispering
Meadows
Wetlands
Napoleon Pa rk
Sturgis
Ferry
Park
Terry Tru eblood
Recrea ti on Area
Wetherby
Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
Highland
V illa g e
IndependenceFriendly
Riversi
deGi nter
420Gilbe
rt
1 s tHollywood
American Legion
Industrial ParkDoverTaylorKeokukBoyrumSycamoreBroadwayL ang en b e rg
L
o
w
er
M
u
s
c
atin
e
Pad do ck HeinzErobiLakeside
Deforest
ModernChartresTaftJamie
San du sky
Whispering
MeadowC al if o r n i a
RussellWellington
TaftRuppert
Wayn e
Wintergreen
SandDic kensonYewell
Freund
M
arsellies
Wi n t e r E a gleWaterfront Brookw ood Cha mb
e
rlainScottPepper
OakCrestHi
l
l
Burn s
Bradford
StevensSouthgate
GrantwoodPlum
Tracy
Sherman EstherOldHighway218AshH
FranklinIzaak Walton LeHarveNevadaBordeauxWestern
Mccollister
SiouxCaminoDelRioLehmanRiversideGleason
Fountain
Osage
M a llRegalAmberRiverBendNurser y
Napole on CompassSoccerParkS tanwy
ckTyl erTerryTruebloodR e c r eation Tra i l Syc a m oreGreenwayTrailI
o
wa
Riv
er
Trail
WindsorRidge TrailE x t e n s ionW
etherbyParkTrailExte ns io n
Source: Esri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA , USGS, AEX, Getmap ping , Aer ogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
the G IS User Co mmunity
0 0 .55 1 .10 .275 Miles
Function al B ikeway Net work
Legend
On-Street Bikeways
Princ ipal Bikeway
Secondary Bikeway
Neighborhood Connector
Under Study/Furth er Study Needed
Off-Street B ikeways
Princ ipal Multi-Use Trail
Secondary Multi-Use Trail
Sid epath
[
The Functional Bikeways Network Map illustrates
the complete future network of on-street and off-
street bikeways as envisioned in this plan. This
bikeway network provides Iowa City residents
and visitors with a comprehensive,
interconnected, and all-ag es system for bicycle
transportation and recreation.
The on-street and off-street bikeways
complement each other by expanding network
coverage, increasing access to destinations not
served by off-street paths, and offering dual
facilities along many arterial and collector
roadways in order to provide a safe and
enjoyable travel for a diverse range of skill,
experience, and comfort levels.
Southeast
RECOMMENDATIONS 77
below in the recommended bicycle facilities section
of this memorandum.
Secondary Bikeways
Secondary bikeways are the primary routes for
local bicycle travel around town, and serve most
of the city’s key destinations and attractions. They
are typically local or collector streets with relatively
low volumes that have good continuity and in many
cases parallel higher order streets . In some cases,
secondary bikeways are long segments of single
streets; in others, they are logical assemblages of
local streets to create an easy-to-follow, continuous
route. These facilities are more comfortable for
many cyclists than the busy corridors they parallel .
Common infrastructure types for secondary bike -
ways can include bicycle boulevards, signed and
marked routes, short segments of multi-use trails
that connect on-street bikeways or provide segment
connecting to an important destination like a park
or school . In some cases, secondary bikeways on
wider streets can also take the form of bike lanes,
which can have a calming effect on motor vehicle
traffic and create an environment supportive of
bicycle travel by people with less comfort or experi-
ence bicycling in traffic.
Neighborhood Connectors
These are short, primarily on-street routes, usually
on low-volume local streets, that connect through
routes with neighborhoods and local destinations
like parks and schools . In some cases, they provide
important connections between higher-order
components, but are too short to function as bicycle
boulevards. Most require minimal infrastructure
investment beyond wayfinding signage.
Off-Street Corridors
Principal Multi-Use Trails
These major off-street trails are the strength of Iowa
City’s current active transportation network . They
are long-distance facilities located on their own
rights-of-way and corridors, primarily the Iowa River
and area creeks or on defined corridors within the
campus environs or developments . Major existing
principal trails include the Iowa River, Clear Creek,
and Court Hill Trails and the Sycamore Greenway .
New principal trails include future corridors that
should be phased with adjacent development and
short but critical links to increase connections .
Because of their length and strategic locations,
these trails serve both transportation and recre-
ation functions.
Connector and Park Trails Multi-Use Trails
These multi-use trails are usually internal to neigh-
borhoods and new developments or make short
connections from neighborhoods or principal trails
to specific destinations. They also include trails that
are internal to parks .
Sidepaths (or widened sidewalks)
These are wide paths, typically built to trail stan-
dards, located within a street right-of-way but fully
separated by curbs from travel lanes. They provide
a level of separation from traffic that many users
find comfortable, but require a great deal of design
attention when they intersect driveways and streets
because of potential traffic conflicts. They are a
very important part of Iowa City’s network, and
city policy includes sidepaths in all major arterial
roadway projects .
Sidepaths work best along streets with controlled
access and relatively few driveway interruptions.
Some corridors offer both a sidepath and on-street
bike lanes, providing users with a choice of facilities.
Recommended Bicycle Facilities
As described above, bicycle facilities vary greatly
in character, context, and intended user . These
facility types are based on national standards and
best practices in bikeway design using state-of-
the-art resources like the AASHTO Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities, the NACTO Urban
Bikeway Design Guide, and the FHWA Small Town and
Rural Multimodal Networks Guide .
78 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Transitioning from the conceptual level map to more
detailed infrastructure recommendations, Map 24
displays the proposed bicycle network by individual
facility type. Maps 25 through 28 display the same
content at a greater level of detail for each quadrant
of the city. It is important to note that some recom-
mended bicycle facilities shown on this map replace
existing bicycle facilities, and that those existing
bicycle facilities are not shown to increase map legi -
bility. An example of this is the recommendation for
buffered bike lanes on Jefferson and Market that will
replace the existing left-side bike lanes. Table 1 lists
recommended bicycle network mileage by facility
type, each of which are described below.
On-Street Facilities
Conventional Bike Lanes
Conventional bike lanes, or simply bike lanes, desig-
nate an exclusive space for bicyclists with pavement
markings and signage . The bicycle lane is located
adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes, and bicyclists
ride in the same direction as motor vehicle traffic.
Bicycle lanes vary in width, but are typically five to
six feet. Most bike lanes are on the right side of the
street (on a two-way street), between the adjacent
travel lane and curb, road edge or parking lane .
Some bike lanes are located on the left side of the
street, particularly on one-way streets .
While bicycle lanes can be added to new arterial and
collector streets as they are built, bike lanes can also
be added to existing roadways through a number
of modifications, including reallocation of excess
width, lane narrowing, 4-lane to 3-lane road diets,
modifications to parking, and roadway widening.
Climbing Lane
Climbing lanes (also known as “uphill bike lanes”)
enable motorists to safely pass slower-speed
bicyclists by providing a bicycle lane in the uphill
direction of travel, and shared lane markings in the
downhill direction, thereby improving conditions for
both travel modes. This treatment is typically found
Facility Type Recommended
Miles
On-Street Facilities 72.5
Bike Lanes (including climbing
lanes)
29 .7
Buffered Bike Lanes 4 .0
Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle
Tracks
3 .0
Bicycle Boulevards 22 .7
Marked and Signed Routes 9 .5
Corridor Study 3 .5
Off-Street Facilities 28.04
Multi-Use Trail/Shared-Use
Path
10 .6
Sidepath (Wide Sidewalk)17 .8
Total 100.9
Table 4. Mileage by Bicycle Facility
RECOMMENDATIONS 79
Map 24. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility Types
Kiwanis
Park
Ryerson Woods
Mercer
Pa rk
Villa Park
Whispering
Mea dows Wetlands
Napoleon
Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Pa rk
Willow
Creek
Pa rk
Scott Pa rk
Rita's
Ranch
Terry
Trueblood
Recrea tion Area
Thornberry
Dog Park
Peninsula
Pa rk
City Park
Terrel Mill
Park/skateboard
Pa rk
Wetherby
Park
Hunter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤6
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
Cle
arCreek Trail
Benton
Market
KirkwoodClintonMadison W
i
ndsor
Ri
dgeTrailGrand
J St
Jefferson
Keokuk3rdRoche ster
H ighland
Myrtle GovernorDodgeMelrose
Lo
w
er
M
uscatin
e
Sandusky
S
y
c
a
moreGr
eenwayTrailArlingtonWoolf AveGilbertIowaRiverT
rail
Bur n s
M
uscatine7th/Wins tonIow
aRiverTrail
De fores tGreenwood
Prentiss
Cour t
W e llington
Duck
Cree
kEmeraldBradford
F /5th
/G
Sou thgate
Hickory
Bowery
She ridanFersonRiver St
1stSandusky /TaylorDov
er/MeadowWindsorRidg e T r a ilExtensionChurc h
Par k Road
SunsetSummitF o s te rWet
h
erbyPark Trai l Ex te n sionWestminster/TetonLakeside
McCollister7thHickoryHillPa r k Tr a i l
Jefferson /Glendale /H e at h e rp ath
Newton
P
r
a
iri
e
DuChienM o r m o n Tr e k
Wa shing to n
American Legion
He rbert Hoover
CampCardinal
Lower West Branch
Hollywood
Davenpo rt
College
Whisperi
ngMeadow /Pinto /Pad d ockCourt H il l TrailSycamoreR o h r e t
K
e
n
n
e
dyWill ow C reek T r ail
Friends hip /Ridgewood
SandTaftTerry
Tru
e
b
l
oodRe
c
rea
tionTrailSource: E sri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstop o, and
the GIS User Community
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 in ch = 0 .75 m ile s
Bicycle Networ k
With Propo sed Facility Types
[
Legen d
On-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Off-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Proposed
Bike Lanes/Wide Shoulders
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lanes
Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle Tracks
Bicycle Boulevards
Marked and Signed Routes
Corridor Study
Proposed
Multi-Use Trails/Shared-Use Paths
Sidepaths
Project Actions for Dedicated On-Street Facilities
Bik e Lanes w ith Road Diet
Bik e Lanes w ith Lane D iet/Narrowing
Bik e Lanes w ith New C onstruction/Rec onstruction
Bik e Lanes w ith New Striping and Markings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with New Striping and M arkings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with Road Diet
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane with Lane D iet/Narrow ing
Protected Bik e Lane/Cy cle Track with New
Construction/Recons truction
RECOMMENDATIONS 80
Map 25. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility Types: Northwest Quadrant
Villa Park
Willow
Creek
Park
Thornberry
Dog Park
Peninsula
Pa rk
City Park
Terrel Mill
Park/skateboard
Pa rk
Hu nter's
Run Park
¥80
¥80¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤6
£¤218
Park12
WestwindsK e n n e d y
H o l i d a y
WoolfMormon TrekFo st er
ShannonCampCardinal Walker
Ri
versi
deMelros e
OrchardD
eer Creek
5Coral RidgePrairi
eMeadow
James
WestgateGalwayMacbrideBurlington
2
Holiday
Benton
C o m m e r c e
102
Idyllw ildBoston
Gree n w oodClinton9
MelroseHeartland Linder
DubuqueForest V i e w
WashingtonLaurenceMackinawL
a
u
r
a
FinkbineCommuterMadisonRiv er
FersonGeorge23Grand
PrairieG ra s s
7
Prentiss
HarrisonCampCardinal
SunsetW ild PrairieNorth R id ge
9
19M a n o rDubuqueSouthRidgeK o s er
Court
H ig hlandOzark
Duck Creek Tipperary
Ta f t S p e e d w a y
8
N e w to n
1 0
KeswickValleyVi
ew2220Normand y
Sierra
Donegal
CapitolHighl
andPark14W
ood
s
i
deW o olridg e
Mari etta
13 Dub
u
q
u
e
CityPark Roads
Buttern u t
M
anitou
RockyShoreDeer CreekMagowanLexington18O a k crest
HawkinsRyan
Iwv
Hawkeye P ark
SlothowerLimeKilnH awk R idg eHawkeyeEmeraldHurtRedtailCoral
R
i
dgeMallClear CreekTrail
U of IIntera
l
Ca
m
pu
sTr
ai
l
I
o
waRi
ver
T
r
a
il
I
owaRi
verTrai
l
UofIInternalCampus Path
Iowa River TrailW illo w Cre e k Trail
Clear C r e ek Trail
Source: E sri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstop o, and
the GIS User Community
0 0 .5 10 .25
Mile
Bicycle Networ k
With Propo sed Facility Types
[
Legen d
On-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Off-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Proposed
Bike Lanes/Wide Shoulders
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lanes
Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle Tracks
Bicycle Boulevards
Marked and Signed Routes
Corridor Study
Proposed
Multi-Use Trails/Shared-Use Paths
Sidepaths
Project Actions for Dedicated On-Street Facilities
Bik e Lanes w ith Road Diet
Bik e Lanes w ith Lane D iet/Narrowing
Bik e Lanes w ith New C onstruction/Rec onstruction
Bik e Lanes w ith New Striping and Markings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with New Striping and M arkings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with Road Diet
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane with Lane D iet/Narrow ing
Protected Bik e Lane/Cy cle Track with New
Construction/Recons truction
Northwest
RECOMMENDATIONS 81
Map 26. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility Types: Northeast Quadrant
Scott Pa rk
Rita's
Ranch
City Park
Terrel Mill
Pa rk/skateboard
Park
Hickory
Hill
Park
¥80
¥80
Park
Co urt
Dubuque
LucasDodgeArlingtonJohnsonMus catin e
Foster
V illa g e
Fri en dshipWoodridgeBurlington
R ochesterRi
versi
deGinterOrchard DodgeN
orthgat
e
GovernorVanBuren1stAmerican Legion
Glendale
Mark et
7thPrairieDuChi
enIdyllw ild
ClintonGilbert4thChurch
DubuqueHickory
WestminsterPrinceton
Lower West BranchBloomington
B e n to n
3rdKirkwo od
Washington
ClarkSummitLau r enc
e340
S
c
ott
RenoPrentiss
L
a
u
r
a
MadisonRiv
erFerson
KennethR o c h e s te rCa
mdenBrown
LindemannOaklandDavenport
Fairc hild
Harrison
Herbert Hoover
Unbridled
Co urt
Jefferson
She rid an
Wayn e Ober
linBarringtonHuntingtonBuckinghamLyndenH
eig
ht
sWas h in gt onDubuque
College
Whiting
BrentwoodOakes
Brooksi d e
DearbornChadwickKim ballColchesterAshfordRundellDevon
MtVernonLind er
Ta f t S p e e d w a y BureshCharl
esHanksGrantBanburyAnnaRidgeway
A
mhurstA rborEversullRavenScottPark
L o w e rWest Branch
H GreenMountain2ndCum be r la n dPostMornings
i
deCapitolBowery
Long fellowDoverWalnut TaftGLinnRonalds
Rapid Cree k
FairwayCity ParkRoad
s
K y le
Rid
g
e
TaftLimeKilnMo ss R idgeA c t
HarvestTyl erC a t
skillIowa
Dolphin
Sh ared Us ePathWin
ds
o
rRi
dgeTrailI
owaRi
ver
T
r
ail
I
owaRi
verTrai
l
H ic k o ry H illP a r k T r a i l
Court Hill Tr a ilSource: E sri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstop o, and
the GIS User Community
0 0 .5 10 .25
Mile
Bicycle Networ k
With Propo sed Facility Types
[
Legen d
On-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Off-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Proposed
Bike Lanes/Wide Shoulders
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lanes
Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle Tracks
Bicycle Boulevards
Marked and Signed Routes
Corridor Study
Proposed
Multi-Use Trails/Shared-Use Paths
Sidepaths
Project Actions for Dedicated On-Street Facilities
Bik e Lanes w ith Road Diet
Bik e Lanes w ith Lane D iet/Narrowing
Bik e Lanes w ith New C onstruction/Rec onstruction
Bik e Lanes w ith New Striping and Markings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with New Striping and M arkings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with Road Diet
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane with Lane D iet/Narrow ing
Protected Bik e Lane/Cy cle Track with New
Construction/Recons truction
Northeas t
RECOMMENDATIONS 82
Map 27. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility Types: Southwest Quadrant
Ryerson Woods
Napoleon Pa rk
Sturgis
Ferry
Pa rk
Will ow
Creek
Pa rk
Terry Trueblood
Recreation Area
Hunter 's
Run Park
£¤218 £¤1
£¤218
£¤1
£¤218WildPrairie
SharonCenterWestSideRi
versi
deRuppertWyldeGreen
MaierSundownR o h r e t
NaplesM o r m o n T r e kSunset
MccollisterMo
r
mo
n
T
r
e
k WeeberDaneT
e
g
LakeBend
Benton
Phoe
n
i
x
NaplesPrairie
Grass
LakeS
hore
Freund
Pow es hiek
Duck Creek
Os age
S
h
a
nnonDenbighFoxana
OakCrestHi
l
l
Me a d o wviewLandon OldHighway218Plaen
ViewMaierPheasantValleyIzaak WaltonSlothowerGoldenrodSpring Ri dg e
S an ta
F
eBay R id ge
B ass wo od
D
u
nley
GilbertF50Kitty LeeRiversidePenfro
R ohretH awk R id
geSchuchert
La c in aDolenRanier
Willo
w
CreekT
rail
Io
w
a
Riv
erTrail
Source: E sri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstop o, and
the GIS User Community
0 0 .5 10 .25
Mile
Bicycle Networ k
With Propo sed Facility Types
[
Legen d
On-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Off-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Proposed
Bike Lanes/Wide Shoulders
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lanes
Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle Tracks
Bicycle Boulevards
Marked and Signed Routes
Corridor Study
Proposed
Multi-Use Trails/Shared-Use Paths
Sidepaths
Project Actions for Dedicated On-Street Facilities
Bik e Lanes w ith Road Diet
Bik e Lanes w ith Lane D iet/Narrowing
Bik e Lanes w ith New C onstruction/Rec onstruction
Bik e Lanes w ith New Striping and Markings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with New Striping and M arkings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with Road Diet
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane with Lane D iet/Narrow ing
Protected Bik e Lane/Cy cle Track with New
Construction/Recons truction
Southwest
RECOMMENDATIONS 83
Map 28. Bicycle Network with Proposed Facility Types: Southeast Quadrant
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer
Pa rk
Whispering
Meadows
Wetlands
Napoleon Pa rk
Sturgis
Ferry
Park
Terry Tru eblood
Recrea tion Area
Weth erby
Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
£¤6
£¤6
Highland
V illa g e
IndependenceFriendly
Ri
versi
deGinter
420Gilbe
rt
1 s tHollywood
American Legion
Industrial ParkTaylorKeokukBoyrumSycamoreBroadwayDoverL an g en b e rg
L
o
w
er
M
u
scatin
e
Pad dock HeinzErobiDe fore st
ModernChartresJamie
TaftLa kesi de
S andusky
Whispering
MeadowC alif o r n i a
RussellWellington
TaftRuppert
Wayn e
Wintergreen
SandDic kensonYewell
Freund
M
arsellies
W i n t e r E a gleWaterfront Broo kwood Cha mb
e
rlainScottPepp er
Burns
OakCrestHi
l
l
Bradford
StevensSouthgate
GrantwoodPlum
Tracy
Sherman EstherOldHighway218AshH
FranklinIza ak Walton LeHarveNevadaBordeauxWestern
Mccollister
SiouxCaminoDelRioLehmanRiversideGleason
Fo un tain
Osage
M a llRegalAmberRiverBendNu rsery
Napole on CompassSoccerParkS tanwy
ckTyl erTerryTruebloodR e c r eation Tra i l Syc a m oreGreenwayTrailIowaRiver
Trail
WindsorRidgeTrailE x te n sionW
etherbyParkTrailExte ns io n
Source: E sri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN , IGP, swisstop o, and
the GIS User Community
0 0 .5 10 .25
Mile
Bicycle Networ k
With Propo sed Facility Types
[
Legen d
On-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Off-Street Bicycle Facilities
Existing
Proposed
Bike Lanes/Wide Shoulders
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lanes
Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle Tracks
Bicycle Boulevards
Marked and Signed Routes
Corridor Study
Proposed
Multi-Use Trails/Shared-Use Paths
Sidepaths
Project Actions for Dedicated On-Street Facilities
Bik e Lanes w ith Road Diet
Bik e Lanes w ith Lane D iet/Narrowing
Bik e Lanes w ith New C onstruction/Rec onstruction
Bik e Lanes w ith New Striping and Markings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with New Striping and M arkings Only
Buffered Bike Lanes with Road Diet
Climbing Lane/Uphill Bike Lane with Lane D iet/Narrow ing
Protected Bik e Lane/Cy cle Track with New
Construction/Recons truction
Southeast
RECOMMENDATIONS 84
on retrofit projects as newly constructed roads
should provide adequate space for bicycle lanes in
both directions of travel. Accommodating an uphill
bicycle lane often includes delineating on-street
parking (if provided), narrowing travel lanes and/or
shifting the centerline if necessary.
Buffered Bike Lanes
Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes
paired with a designated buffer space, separating
the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle
travel lane and/or parking lane. Buffered bike lanes
are designed to increase the space between the bike
lane and the travel lane or parked cars . This treat-
ment is appropriate for bike lanes on roadways with
high motor vehicle traffic volumes and speed, adja-
cent to parking lanes, or a high volume of truck or
oversized vehicle traffic.
Protected Bike Lanes/Cycle Tracks
Protected bike lanes, also commonly referred to as
separated bike lanes or cycle tracks, are designed
for exclusive use by bicyclists and are located within
or directly adjacent to the street and is physically
separated from motor vehicle traffic by parking
and/or a three-dimensional element. Protected bike
lanes have different forms but all share common
elements—they provide space that is intended to
be exclusively or primarily used by bicycles, and are
separated from motor vehicle travel lanes, parking
lanes, and sidewalks . In situations where on-street
parking is allowed, protected bike lanes are located
to the curb-side of the parking (in contrast to
conventional bike lanes) .
Cycle tracks may be one-way or two-way, and may
be at street level, sidewalk level or at an interme-
diate level. If at sidewalk level, a curb or median
separates them from motor traffic, while different
pavement color/texture separates the cycle track
from the sidewalk. If at street level, they can be
separated from motor traffic by raised medians,
on-street parking or bollards .
Advisory Bike Lanes
Advisory bike lanes provide a unique design option
for low-volume streets that lack the width neces-
sary to install conventional bike lanes, but require
a greater treatment than shared lane markings or
signage . Advisory bike lanes are bicycle priority
areas delineated by dotted white lines . The auto-
mobile zone should be configured narrowly enough
so that two cars cannot pass each other in both
directions without crossing the advisory lane line .
85 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Motorists may enter the bicycle zone when no
bicycles are present . Motorists must overtake with
caution due to potential oncoming traffic. This treat-
ment is not currently present in any state or federal
design standards though it is being implemented in
the US and is common in many European countries .
While not recommended in this plan, the design
option has been considered during this planning
process and may be viable option for project devel-
opment moving forward.
Bicycle Boulevards
Bicycle boulevards are a special class of shared
roadways designed for a broad spectrum of bicy-
clists . They are low-volume local streets where
motorists and bicyclists share the same travel lane .
Treatments for bicycle boulevards are selected
as necessary to create appropriate automobile
volumes and speeds, and to provide safe crossing
opportunities of busy streets. Bicycle boulevards
incorporate treatments such as signage, pavement
markings, traffic calming and/or traffic reduction,
and intersection modifications to support through
movements of bicyclists while discouraging similar
through-trips by non-local motorized traffic. The
appropriate level of treatment to apply is depen-
dent on roadway conditions, particularly motor
vehicle speeds and volumes, and on community-
based support and design processes .
Marked and Signed Routes
A marked and signed shared roadway is a general
purpose travel lane marked with shared lane mark-
ings (“sharrows”) and signed with Bikes May Use
Full Lane and/or wayfinding signs to encourage
bicycle travel and proper positioning within the
lane . In constrained conditions, the shared lane
markings are placed in the middle of the lane to
discourage unsafe passing by motor vehicles. On a
wide outside lane, the shared lane markings can be
used to promote bicycle travel to the right of motor
vehicles . In all conditions, shared lane markings
should be placed outside of the door zone of parked
cars . Placing shared lane markings between vehicle
tire tracks will increase the life of the markings
and minimize the long-term cost of the treatment.
The marked and shared routes are most appli-
cable on low-volume, low-speed roadways linking
RECOMMENDATIONS 86
destinations and endpoints to principal bikeways,
bicycle boulevards, and multi-use trails .
Corridor Study
Some roadways identified for bikeway development
have been designated as corridors for future study,
a reflection of geometric, operational, or juris-
dictional challenges inherent along the roadway .
Gilbert Street is currently under study to examine
the safety and operational performance of road
diet, and Newton Road is identified for future study
to develop bikeway treatments that meet the safety
and internal circulation needs of the University
of Iowa while also addressing city-wide network
considerations .
Off-Street Facilities
Shared-Use Paths/Multi-Use Trails
These facilities are frequently found in parks, along
rivers, beaches, and in greenbelts or utility corri-
dors where there are few conflicts with motorized
vehicles. Eight feet is the minimum allowed for a
shared-use path and is only recommended in low
traffic or physically constrained situations. Ten
feet is recommended in most situations and is
adequate for moderate to heavy use. Twelve feet
is recommended for heavy use situations with high
concentrations of multiple users such as runners,
bicyclists, rollerbladers and pedestrians . A separate
track (5’ minimum) can be provided for pedestrian
use .
Sidepaths
Sidepaths (also referred to as wide or widened
sidewalks) are located adjacent to a roadway
and provide for two-way, off-street bicycle use.
Sidepaths may also be used by pedestrians, skaters,
wheelchair users, runners and other non-motorized
users. These facilities are frequently found in parks,
along rivers, beaches, and in greenbelts or utility
corridors where there are few conflicts with motor-
ized vehicles. Eight feet is the minimum allowed
for a shared-use path and is only recommended
in low traffic or physically constrained situations.
Ten feet is recommended in most situations and is
adequate for moderate to heavy use. Twelve feet is
recommended for heavy use situations with high
concentrations of multiple users such as runners,
bicyclists, rollerbladers and pedestrians . A separate
track (5’ minimum) can be provided for pedestrian
use .
87 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
When designing a bikeway network, the presence of
a nearby or parallel path should not be used as a
reason to not provide adequate shoulder or bicycle
lane width on the roadway, as the on-street bicycle
facility is preferred over the sidepath by experienced
bicyclists and those who are cycling for transporta-
tion purposes .
Bikeways Network Support Systems
Bicycle Wayfinding
Landmarks, destinations, neighborhood business
districts, natural features and other visual cues
help residents and visitors travel through Iowa
City. However, many of the recommended bicycle
routes utilize less familiar, lower-volume roadways
that may not be as familiar to many people, who
may typically use an alternate route when traveling
by bus or car. The placement of wayfinding signs
throughout Iowa City will indicate to bicyclists their
direction of travel, the location of popular desti-
nations, and the distance (and travel time by bike)
to those destinations . This will in turn increase
the comfort, convenience and utility of the bicycle
network. Wayfinding signs also provide a branding
element to raise the visibility of Iowa City’s growing
active transportation network .
Signage can serve both wayfinding and safety
purposes, including:
■Helping to familiarize users with the bikeway
system
■Helping users identify the best routes to
destinations
■Helping to address commonly-held perceptions
about travel time and distance
■Creating seamless transitions between on-street
and off-street bikeways
■Helping overcome a “barrier to entry” for people
who do not bicycle often and who fear becoming
lost
■Alerting motorists that they are driving along a
bicycle route and should use caution
Signs are typically placed at key locations leading
to and along bicycle routes, including the intersec-
tion of multiple routes. Iowa City should develop a
community-wide Bicycle Wayfinding Signage Plan
that identifies:
■Sign locations along existing and planned bicycle
routes
■Sign type—what information should be included
and what is the sign design
■Destinations to be highlighted on each sign—key
destinations for bicyclists
■Approximate distance and riding time to each
destination
General cost estimates for wayfinding signage range
from standard Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (MUTCD) signage to customized signage with
branded elements and posts. Costs of wayfinding
signage will depend on the type of signing and mate -
rials chosen for fabrication of the signs.
Figure 29. Wayfinding directs users to areas of
interest and can alert users to active transportation
opportunities.
RECOMMENDATIONS 88
End-of-Trip Facilities
End-of-trip facilities are an integral component of
a successful, functional bicycle network. Without
secure, accessible, and convenient bicycle parking,
people are less likely to choose to ride a bicycle . Iowa
City and community partners like the University of
Iowa should continue to increase bicycle parking
supply with secure, attractive, and highly visible
bicycle parking facilities, including short-term
bicycle parking solutions like racks and corrals, and
long-term solutions like lockers and secure parking
areas. Providing context-appropriate facilities to
enhance Iowa City’s bike network could be as simple
as providing short-term bicycle parking outside
popular destinations and secure bicycle parking at
transit stops . Policies requiring secure long-term
bicycle parking in new residential and commer-
cial buildings, or the retrofit of older buildings
with secure bicycle parking and shower/changing
rooms in large employment centers, will make it
easier to make bicycling a habit for future building
users. Recognizing that the plan focuses on people
of all ages and abilities, bicycle parking should be
designed to accommodate a wide variety of bicycle
types. Table 5 shows the general characteristics of
short- and long-term bicycle parking .
Bicycle Transit Integration
When designed properly, transit and bicycle facili-
ties can have mutually beneficial impacts. Transit
stops with good access and secure parking for bicy-
clists can support multi-modal trips, increase bus
ridership, and extend bicyclists’ trip distance to
reach areas previously inaccessible by bicycle travel
alone . Typical integration design elements include
improvements to transit stops and transit centers,
Criteria Short-Term Bicycle Parking Long-Term Bicycle Parking
Parking
Duration
Less than two hours More than two hours
Typical
Fixture
Types
Bicycle racks and on-street corrals Lockers or secure bicycle parking (racks
provided in a secured area)
Weather
Protection
Unsheltered or sheltered Sheltered or enclosed
Security High reliance on personal locking devices
and passive surveillance (e .g ., eyes on the
street)
Restricted access and/or active supervision
Unsupervised:
■“Individual-secure,” e .g ., bicycle lockers
■“Shared-secure,” e .g ., bicycle room or
locked enclosure
Supervised:
■Valet bicycle parking
■Video, closed circuit television, or other
surveillance
Typical
Land Uses
Commercial or retail, medical/ healthcare,
parks and recreation areas, community
centers, libraries
Multi-family residential, workplace, transit,
schools
Table 5. Characteristics of Short- and Long-Term Bicycle Parking
89 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
on-bus bicycle racks, and roadway improvements
that increase safe interactions between buses and
bicycles .
Transit Stop Planning
Determining the appropriate type of bicycling infra-
structure for each transit stop is critical to attracting
and maintaining transit riders . Recommended provi-
sions at transit stops, which will vary depending on
the type and use of stops, include:
■Trip information: essential information that
should be provided at every stop includes the
route number and the stop number. It is prefer-
able to also provide a route map and timetable .
Real-time arrival information may be appro -
priate where there are frequent bus arrivals and
multiple lines at a stop and if the required tech-
nology is in place (at the new transit center, for
instance) .
■Bicycle parking: In general, minor and local
stops can make do with bike racks . As the stop’s
importance increases, more secure options
should be provided .
■End-of-trip facilities: major transit hubs and
stops may offer end-of-trip facilities beyond
parking such as showers, washrooms, clothing
lockers, etc .
The Transit Cooperative Research Program report,
Integration of Bicycles and Transit, recommends
that bicycle parking receive priority siting near the
bus loading zone . Parking should also be located so
that bicyclists do not need to carry bicycles through
crowds of travelers. The parking facility should
be located in the clear view of the general public,
vendors or transit staff as security is a particular
concern with bicycle parking .
Bicycle/Transit Interface
In addition to providing safe routes to get to transit,
it is important to minimize potential conflicts
between bicyclists and transit vehicles as well as
people waiting or boarding transit . Where bicycles
and transit share lane space, buses frequently stop
to pick up or drop off passengers. This can delay
bicyclists or require them to pass the transit vehicle
creating a potentially unsafe “leapfrog” scenario.
Recommendations for improving bicyclists’ safety
around buses include:
■Designate dedicated space for bicyclists through
use of bike lanes or other pavement markings.
■Provide infrastructure to increase bicyclists’ visi-
bility at intersections .
■Educate transit drivers about areas where bicy-
clists may be present and typical bicycle behavior .
Bike Share
Iowa City and the University of Iowa are in the
process of developing the first phase of a bike
share system to support short trips in Downtown
and on the university campus. Funding has been
secured, and vendor selection and station siting are
underway for an anticipated launch in 2018. Success
of bike share systems are in large part dependent on
bicycle network infrastructure to support their use.
Iowa City and the University of Iowa should coor-
dinate station siting and routing between stations
with bikeway development in and around campus
and Downtown .
Figure 30. Secure bike lockers at transit stops let
commuters store their bicycles.
RECOMMENDATIONS 90
Programs and Policies
Iowa City’s status as a BFC is sign of the community’s
commitment to bicycling and rests as much on local
agencies’ and organizations’ effective programs
and policies as it does the growing network of trails
and bikeways. To further support Iowa City and its
many community partners (identified in greater
detail in the Existing Conditions Chapter) in building
a culture of bicycling, this plan identifies a range of
new policies and programs that build on and diver-
sify current offerings. The programs and policies
listed in the table below, and described in greater
detail in this chapter, reflect the needs and values
of the community residents and address service
gaps identified in the LAB’s BFC feedback provided
in 2013. Table 6 shows the applicable Six E’s of a
Bikeable Community for each program, and also
identifies if a program addresses a specific recom-
mendation in the LAB’s BFC feedback.
With more than twenty specific programmatic and
policy recommendations included in this section, it
will be essential for the city to coordinate with its
many local partners to identify appropriate program
sponsors according to mission, capacity, funding,
target audience, and other related factors. RecommendationEducationEncouragementEnforcementEngineeringEvaluation and PlanningEquityBFC RecommendationBicycle Coordinator Position X X X X X X
Standing Bicycle Advisory Committee X X X X X X X
Annual Implementation Agenda X X X X X X
Adopt NACTO Bikeway Design Guide X X
Zoning Code and Subdivision Regulations
Updates
X X
Complete Streets Implementation Plan X X X
Youth Bicycle Training Classes X X X X
Earn-A-Bike Program X X X
Public Education Campaigns X X X X X
Bike Light Campaign X X X X
Themed & Targeted Bicycle Rides X X X X
Create a Commuter Program X X X
Table 6. Recommended Programs and Policies
91 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Bicycle Coordinator Position
To enhance interdepartmental coordination,
support interagency coordination, and streamline
communications with community residents, stake -
holders, and media, Iowa City should establish a
Bicycle Coordinator position responsible for over-
seeing the city’s diverse range of bicycling activities.
This staff person’s job responsibilities may include:
■Monitoring facility planning, design, and
construction of bicycle and bicycle-related
projects
■Coordinating the implementation of recom-
mended projects and programs in this Plan with
city staff and external agencies
■Provide regular updates to the City Council
related to bicycle initiatives and projectsRecommendationEducationEncouragementEnforcementEngineeringEvaluation and PlanningEquityBFC RecommendationBike Mentor Program X X X
Bike Month/Bike to Work Events X X X
Targeted Law Enforcement Activities X X X
Speed Message Board Deployment X X
Specialized Bicycle-Focused Training for
Law Enforcement Officers
X X
Publicize and Enforce “No Bikes on
Sidewalks” and Dismount Zones
X X
Bicycle Facilities Fact Sheets X X
Project Outreach X X X X X
Pop-Up Demonstration/Pilot Projects X X X X
Annual Report Card X X X X X X X
Expanded Bicycle Count Program X
Crash Monitoring and Evaluation X X X
Economic Impact of Bicycling Study X X X X
Bicycle Master Plan Updates X X X X X X X
Apply for Gold-Level BFC Status X
RECOMMENDATIONS 92
■Leading annual evaluation programs like bicycle
counts, annual reporting, and crash evaluation
■Identifying new projects and programs to
improve the bicycling environment
■Pursue funding sources for project and program
development
■Research and oversee policy development
■Represent the City of Iowa City for matters
related to bicycle infrastructure projects and
supporting programs
It is common for a bicycle coordinator to also
oversee matters related to pedestrian mobility or
active transportation in general. The title of Active
Transportation Coordinator may reflect the broader
scope and responsibilities of the position if the city
should choose to consolidate bicycle and pedestrian
matters under a single person .
Standing Bicycle Advisory Committee
During the Bicycle Master Planning process, Iowa
City convened two committees to provide over-
sight and guidance for the planning team. The BAC
consisted of community partners and residents
whose knowledge, experience, insight, and involve -
ment were critical to the creation of the Plan. The TAC
consisted of Iowa City department representatives
and key staff from other agencies whose technical
expertise and understanding of department proce -
dures, planned projects, and other information
provided a framework for plan recommendations
and implementation considerations . As Iowa City
transitions from planning into implementation, it
will be critical that these partners and department
representatives remain involved with implementa-
tion decision-making and provide leadership and/
or support to carry out projects, programs, and
other actions pertinent to their focus areas. Iowa
City should continue to have regular BAC meetings
and include department staff to join meetings on an
as-needed basis . Membership should be reevalu-
ated periodically to include representatives from
relevant agencies, organizations, and community
groups. Similar to the expansion of responsibilities
of a bicycle coordinator to see all active transpor-
tation matters, it may be necessary to combine
bicycling and pedestrian issues under a single
Active Transportation Committee (ATC) to reduce
committee fatigue. The mission of this committee
will be to implement this plan, as well as provide
information to the City in an advisory capacity
regarding pedestrian issues .
Annual Implementation Agenda
In partnership with the BAC/ATC and representa-
tives of Iowa City departments, Iowa City should
develop an annual implementation agenda and
budget that identifies specific projects, programs,
and targets for executing the Bicycle Master Plan.
The annual agenda and budget should be based
upon available staff capacity, funding resources,
and similar considerations .
Adoption of Best Practice Design
Guides
Design guidelines are critical to the development
of a safe, consistent bicycle network. In order to
support local agencies in developing bicycle facilities
based on sound planning and engineering prin-
ciples and best practices from around the country,
NACTO created the Urban Bikeway Design Guide .
From Seattle, Washington to Washington, D.C. to
Des Moines, Iowa, over fifty progressive cities have
adopted the guide to inform city staff and consul-
tants during project design and development . The
guide expands upon basic facility guidance and
standards included in the AASHTO Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Ed (2012) and the
FHWA’s MUTCD, both of which are regularly used to
for local bikeway projects, along with guidance from
state design standards in the SUDAS . In 2013, the
FHWA signed a memorandum expressing support
for the Urban Bikeway Design Guide as a valuable
resource to “help communities plan and design safe
and convenient facilities” for bicyclists and actively
encourages agencies to use the guide to go beyond
93 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
minimum requirements and design facilities that
“foster increased use by bicyclists… of all ages and
abilities .”
The FHWA has developed a number of new
resources in recent years to support bikeway plan-
ning and development as well . In 2016, the agency
released Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks
(STAR guide) to support transportation practitioners
by applying national design guidelines to the unique
settings found in small towns and rural communi-
ties . The guide encourages innovation within the
bounds of MUTCD and AASHTO compliance by
providing unique engineering solutions and design
treatments that address small town and rural needs .
Iowa City should adopt by resolution the NACTO
Bikeway Design Guide and the FHWA STAR guide as
a supplemental resources to implement the recom-
mendations included in this plan .
Resources
■NACTO Urban Bike Design Guide: http://nacto.
org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/
■Sample Endorsement Letters: Des Moines, IA:
http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/
Des-Moines-Endoresement-all-Guides.pdf
■Minneapolis, MN: http://nacto.org/wp-content/
uploads/2015/06/Minneapolis_Urban-Bikeway-
Design-Guide-endorsement-letter_08.24.11.pdf
Zoning Code and Land Subdivision
Regulations Updates
Land use patterns have significant impact on how
people travel in and around Iowa City . Bicycling
and walking are disproportionally impacted by
land use patterns when compared to other travel
modes, as travel distances, street connectivity, and
other environmental factors can restrict or deter
altogether bicycling and walking activity . Zoning
ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes,
and other policies create the framework for physical
development . Zoning ordinances and subdivision
regulations in particular focus on environmental
design considerations, including aesthetics and
safety, street connectivity, development scale and
density, building setbacks, and mixture (or separa-
tion) of land uses. As a result, these regulations can
change the way individuals relate to the people and
places around them by affecting travel distances,
streetscape character, presence of sidewalks and
bicycling facilities, and even trees and landscaping.
An expanding body of scientific research points to
the direct link between land use policies like zoning
ordinances and subdivision regulations, and active
transportation . Zoning regulations can impact the
percentage of population making trips on foot or
by bicycle instead of car. Zoning regulations and
supportive land use policies and infrastructure
improvements can increase bicycling trips and the
percentage of the population riding bicycles.
In recent years, Iowa City has been proactive in
updating zoning and development regulations to
ensure that new development and redevelopment
incorporate bicycling considerations and support
active transportation . As bicycling continues to
grow as valued transportation mode in Iowa City, it
will be important to integrate and codify this value
to ensure it is reflected in future developments. The
following amendments to Iowa City Zoning Code
and Land Subdivision regulations should be consid-
ered to increase bicycle safety, connectivity, and
accessibility:
Figure 31. National standards provide detailed guid-
ance for facility design.
RECOMMENDATIONS 94
■Increase minimum sidewalk widths . (City Code,
Chapter 15 Section 3 Subsection 3 Paragraphs
B-D) The 8-foot wide sidewalks adjacent to many
roadways throughout Iowa City function as an
extension of the trail system and are intended
to serve bicycle traffic. In addition, many local
sidewalks are used by children, young adults,
and adults less comfortable bicycling on the
roadways . Iowa City should consider increasing
minimum width for wide arterial sidewalks from
8 feet to 10 feet, and increasing minimum width
for sidewalks along collectors from 5 feet to 6 feet
to more comfortably accommodate all sidewalk
users and increase overtaking and bi-directional
passing safety.
■Incorporate bike lanes into all collectors and arte -
rials . (City Code, 15-3-2, Table 15-1) The current
standards for street rights-of-way and pavement
width differentiate between roads with and
without bike lanes. This differentiation increases
the difficulty of retroactively adding bike lanes
due to pavement width constraints . Iowa City
should consider standardizing bike lanes (or
separated bike lanes) as a required element of all
collectors and arterials . This policy amendment
will help fulfill the LAB’s metric examining pres-
ence of bike lanes on arterial roads and will also
ensure bicycle network growth is commensurate
with future land development and surface trans-
portation system growth .
■Differentiate between long-term and short-term
parking requirements . (City Code, 14-5A) Bicycle
is an important element of the current off-street
parking requirements of the city’s zoning code,
specifying the quantity, type, and site location
of bicycle parking facilities for developments.
The lack of differentiation between short-
term parking and long-term parking does not
provide adequate storage for long-term parking,
which includes bicycle lockers, indoor secure
parking areas, and covered, weather-protected
parking areas, and may discourage daily bicycle
commuting . The City should consider updating
bicycle parking requirements to differentiate
between these types of bicycle parking and asso -
ciated requirements for each.
Resources
■Zoning Regulations for Land Use Policy,
Roadmaps to Health, Robert Wood Johnson
Foundation: http://www.countyhealthrankings.
org/policies/zoning-regulations-land-use-policy
■Bicycle Parking Zoning Modifications, City of
Cambridge, MA http://www.cambridgema.gov/
CDD/Projects/Planning/bicycleparkingzoning
Complete Streets Implementation
Iowa City has an adopted and very good Complete
Streets policy that will contribute to the implemen-
tation of facility recommendations included in this
plan, as well as the general bikeability of streets
and public rights-of-way throughout Iowa City. To
ensure implementation of the policy and the bicycle
master plan, it is recommended that representa-
tives across City departments work together to
review existing plans, processes, and procedures
related to the transportation system and establish
goals and targets for complete streets implemen-
tation. Suggestions for how to best proceed with
creating such a process and recommendations for
key elements are provided below .
Create an Implementation Plan
Process
■Objective: Create a Complete Streets Committee
that includes representatives from all city
departments/divisions and relevant city boards/
committees that will be charged with develop-
ment of an implementation plan and schedule
that will review and revise all procedures, plans,
regulations, and processes of implementation
and will perform an annual review. If there is
considerable overlap in duties and responsi-
bilities with other existing committees, consider
assigning these responsibilities to an existing
95 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
committee .
■Objective: secure training for pertinent city staff
and decision-makers on the technical aspects of
Complete Streets principles and best practices,
as well as providing for community engagement
and education on Complete Streets .
■Objective: Identify and recommend land use
patterns, parking requirements, and develop -
ment policies that increase overall mobility,
which improve and support compact, mixed-use,
bikeable and walkable development and connec-
tions to rural routes and areas, and that support
local economic development .
Establish Design Criteria Utilizing
Up-To-Date Standards, Innovative
Design Guidance, and Current Best
Practices
The City will utilize the latest design guidance,
standards, and recommendations available to
implement the Complete Streets Policy:
■Objective: The City will utilize the NACTO Street
and Bikeway Design guides as the formal guid-
ance for the development of city roadway and
development projects .
■Objective: The City will use the current version
of the MUTCD, for signal, signing and striping
operations .
■Objective: The City will utilize the current version
of the AASHTO Bicycle and Pedestrian guides
for the development of bicycle and pedestrian
projects .
■Objective: Use design to enhance and support
expansion of services for active modes of trans-
portation including, but not limited to transit,
walking and bicycling, through increased funding
and cooperative regional planning .
■Objective: Ensure the design of projects promotes
the health and enhances the economic benefits
of walking and bicycling as practical modes of
transportation .
■Objective: Design projects so that they assure the
protection of local and regional investments in
transportation and assure proper maintenance
and improvements of the facilities over time.
■Objective: Establish a detailed set of design
guidelines for transportation system safety, user
comfort, and maintenance.
■Objective: Include pedestrian lighting, connec-
tions through parking lots, short-term and
long-term bicycle parking located near building
entrances, and consideration of strong aesthetics
in core or high-activity areas of town.
■Objective: In addition to infrastructure recom-
mendations, provide programmatic elements
such as wayfinding, kiosks, public art, and events
such as open streets, and along sidewalks such
as walking tours, street festivals, and public
markets .
Youth Bicycle Safety Classes
Instilling a love for bicycling in children and young
adults can support long-term gains in cultural accep-
tance of and support for bicycling activity. While
many children learn bicycling at a young age, it is
not a part of physical education curriculums in most
schools in Iowa City and across the country, partially
due to the lack of access to resources. Some school
districts, however, have begun to incorporate basic
bicycling safety and skills into physical education
curriculums with great success, often partnering
with local police departments, non-profits, and
certified bicycling instructors to provide bicycles
for students and offer effective instructions to
encourage safe riding practices and a basic under-
standing of rules and responsibilities when riding
around motor vehicle traffic. Iowa City should coor-
dinate with the ICCSD to explore opportunities to
teach basic bicycling skills to younger students .
RECOMMENDATIONS 96
Resources
■SHAPE America (Society of Health and Physical
Educators) Bicycle Safety Curriculum: http://
www.shapeamerica.org/publications/resources/
teachingtools/qualitype/bicycle_curriculum.cfm
■LAB Bicycling Skills 123 Youth and Safe Routes
to Schools courses: http://www.bikeleague.org/
content/find-take-class
■Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Traffic Safety Training Resources: http://www.
saferoutespartnership.org/state/bestpractices/
curriculum
Earn-A-Bike and Create-A-Commuter
Programs
Many children and adults in Iowa City lack access
to quality bicycles and bicycle maintenance training
and tools. In order to address this lack of access, the
City and its community partners should develop
Earn-A-Bike and Create-A-Commuter programs for
children and adults, respectively . In March 2017, the
Iowa City Police Department announced an Earn-A-
Bike pilot program for local youth in collaboration
with the City of Iowa City and World of Bikes, one
of Iowa City’s local bike shops. The program will
focus on teaching children basic bike maintenance
and bicycling skills and provide each participant
with a refurbished bike, helmet, and bike lights. The
initial program is limited to 15 children. If successful,
the City should determine capacity and resources
needed and available to expand the program to a
wider audience .
Similar in concept to the Earn-A-Bike program,
Create-A-Commuter programs provide low-income
adults with limited access to transportation choices
a function bicycle, as well as bicycle maintenance
and skills training. The program was first developed
in Portland Oregon by the Community Cycling Center
using federal Job Access and Reserve Commute
(JARC) funding. Bicycles are outfitted with fenders,
cargo racks, lights, and other equipment essential to
safe bicycle commuting.
Resources
■Earn-A-Bike Program, St Louis Bicycle Works (St
Louis, MO): http://www.bworks.org/bikeworks/
earn-a-bike/
■Create-A-Commuter Program, Community
Cycling Center (Portland, OR): http://web1.
ctaa.org/webmodules/webarticles/articlefiles/
Portland_TriMet.pdf
■http://www.communitycyclingcenter.
org/?s=create+a+commuter
Figure 32. A recent bike rodeo at Weber Elementary
School taught children safer bicycling skills.
97 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Bike Light Campaign
Bicycling at night without proper front and rear bike
lights is dangerous, yet many people bicycling in
Iowa City lack the proper lighting to stay safe and
visible at night. In order to increase bicycling safety
and overcome cost barriers that prohibit many indi-
viduals from purchasing bike lights, Iowa City should
coordinate with community partners to create a bike
light giveaway campaign . Community organizations
with a public health focus may be effective partners
and see a need to sponsor such a program . Similar
programs across the country combine catchy names
like “Get Lit” or “Light Up” to garner public and media
attention . The City should consider scheduling the
program to coincide with back to school events for
college students or the end of daylight savings.
Public Education and Awareness
Campaigns
A broad public outreach and education campaign
can help normalize bicycling as an accepted and
welcomed way for people to travel in Iowa City
through compelling graphics and messages targeted
to motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists . These
campaigns utilize a variety of media to share their
messages, from billboards, bus, and bus stop shel-
ters to websites, online ads, social media outlets .
Common topics for media campaigns include
safety and awareness; sharing the road and travel
etiquette; light and helmet use; and even human-
ization of bicyclists as fathers, mothers, sons, and
daughters . Iowa City should develop a public educa-
tion and awareness campaign to further establish
bicycling as a valued mode of travel for all commu-
nity residents .
Resources
■We’re All Drivers, Bike Cleveland (Cleveland,
OH): http://www.bikecleveland.org/our-work/
bike-safety-awareness/
■Drive with Care, Bike PGH (Pittsburgh, OH):
http://www.bikepgh.org/care/
■Every Lane Is a Bike Lane, Los Angeles County
Metropolitan Transportation Authority
(Los Angeles, CA): http://thesource.metro.
net/2013/04/11/every-lane-is-a-bike-lane/
■Every Day Is a Bike Day, Los Angeles County
Metropolitan Transportation Authority
(Los Angeles, CA): http://thesource.metro.
net/2014/04/30/l-a-metro-launches-new-
bike-ad-campaign-in-time-for-bike-week-l-
a-may-12-18/
■A Metre Matters and It’s a Two-Way Street,
Cycle Safe Communities, Amy Gillett Foundation
(Australia): http://cyclesafe.gofundraise.com.au/
cms/home
Figure 33. A public education campaign can include
traditional advertisements, maps, and educational
brochures.
RECOMMENDATIONS 98
This would differ from the “Light the Night” campaign
organized by the Iowa City Police Department and
Think Bicycles, in which bicyclists who were issued
citations for lack of proper lights could purchase bike
lights and have their citation fee waived. In contrast,
this new program would reduce or eliminate the
cost altogether and therefore have a greater posi-
tive impact for low-income individuals.
Resources
■How to Do a Successful Bike Light Giveaway,
LAB: http://www.bikeleague.org/content/
how-do-successful-bike-light-giveaway
■Get Lit, Community Cycling Center (Portland,
OR): http://www.communitycyclingcenter.org/
get-lit/
■Pop-Up Bike Light Giveaway, BikePGH
(Pittsburgh, PA): http://www.bikepgh.
org/2013/09/30/pop-up-bike-light-giveaway/
Themed & Targeted Bicycle Rides
Organized bicycle rides offer people a comfortable
and fun way to explore Iowa City’s bicycle routes and
trails in a group setting. For many, these types of
events build participants’ confidence and knowledge
of the bicycle network, giving them the tools neces-
sary to choose bicycling for short daily trips. Target
audiences for these organized bicycle rides should
reflect the diversity of the community and include
children, seniors, low-income residents, minority
residents, immigrants, and college students .
Smaller group rides with capped attendance can
capitalize on cultural assets and amenities like
historic monuments and buildings, city parks, busi-
ness districts, and other unique locations . In St
Louis, Missouri, Trailnet’s free weekly Community
Rides center around the city’s history and culture,
with themes ranging from museums, breweries,
jazz, prohibition, greenways, and the Underground
Railroad. Many of these rides are organized and led
by local historians and civic enthusiasts .
Larger group rides called cruiser rides that offer
family-friendly environment have become main-
stays in communities across the country . The
Denver Cruiser Ride, the Slow Roll in Detroit, and
Freewheel in Memphis attract hundreds to thou-
sands of participants, move at a leisurely pace, and
welcome people of all ages and abilities.
The City should coordinate with local advocacy
organizations and other community partners to
explore opportunities to diversify and strengthen
organized bicycle ride offerings as an essential tool
to encourage bicycling activity in Iowa City .
Resources
■Trailnet (St Louis, MO) Community Rides: http://
trailnet.org/tag/community-rides/
■Slow Roll (Detroit, MI): http://slowroll.bike/
■Denver Cruiser Ride: http://denvercruiserride.
com/
■People for Bikes, How to Start a Cruiser Ride:
http://pfb.peopleforbikes.org/take-a-brake/
how-to-start-a-cruiser-ride/
Figure 34. Iowa City Cycling Club and other partners
host numerous rides throughout the year.
99 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Bike Mentor Program
For many Iowa City residents, bicycling to work can
be a daunting challenge . Timing, route planning,
selecting the right clothing for both work and the ride
itself, and dozens of other considerations can over-
whelm potential commuters, even if it’s only a short
ride from home to work. A bike mentor program
addresses this need by matching new commuters
with experienced commuters who can assist with
route planning, commute preparation, and other
nuances of commuting by bike. The City of Iowa
City should coordinate with community partners to
establish a network of bike mentors to share their
experiences, assist new commuters with helpful
tips and resources, and even ride to and from work
destinations together . Bike mentor programs can
even be established internally by major employers .
These opportunities should be explored as well .
Resources
■Hartford County, MD Bike Mentor Program:
http://www.harfordcountymd.gov/763/
Bike-Mentor-Program
■Bike New York’s Gear Femmes: http://www.bike.
nyc/education/programs/gearfemmes/
■National Institute for Health Ride Mentors:
http://www.nihbike.com/home/ride-mentors
Bike Month and Bike to Work Events
Local agencies and organizations have developed a
robust slate of Bike Month activities and events in
recent years, having grown out of the shorter Bike
to Work Week period, usually the third week of May.
A full calendar of activities during the month of May
is kept up to date on Bike Iowa and Think Bicycles
of Johnson County websites, and local partners and
residents can submit events to the calendar . This
participatory approach to creating a full calendar
of events is modeled after the Pedalpalooza in
Portland, which compiles over 100 events during the
month of June to encourage bicycling across the city.
In Iowa City and neighboring municipalities in
Johnson County, over 30 events were held in Bike
Month 2017, including bike rodeos, party rides, slow
rolls, farmer’s market rides, trail rides, and repair
clinics. The City of Iowa City should continue to
support its local partners to increase Bike Month’s
visibility and impact within the community, and also
explore opportunities to expand Bike Month’s reach
to traditionally underserved communities. For bicy-
cling to become accepted and enjoyed by all, it must
be accessible to all as well . Bike Month presents a
prime opportunity to create inclusive events that
serve a diverse audience and build shared support
for bicycling.
Resources
■Think Bicycles Bike Month: http://www.thinkbi-
cycles.org/bike-month.html
■Bike Month Iowa City Facebook Page: https://
www.facebook.com/bikemonthiowacity/
■Bike Iowa Events Calendar: http://www.
bikeiowa.com/Events
Figure 35. Iowa City holds many events for Bike Month
in May.
RECOMMENDATIONS 100
Specialized Bicycle-Focused Training
for Law Enforcement Officers
Law enforcement officers receive considerable
training annually to effectively enforce local and
state laws, but little of that training focuses specifi-
cally on bicycle laws and safety. To address this
gap in education, the Iowa City Police Department
should invest in training opportunities targeting
bicycle (and pedestrian) laws, law enforcement,
travel behavior, and education tactics in order
to better support active transportation. Funding
support from local agencies, state departments
of transportation, state highway patrols, and non-
profit advocacy organizations have helped to bring
valuable training and resources to law enforcement
agencies across the country .
Resources
■Bike Cleveland Enforcement Education
(Cleveland, OH): http://www.bikecleveland.org/
enforcement/
■Continuum of Training. We Bike, etc: http://
www.webike.org/services/enforcement/
continuum-of-training
Targeted Law Enforcement Activity
Targeted enforcement is an effective way of encour-
aging lawful travel behavior and instilling respect
for other road users. Enforcement activities may
include deployment of speed reader boards, police
“sting” operations at high crash intersections,
wrong-way riding enforcement, bike light enforce-
ment, and even distribution of safety literature
along corridors with high volumes of bicycle activity.
In the City of Chicago, police officers partner with
the City’s Bicycling Ambassadors to educate road
users .
The Iowa City Police Department should explore
opportunities for regularly-scheduled enforcement
activities at strategic locations around the commu-
nity to support bicycling activity and create safer
environments for all road users.
Resources
■City of Chicago Targeted Enforcement (Chicago,
IL): http://chicagocompletestreets.org/safety/
targetedenforcement/
Figure 36. Police office training should include riding.
Figure 37. Police can partner with other groups to
educate the public during enforcement activities.
101 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Publicize and Enforce “No Bikes on
Sidewalks” and Dismount Zones
Bicycling activity on busy sidewalks can be dangerous
and obstructive for bicyclists, pedestrians, and even
motor vehicles. Iowa City has a number of sidewalks
and pedestrian malls in Downtown and surrounding
the University of Iowa campus where bicycling on
sidewalks is prohibited . Bicyclists are also required
to dismount and walk their bicycles on a numerous
pedestrian bridges that lack sufficient width for
multi-use activity. In order to create safe spaces for
all road users, Iowa City Police Department should
combine targeted public messaging and visible
enforcement of bicycling prohibitions on sidewalks
in these designated areas . The resources below
highlight efforts from other cities across North
America .
Resources
■Sidewalks are for Pedestrians, City of Toronto,
Canada: http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/
contentonly?vgnextoid=94230995bbbc1410VgnV
CM10000071d60f89RCRD
Iowa City Bicycle Program Web
Presence
The City of Iowa City’s website provides an ideal
platform for the distribution of educational mate -
rials, project updates, upcoming events, public
meetings, and other relevant information to inform,
educate, and encourage residents to travel by
bicycle . Iowa City should consolidate and organize
bicycle-related information on the City’s website to
provide a single point of entry for website users to
access bicycle information. While the primary focus
should be on city-driven initiatives, it should also
include resources from and/or links to community
partners websites and highlight the importance of
these community partners in creating a BFC.
Resources
■Honolulu Bicycle Program Webpage (Honolulu,
HI): https://www.honolulu.gov/bicycle
■Bicycling in Minneapolis Webpage (Minneapolis,
MN): http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/bicycles/
■Seattle DOT Bicycle Program (Seattle, WA):
http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/bikepro-
gram .htm
Project Outreach
Iowa City has used multi-pronged outreach efforts
for many capital projects in order to actively engage
and educate residents about changes to public
infrastructure. As bicycle facility projects are devel-
oped and installed, it will be important to continue
these outreach efforts and inform residents along
project corridors about how to interact with these
new bicycle facilities and the likely increase in bicycle
activity that will result . By using online videos, door
hangers, neighborhood meetings, and other outlets,
Iowa City can build awareness and support for these
new facilities as important elements of the trans-
portation system. Examples of project outreach via
community meetings and an online presence are
listed below .
Resources
■Seattle DOT Bicycle Program Projects (Seattle,
WA): http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/
bikeprojects .htm
Figure 38. The Bike Long Beach website provides infor-
mation on bicycling in Long Beach, California.
RECOMMENDATIONS 102
Annual Report Card/Bicycle Account
An annual report card that tracks implementation
progress is an effective way to communicate the
community’s efforts to integrate bicycling into the
fabric of the community. A report card captures plan
successes and highlights the importance of collabo-
ration to achieve shared goals and objectives . The
document can be posted on the City’s website,
shared via social media, and printed for dissemi-
nation at public facilities and community events.
Depending on the volume of actions completed
and the capacity of available staff, the report card
can range in size and scope from a brief one-page
information sheet to a more detailed report, which
can include resident surveys, economic impact anal-
yses, and other tools to communicate the value and
benefits of bicycling.
Resources
■Gateway Bike Plan Report Card, Great Rivers
Greenway (St Louis, MO): http://greatriversgre-
enway.org/about-us/projects-in-partnership/
gateway-bike-plan/
■Bicycle Account Guidelines, LAB:
http://www.bikeleague.org/content/
bicycle-account-guideline-provides-tools-
monitor-biking-your-community
■Auckland, New Zealand Cycling
Account: https://at.govt.nz/cycling-
walking/cycling-walking-monitoring/
auckland-cycling-account/
■Cincinnati Bicycle Transportation Plan Current
Projects (Cincinnati, OH): http://www.cincinnati-
oh.gov/bikes/bike-projects/
■Denver City and County Current Projects
(Denver, CO): https://www.denvergov.org/
content/denvergov/en/bicycling-in-denver/infra-
structure .html
Pop-Up Demonstration/Pilot Projects
Many bicycle facility types recommended in this
Plan are new to Iowa City residents . Many bicy-
clists and motor vehicle drivers will be unfamiliar
with how to operate their vehicles on, adjacent
to, or across these new bikeways . By developing
day-long or weekend-long pop-up demonstration
projects, Iowa City can introduce these new bike -
ways to the community in a low-cost and effective
way . Pop-up demonstration and pilot projects have
proven effective for their ability to build support for
new bicycle facility, gain acceptance among skep -
tical residents, and generate community interest
in the City’s efforts to build a more bicycle friendly
Iowa City. Public health students at the University of
Iowa conducted a bicycle boulevard demonstration
project in 2015 in collaboration with more than a
dozen local partners, generating considerable press
and positive feedback from community members.
The City should work with community partners and
neighborhood groups to use pop-up demonstration
and pilot projects to introduce new bikeways to the
community and to build support for safe, comfort-
able, low-stress bicycle facilities as an accepted part
of the street network.
Resources
■WALC Institute Pop-Up Demonstration
Toolkit: http://www.walklive.org/
popup-demonstration-tool-kit/
■Iowa City Bike Boulevard Demonstration
Project: https://sustainability.uiowa.edu/news/
student-group-tests-iowa-city-bike-boulevard/
■https://www.facebook.com/
iowacitybikeboulevard
Figure 39. An annual report card helps track progress
on bicycling-related initiatives throughout the city.
103 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Expanded Bicycle Count Program
Bicycle count programs are valuable mechanisms
for tracking bicycle facility usage over time and
evaluating the success of infrastructure projects for
their ability to increase ridership . MPOJC currently
conducts annual counts of trail users using infrared
automated counters . Count locations are based on
requests from MPO entities and included seven
locations in Iowa City in 2015 .
The City should investigate expansion of the annual
bicycle and pedestrian count program of trail users
to include on-street locations along key corridors
throughout the city . The same locations should
be counted in the same manner annually . This will
provide the City with information about the growth
of bicycle ridership and pedestrian usage of facili-
ties, determine where improvements need to be
made, assess who is using the facilities, and provide
a dataset to accompany grant applications . The City
should consider additional counts along corridors
slated for future bikeway development, like Clinton
Street and Madison Street, to evaluate before and
after conditions. The installation of several perma-
nent counters can also be used to calibrate annual
extrapolations at other count locations to increase
data reliability . The National Bicycle and Pedestrian
Documentation Project has developed recom-
mended methodology, survey and count forms, and
reporting forms for local agency count programs.
Resources
■National Bicycle & Pedestrian Documentation
Project: http://bikepeddocumentation.org/
■Innovations in Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts: A
Review of Emerging Technologies:
■http://altaplanning.com/resources/
innovative-counting-technologies/
■The National Cooperative Highway Research
Program (NCHRP) Guidebook on Pedestrian and
Bicycle Volume Data Collection: http://www.trb.
org/Publications/Blurbs/171973.aspx
■Oregon Metro, Portland, OR Count
Program: http://www.oregonmetro.gov/
how-metro-works/volunteer-opportunities/
trail-counts
Crash Monitoring and Evaluation
Crash reports from collisions involving bicyclists can
be an invaluable resource for learning about the
behavior of motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians,
as well as roadway conditions and characteristics
that may lead to collisions . Regular monitoring and
evaluation of crash locations can help to identify
high-risk areas and develop solutions to minimize
crash risk . While total crash volumes each year in
Iowa City are relatively low, a 5-year sample size
can help identify trends with regard to crash time,
contributing factors, crash type, location, and other
key details . Iowa City should look at conducting a
more detailed analysis of reported bicycle crashes,
including a review of individual crash report narra-
tives, every two years . In addition, an online tool on
the City’s website can allow those biking to report
concerns that are not necessarily crashes that can
help identify a problem before a crash occurs.
Resources
■Denver Bicycle Crash Analysis: Understanding
and Reducing Bicycle & Motor Vehicle Crashes
(Denver, CO): https://www.denvergov.
org/content/dam/denvergov/Portals/705/
Figure 40. Trail counts can be manual or use automatic
systems.
RECOMMENDATIONS 104
documents/denver-bicycle-motor-vehicle-crash-
analysis_2016.pdf
■University of North Carolina Highway Safety
Research Center Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash
Analysis Tool (PBCAT): http://www.pedbikeinfo.
org/pbcat_us/
■Cambridge Bicycle Crash Fact Sheet (Cambridge,
MA): https://www.cambridgema.gov/~/media/
Files/CDD/Transportation/Bike/Bicycle-Safety-
Facts_FINAL_20140609.pdf
Economic Impact of Bicycling Study
Bicycling is more than just a way to get around Iowa
City; it’s an important part of the local economy.
Trail and recreational tourism, annual events that
draw thousands of visitors to the area, and perma-
nent jobs are dependent upon the bicycling activity
that the community has cultivated over the years . In
addition, bicycling also impacts insurance savings,
healthcare cost savings, transportation cost
savings, and other economic factors. The City of
Iowa City and its regional partners should conduct
an economic impact study to quantify the value of
bicycling on the local economy and to serve as a
catalyst for continued investments in bicycle facili-
ties, programs, and events . More than a dozen
states have conducted economic analyses of bicy-
cling activity or the bicycling industry, and numerous
regions and municipalities have done the same,
including the Pikes Peak Region, New York City, the
Capital Regional District (Victoria, British Columbia),
and Portland, Oregon .
Resources
■The Economic Impact of Cycling in the Pikes
Peak Region, Pikes Peak Area Council of
Governments, Trails and Open Space Coalition
(Colorado Springs, CO): http://www.trailsando-
penspaces.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/
Economic-Impact-of-Cycling.pdf
■The Economic Impact of the Bicycle Industry
in Portland, Portland Bureau of Planning and
Sustainability (Portland, OR): https://www.port-
landoregon.gov/bps/article/555482
■Bikeonomics: A Primer on the Economic Impact
of Cycling in the Capital Region, Capital Region
District (Victoria, B.C.): https://www.crd.bc.ca/
docs/default-source/regional-planning-pdf/
Pedestrian-Cycling-Master-Plan/crd_bikesed-
booklet-version.pdf?sfvrsn=2
Apply for Gold-Level BFC Status
In its Strategic Plan, the City Council has made
clear its commitment to improving bicycling condi-
tions in Iowa City and has targeted application for
Gold-Level BFC designation from the LAB in 2017.
The achievement of this designation in 2017 would
be largely dependent on activities conducted and
projects completed prior to the adoption of this
Bicycle Master Plan. The current Silver-Level BFC
Designation is due to expire in 2017, and the City
must therefore reapply in August of 2017 regardless.
Bicycle Master Plan Updates
Like all plans, this Bicycle Master Plan will lose its
efficacy and relevance as the bike network grows,
physical development occurs, travel patterns
change, and community needs and values evolve .
Iowa City should revisit the plan every five years for
a comprehensive update, at which point implemen-
tation progress can be measured, new goals and
targets can be established, and bike network and
support systems can be evaluated and updated to
reflect current conditions and opportunities. The City
should also establish a process whereby changes to
the bike network itself can be made to reflect newly
identified fatal flaws in project recommendations or
route changes that capitalize on unforeseen oppor-
tunities during initial plan development .
105 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Section 6
Implementation
107 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Implementation
The Iowa City Bicycle Master Plan provides a
comprehensive set of recommendations and phys-
ical improvements intended to weave bicycling
into the physical and social fabric of the commu-
nity . Implementing the Plan will require collective
commitment and persistence from Iowa City and
its community partners to pursue the opportunities
identified in this plan, as well as those that arise in
the coming years .
This chapter of the plan sets forth a multi-pronged
strategy to implement the bicycle network,
programs, and policy recommendations to ulti-
mately achieve the vision of a bicycle-friendly
community in which bicycling is a safe, comfortable,
convenient, and preferred mode of travel and recre -
ation for people of all ages and abilities. Included in
this chapter are immediate actions to transition into
plan implementation, capital project prioritization,
cost estimates, funding sources, a project phasing
strategy, ongoing maintenance recommendations,
and evaluation activities .
Going for Gold: Immediate
Actions
The following immediate action steps are designed
to initiate plan implementation, sustain momentum
built during the planning process, and help Iowa
City become a Gold-Level BFC. These action items,
which represent a mix of policy, procedures, capital
projects, and programs, provide early opportuni-
ties expand the bicycle network, engage community
partners, and establish strong and lasting relation-
ships on which successful implementation efforts
will depend .
Adopt the Plan
Adopting the plan is the first step and represents
the City’s commitment to bicycling . Adopting the
plan will also provide guidance for future capital
investments and transportation decisions . Iowa
City should pursue a formal adoption process to
incorporate this plan as a supplemental document
supporting the comprehensive plan . This will add
legitimacy to the plan recommendations and open
funding opportunities that favor or require poten-
tial projects to be part of an adopted plan, as in the
case of the State Recreational Trails Program.
Establish Bicycle/Active Transportation
Advisory Committee
Implementing this plan will require cooperation
among city departments, local agencies, advocacy
organizations, and other community partners .
Through the creation of a bicycle or active transpor-
tation advisory committee, Iowa City can increase
coordination among those responsible for imple-
menting the plan and ensure that the needs and
values of the community are represented and
reflected in decision-making processes, provide for
delegation of responsibilities, and ensure collec-
tion of key data and evaluation metrics. For more
information about this committee, see Programs &
Policies Memo .
Create Bicycle Coordinator Position
Iowa City should establish a Bicycle Coordinator
position responsible for overseeing the city’s
diverse range of bicycling activities to enhance inter-
departmental coordination, support interagency
coordination, and streamline communications with
community residents, stakeholders, and media .
Additional information about this immediate action
item can be found in the programs and policies
section of the Recommendations chapter.
Complete Immediate-Term Bikeway
Projects
Initial investments in bicycle facilities to target
gap closure, safety improvements, and network
connections will serve as visible statements to the
community that Iowa City is committed to making
bicycling a valued form of transportation and recre-
ation . Immediate-term bikeway projects to be
completed within the first two years of plan adoption
are identified in the project phasing strategy. The
12.4 miles of immediate-term projects below repre-
sent critical additions to the active transportation
IMPLEMENTATION 108
network and will substantially improve bicycle
safety and connectivity, particularly through the
provision of new on-street bicycle facilities.
Apply for BFC Designation
Iowa City’s current Silver-Level BFC Designation is
due to expire in 2017, and the city must therefore
reapply in August of 2017. Failure to do so will result
in a revocation of the current Silver-Level desig-
nation. The lack of a significant on-street bicycle
network, particularly dedicated, protected, or low-
stress facilities, may be a limiting factor in the city’s
search for Gold-Level status; however, adoption
of this plan and early plans for implementation of
the expanded on-street network will help support
the city’s application. Regardless of the outcome,
Iowa City will receive additional feedback to further
refine its bicycle-related projects and programs and
identify specific recommendations in this plan that
will advance their efforts to achieve Gold.
Collect Baseline On-Street Bicycle
Counts
A bicycle count program is a valuable mechanism
for tracking bicycle facility usage over time, evalu-
ating the success of infrastructure projects for their
ability to increase ridership, and demonstrating
impacts on roadway safety. The City should coor-
dinate with the MPOJC’s to expand their annual
bicycle and pedestrian count program to include
on-street locations along key corridors throughout
the city . The City should consider additional counts
along corridors slated for future bikeway develop-
ment, like Clinton Street and Madison Street, to
evaluate before and after conditions. The installa-
tion of several permanent counters can also be used
to calibrate annual extrapolations at other count
locations to increase data reliability . Additional
information about this immediate action item can
be found in the programs and policies section of the
Recommendations chapter .
Establish Baseline Performance
Measurements and Set Target
Benchmarks
Evaluating plan performance will require measur-
able objectives and benchmarks that define
success. The plan identifies specific metrics that
relate to one or more goals and objectives to track
implementation efforts over time. Iowa City, in
collaboration with the Bicycle/Active Transportation
Advisory Committee, will collect baseline measure-
ments and propose targets for each measurement
based on available resources and capacities . When
proposing targets, it will be important to maintain
the plan’s aspirational vision for bicycling while also
being cognizant of practical limitations such as time,
funding, and capacity.
Corridor and Project
Prioritization
The City of Iowa City is responsible for the effi-
cient, effective, and values-driven expenditure of
taxpayer dollars. Bicycle-related infrastructure proj-
ects and programs must compete with other capital
improvements and municipal services, as well as
with one another, for limited internal and external
resources . In order to maximize investment and
provide the greatest benefit, Iowa City should use
a prioritized approach to invest in bicycle trans-
portation infrastructure and plan implementation.
Using the corridor approach to facility development
as outlined in the Recommendations chapter, each
bicycle corridor and associated project has been
assigned a score according to its ability to address
specified prioritization criteria. These criteria are
based on the plan goals and objectives, input from
the community, and feedback from the BAC. The
prioritization criteria have also been weighted based
on their relative importance based on public input
at the second plan open house, and on BAC input .
The criteria and their relative weights are listed in
Table 7 on the following page.
109 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
coordination between all concerned departments
in order to arrive at detailed project costs . These
costs are provided in 2017 dollars and include a 20
percent contingency. Inflation should be included in
costs in future years when bikeway improvements
are programmed .
The cost estimates do not include costs for corridor
planning, public engagement, surveying, engi-
neering design, right-of-way acquisition, and other
work required to implement a project, since these
are planning-level costs . Based on city experi-
ences, these elements can and should be added
as these projects are programmed into the capital
improvement program (CIP) . Depending on the
type of improvement, these additional costs can
generally be estimated at up to 25 percent of the
facility construction cost, in the case of a shared use
path design or a two-way cycle track . Construction
costs will vary based on the ultimate project
scope (i .e ., combination with other projects) and
economic conditions at the time of construction.
When combined with larger roadway projects, the
city can achieve economies of scale and maximize
the value of every dollar spent on transportation
infrastructure.
Corridors are scored with a total of 100 possible
points and then grouped into three categories—high,
medium, and low—to reflect corridor value based
on the criteria above. The prioritization results for
each corridor and associated projects are shown in
Map 29 on the following page. Prioritization scores
for each recommended project are also shown in
the appendix of this plan. While these prioritiza-
tion scores are a critical factor for project phasing,
other important factors like available funding,
programmed projects, funding sources, and logical
network growth and development inform the
phasing schedule for network buildout as well. The
phasing plan is described later in this chapter .
Cost Estimate Assumptions
Cost estimates are an essential planning tool
used for programming capital improvements and
drafting applications for external funding sources.
Cost estimates were developed for each project
based on initial planning-level examples of similar
constructed projects and industry averages . These
costs were then refined with the assistance of local
staff based on local experience. All facility designs
and associated cost estimates proposed in this
plan are conceptual in nature and must undergo
final engineering design and review through
Prioritization Criteria Total
Points
Definition
Gap Closure 25 Degree to which the corridor addresses a gap in the existing
bikeway network by providing a facility type of equal or greater
level of comfort
Safety 25 Degree to which the corridor increases safety along streets with
bicycle-related crashes from the last five years
Demographic Equity 15 Corridor’s ability to provide bicycle access to underserved popula-
tions, including minorities, low-income households, youth, elderly,
and households without access to a vehicle
Connections to Existing
Facilities
15 Number of existing facilities to which the corridor connects
Nearby Parks & Schools 10 Number of parks and schools to which the corridor connects
All-Ages Facility 10 Ability of corridor to provide a low-stress, all-ages bicycle facility
Table 7. Prioritization Criteria
IMPLEMENTATION 110
Map 29. Bikeway Project Prioritization
Kiwanis
Pa rk
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer Park
Villa Park
Whispering
Meadows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Pa rk
Willow
Creek
Pa rk
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranc h
Terry
Trueblood
Recreation Area
Thornberry
Dog Park
Pen insula
Park
City Park
Terrel Mill
Park/skateboard
Park
Wetherby
Pa rk
Hu nter 's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa City
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
P ar k12
Court
H oliday
LucasD odgeHighland
Mu scat ine
Fo st e r
Villa g e
Frie ndship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJam
es
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMar ket
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDu
C
h
i
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLower Wes t B ranch
La ke side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKir kwood
S andusk y
340
ScottMadison7
Davenpor tFairchild
Herb ert H oover
Jeffers onCampCardinalNorthRidge Rochest e r
SandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsWas hi n gt o nDubuque
College
DoverOs age
Lin de r
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13
SlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
SoccerParkHawkeyeP ark
Osage
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestC o r al R idge
MallIowa
Source : Esri, Digita lGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, G etmapping , Aerogrid , IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and
th e G IS User Community
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 in ch = 0 .75 m ile s
Bike way Project Prioritization
Legend
Bikeway Prioritization
High-Priority Recommendation
Medium-Priority Reco mmendation
Low-Priority Recommendation
Existing Bikeway
Other Map Elements
Interstate
Principle Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Road
Railroad
Park
Iowa City Boundary
[
IMPLEMENTATION 111
Cost estimates for unfunded recommended
projects included in the immediate-, near-, and
long-term implementation phases are listed in
Table 8. Bikeways to be developed as part of other
programmed projects or as integral components
of roadway reconstruction projects according to
the city’s street design standards are not included
in the cost estimates table. A complete list of cost
estimates for each individual project can be found
in the appendix of this document.
Project Phasing Strategy
Given the limited resources available to implement
the plan, it is necessary to phase recommended
projects over time in a manner that best supports
the vision and the goals of the plan, addresses
safety issues and network gaps, and provides for
orderly and logical network expansion .
The City’s Annual Complete Streets Improvements
and Traffic Calming line items in the FY2018 Capital
Projects Fund identifies $150,000 and $20,000 per
year, respectively, from 2018 through 2021. With
opportunity to leverage this line item for external
funding at a 50/50 or 80/20 matching level, the City
can increase annual investments in bikeway projects
by an additional $150,000 to $600,000 . In addition,
some recommended projects are already identi-
fied as separate projects in the FY2018 five-year
CIP, and others can be developed in tandem with
programmed roadway construction, reconstruc-
tion, repaving, and other improvements included
in the five-year CIP. For example, new arterial road-
ways like the McCollister extension from Gilbert
to Sycamore, a sidepath and bike lanes will be
constructed per design standards . Other projects
on existing local roadways may be incorporated into
resurfacing projects funded through the Annual
Pavement Rehabilitation line item .
Using a combination of project prioritization, cost
estimates, programmed capital improvements,
available funding in city budget, and other informa-
tion, recommended projects have been grouped
into three distinct project phases: immediate term
(2017-2018), near term (2019-2022), and long term
(2023-2027) . It is important to note that project
phasing should not restrict the development of proj -
ects outside their identified phasing term should
opportunities arise to move a project forward. With
Facility Type Average Cost Per
Mile
Recommended
Miles
Total Cost
Shared Use Path $1,132,250 6 .0 $6,821,925
Sidepath $638,040 5 .0 $3,205,320
Two-Way Cycle Track $1,493,500 0 .5 $724,516
Buffered Bike Lanes*$64,071 3 .2 $202,674
Standard Bike Lanes $102,034 15 .7 $1,604,888
Climbing Lanes $55,130 0 .2 $10,598
Bicycle Boulevards $80,470 22 .7 $1,828,675
Marked and Signed Routes $17,110 9 .5 $162,506
All Recommended Bikeways 66.4 $14,561,101
* Majority of these projects are one-way buffered bike lanes, resulting in lower average costs per mile.
Table 8. Cost Estimates by Facility Type
112 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
over 100 miles of recommended bikeways included
in the plan, full network buildout cannot be accom-
plished within ten-year timeframe identified in this
phasing plan . As the network expands and the
plan is revisited phasing strategies will be adjusted
to reflect changing priorities, opportunities, and
constraints .
The project phasing strategy is shown on Map 30 .
Immediate and near-term projects are listed below,
and all phases are included as an attachment .
Project Length Phasing Notes
Clinton Street 4-lane to 3-lane
conversion with bike lanes
1 .28 Programmed capital improvement scheduled for 2018.
College bicycle boulevard 1 .02 Incorporate wayfinding signage and pavement mark-
ings. Traffic calming already present.
Camp Cardinal bike lanes 1 .11 Add markings and signage to existing wide striped
shoulders .
Governor bike lane/protected bike
lane from Bowery to Brown
1 .10 Project S3942 - Scheduled for resurfacing in 2018.
Dewey/Summit/Brown bicycle
boulevard
0 .42 Complete in tandem with Governor resurfacing to
provide complete connection to Dodge sidepath and
Prairie Du Chien .
Prentiss & Bowery bicycle boulevard 0 .86 Provide east-west connection extension from Clinton.
Mormon Trek Street 4-lane to 3-lane
conversion with bike lanes from
Melrose to Westside
1 .72 Programmed for road diet in 2018.
Madison Street 4-lane to 3-lane
conversion with bike lanes from
Market to Court
0 .74 Programmed for road diet in 2018. Include signage and
markings to extend facility north to the Iowa River Trail.
Myrtle and Riverside intersection
and signal improvements with side-
walk access to the Iowa River Trail
N/A Project S3933 - Programmed for improvements in 2018,
including crosswalk improvements and trail access
improvements .
Greenwood & Myrtle bicycle
boulevard
0 .64 Complete in tandem with Myrtle/Riverside intersection
improvement project S3933 .
Wetherby bicycle boulevard
(Lakeside, Sandusky, Taylor,
Southgate, Wetherby)
2 .22 Increase bicycle access to parks and trails south of Hwy
6 . May incorporate phased approach beginning with
wayfinding signage and pavement markings.
Keokuk road diet from Hwy 6 to
Sandusky
0 .37 Increases safety and Hwy 6. Completes link in Southside
Bicycle Boulevard .
Highway 1 Sidepath Trail 0 .52 Project R4225 - Programmed for construction in 2018.
Table 9. Immediate-Term Projects (2017-2018)
IMPLEMENTATION 113
Project Length Phasing Notes
Dodge bike lane/buffered
bike lane from Governor to
Kirkwood
1 .87 Improve Dodge to provide buffered bike lane/bike lane
corridor along with Governor .
Benton bike lanes from
Greenwood to Mormon Trek
1 .24 Complete following installation of facilities on Greenwood and
Myrtle . Provide direct link between Mormon Trek and Iowa
River Trail .
Hwy 6 sidepath from Heinz to
Hollywood
1 .66 Project R4227 – scheduled for completion in 2021. Addresses
gap in sidepath network .
Market & Jefferson buffered
bike lanes
1 .98 Enhances safety and comfort along high-volume, high-priority
corridor . Project include Clapp marked and shared route .
Jefferson/Glendale bicycle
boulevard
0 .97 Extends critical Central Corridor bikeway west to 1st Ave .
Washington 1 .07 Extends critical Central Corridor bikeway west to Scott .
Keokuk bike lanes/marked
and shared route from
Kirkwood to Hwy 6
0 .44 Improves north-south access across Hwy 6 .
Kirkwood bike lanes from
Clinton to Lower Muscatine
1 .13 Establishes east-west route south of downtown. Connects to
Clinton near-term project .
McCollister bike lanes from
Gilbert to Sycamore
0 .85 Project S3934 - Programmed for 2018-2019. Incorporated into
standard arterial design
McCollister sidepath from
Gilbert to Sycamore
0 .85 Project S3934 - Programmed for 2018-2019. Incorporated into
standard arterial design
Sunset bike lanes from
Benton to Hwy 1
0 .61 Provide north-south corridor in west Iowa City
Lower Muscatine bike lanes 1 .0 Complete east-west corridor from south of downtown to Hwy
6 .
Church bicycle boulevard 0 .6 East-west connector in north Central District
Dover/Westminster bicycle
boulevard
1 .48 North-south route through east Iowa City . Includes trail
segment connecting to Court Hill Trail .
Emerald bicycle boulevard 0 .42 Provide north-south route through west Iowa City .
Table 10. Near-Term Projects (2019-2022)
Project Length Phasing Notes
Willow Creek Rd neighborhood
connector
0 .18 Gap closure project should be completed in conjunction
with Hwy 1 sidepath to enhance connectivity to Willow
Creek Trail .
Total Miles of Immediate-Term
Projects
12.38 Total Cost for Immediate-Phase Projects: $786,177
114 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Funding Sources
Funding bikeway projects and bicycle-related
programs will require a diverse and creative
approach . While Iowa City sets aside a certain
amount of annual funding for complete streets
projects, external funding sources will be necessary
to implement plan recommendations in a timely
manner . When possible, this set-aside should be
leveraged as local match for external funding in
order to maximize the city’s return on investment .
In addition, Iowa City must be flexible and sponta-
neous enough to capitalize on partnerships, in-kind
matches, and other non-traditional opportuni-
ties to implement the plan recommendations . The
following section of this chapter provides an over-
view of funding sources that can be utilized.
Federal and State Funding Sources
The federal government has numerous programs
and funding mechanisms to support bicycle and
pedestrian projects, most of which are allocated by
the US DOT to state, regional, and local entities . In
many cases, state and regional entities administer
these funds to local agencies through competitive
grant programs . In order to clearly convey the roles
and responsibilities of all agencies in the administra-
tion and spending of federal transportation funds,
the Iowa DOT has created the Guide to Transportation
Funding Programs of Interest to Local Governments
and Others (2017, revised edition) . This guide is an
invaluable resource for funding exploration, project
development, and procedural compliance .
Project Length Phasing Notes
1st Ave sidepath from
Rochester to Court Hill Trail
1 .02 Critical north-south corridor . Addresses gap in existing side-
path network .
Burlington Street Bridge from
Madison to Riverside
0 .22 Address critical river crossing .
Grand/Byington bike lanes
and marked and shared
routes
0 .44 Increase connectivity between existing bike lanes on Melrose,
Iowa River Trail, and downtown Iowa City .
Evans/Muscatine marked and
shared route and bike lanes
from Market to 1st Ave
1 .45 Key arterial corridor . Bike lanes can be striped and signed with
no disturbance to pavement .
American Legion sidepath
from Scott to Taft
1 .08 Project S3854 - Scheduled for completion in 2021
American Legion bike lanes
from Scott to Taft
1 .08 Project S3854 - Scheduled for completion in 2021
Court Street sidepath
segments between
Friendship and Taft
0 .39 Sidepath infill projects to address gaps in the corridor
Capitol Street shared
connecting route
0 .15 Short 2-block segment connecting Iowa River Trail, U of I
Campus, and Market & Jefferson couplet.
Total miles of Near-Term
Projects
24.53 Total Cost for Near-Term Projects: $2,388,265
IMPLEMENTATION 115
Map 30. Project Phasing Strategy
Kiwanis
Park
Ryerson
Woods
Mercer Park
Villa Park
Whispering
Mea dows
Wetlands
Napoleon
Park
Sturgis
Ferry
Park
Willow
Creek
Park
Scott Park
Rita's
Ranch
Terry
Trueblood
Recreation Area
Thornberry
Dog Park
Peninsula
Park
City Park
Terrel Mill
Park/skateboard
Park
Wetherby
Park
Hunter's
Run Park
Hickory
Hill Park
Iowa Ci ty
Kickers
Soccer Park
¥80 ¥80
¥80
£¤1
£¤1
£¤218
£¤6
£¤218
£¤6
Par k12
Court
H oliday
LucasD odgeJohnsonHighlan d
M
uscatine
Fo st e r
Villa g e
Fr iendship
Burlington
RiversideMelrose
420
D
eer Creek
GilbertGovernor5CoralRidge
1stJames
KennedyMormon TrekAmerican Legion
2
KeokukMarket
7thSycamoreBenton PrairieDu
C
h
i
enHeartland2
ClintonL
o
w
er
M
u
sc
atin
e
Melrose
R o h r e t
NaplesChurch
SunsetHeinzLowe r Wes t B ra nch
Lake side
Bloomington
Dane3rdKir kwood
S andusk y
340
ScottMadison7
Daven portFairchild
Herbert H oover
Jeffers onCampCardinalNorthRidge Rochest e r
SandLyn
d
e
n
He
ightsWa shi ng t o nDubuque
College
DoverOsage
Lin der
Ne
wton
1 0
Landon2ndOldHighway218TaftOakCrestHillTaft13 DubuqueSlothowerMccollister
MaierHawkins
HawkeyeP ark
SoccerParkOs age
Sharon CenterSiouxHurtHarvestC o r al R idge
MallIowa
Source: E sri, DigitalGl obe, GeoEye, i-cubed , USDA, USGS, AEX, G etmapping , Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and
th e G IS User Community
0 1 20 .5 Miles
1 inch = 0 .75 m iles
Project Phasing Strategy
Legend
Project Phasing
Immediate (2017-2018)
Near (2019-2022)
Long (2023-2027)
Unscheduled
Existing Bikeway
Other Map Element s
Interstate
Principle
Minor
Collector
Local Road
Railroad
Park
Iowa City Boundary
[
IMPLEMENTATION 116
Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act
In 2015, the FAST Act was signed into law, autho -
rizing $305 billion in transportation infrastructure
planning and investment for a five-year period from
2016-2020 . Multiple programs have been carried
over from the previous transportation bill, Moving
Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century, or MAP-21.
Funding for FAST Act programs available to Iowa
City is allocated to the MPOJC based on apportion-
ment formulas determined at the federal and state
levels . These programs are described below .
Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG)
Program
The STBG provides funding that may be used by
States and localities for projects to preserve and
improve the conditions on any Federal-aid highway,
bridge and tunnel projects, public road projects,
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit
capital projects. Bicycle and pedestrian infrastruc-
ture projects include ADA sidewalk modification,
recreational trails, bicycle transportation, on- and
off-road trail facilities for non-motorized transpor-
tation, and infrastructure projects and systems that
will provide safe routes for non-drivers, including
children, older adults and individuals with disabili-
ties to access daily needs .
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
The TAP was authorized by MAP-21 in 2012 and has
been continued by the FAST Act, through federal
fiscal year 2020. Eligible project activities for TAP
funding include a variety of smaller-scale trans-
portation projects such as pedestrian and bicycle
facilities, recreational trails, safe routes to school
projects, and community improvements such as
historic preservation, vegetation management, and
some environmental mitigation related to storm
water and habitat connectivity . The TAP program
replaced multiple pre-MAP-21 programs, including
the Transportation Enhancement Program, the Safe
Routes to School Program, and the National Scenic
Byways Program .
Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP)/
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
Program
This program funds highway/street, transit, bicycle/
pedestrian, and other projects or programs which
help maintain Iowa’s clean air quality by reducing
transportation-related emissions. Eligible highway/
street projects must be on the federal-aid system,
which includes all federal functional class routes
except local and rural minor collectors .
■https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/
air_quality/cmaq/
■https://iowadot.gov/systems_
planning/grant-programs/
iowa-clean-air-attainment-program-icaap
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
The HSIP is intended to achieve significant reduction
in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public
roads by funding projects, strategies and activities
consistent with a state’s Strategic Highway Safety
Plan (SHSP) .
■https://iowadot.gov/traffic/sections/HSIP
Section 402 State and Community Highway
Safety Grant Program
Section 402 funds can be used to develop educa-
tion, enforcement and research programs designed
to reduce traffic crashes, deaths, severity of
crashes, and property damage . Eligible program
areas include reducing impaired driving, reducing
speeding, encouraging the use of occupant protec-
tion, improving motorcycle safety, and improving
bicycle and pedestrian safety. Examples of bicycle
and pedestrian safety programs funded by Section
402 are comprehensive school-based pedestrian
and bike safety education programs, helmet distri-
bution programs, pedestrian safety programs for
older adults, and general community information
and awareness programs .
117 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
actual trail construction, other eligible costs include
bridge and culvert repair, intersection and crossing
improvements, restrooms, trailheads, storm
drainage, trail signs, landscaping, and even trail
resurfacing and overlays.
■https://iowadot.gov/systems_
planning/grant-programs/
federal-and-state-recreational-trails
Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF)
The goal of the LWCF is the creation and mainte-
nance of high quality recreation resources through
the acquisition and development of public outdoor
recreation areas and facilities. The program, oper-
ated by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources,
requires a 50 percent match from the project
sponsor. After the funding is awarded and the
project is completed, the local agency receives a
reimbursement of 50 percent of the actual project
costs .
■http://www.iowadnr.gov/
About-DNR/Grants-Other-Funding/
Land-Water-Conservation-Fund
Revitalize Iowa’s Sound Economy
(RISE) Program
The RISE Program promotes economic development
through the establishment, construction, improve-
ment, and maintenance of roads and streets that
inject money into the local and state economies
and support economic growth . Bicycle projects
associated with roadway resurfacing, rehabilita-
tion, modernization, upgrading reconstruction, and
initial construction are eligible for funding through
the program . Bicycle trails, sidepaths, and wide side-
walks are not eligible for RISE funding except when
replacing facilities already in service and affected by
or as an integral part of a roadway project.
■https://iowadot.gov/systems_
planning/grant-programs/
revitalize-iowa-s-sound-economy-rise-program
TIGER Discretionary Grants Program
The US DOT’s Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery (TIGER) Discretionary Grants
Program was created as part of the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 with the
purpose of funding road, rail, transit and port
projects that achieve critical national objectives,
including livability, economic competitiveness, envi-
ronmental sustainability, and safety. Forty projects
were awarded funding in 2016 for a combined total
of nearly $500M, and fifteen of the forty projects
directly benefit bicycling through the provision
of dedicated and often protected bicycle facili-
ties . Examples include a $21M in complete streets
projects in Mobile, Alabama, $22M in bridge recon-
struction and rehabilitation in Des Moines, Iowa, and
$40M in roadway reconstruction and multi-modal
improvements in Flint, Michigan that will occur in
tandem with water transmission line replacement .
■https://www.transportation.gov/tiger
National Recreational Trails (NRT)
Program
The Iowa DOT maintains and awards federal funding
through the National Recreational Trails (NTP)
Program . The program was originally established
as part of the Inter-modal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act (ISTEA) in 1991 and has been incorpo-
rated into all subsequent transportation bills, even
if under different titles. Trail projects can include
hiking and walking, bicycling, cross-country skiing,
snowmobiling, horseback riding, canoeing, and off-
highway vehicles .
■ https://iowadot.gov/systems_
planning/grant-programs/
federal-and-state-recreational-trails
State Recreational Trails Program
Similar in scope and purpose to the NRT Program,
the State Recreational Trails Program uses funding
collected within the State of Iowa to support local
trail projects . In addition to land acquisition and
IMPLEMENTATION 118
programs that target the city’s underserved,
minority, and low-income residents .
Local Option Sales Tax
A Local Option Sales Tax is a special-purpose tax
implemented and levied at the city or county level .
A local option sales tax is often used as a means
of raising funds for specific local or area projects,
such as improving area streets and roads, or refur-
bishing a community’s downtown area . Special
Improvement Districts are often created to define
a sales tax area and administer the collection and
expenditures of generated tax.
General Obligation Bond
General obligation bonds offer local agencies the
opportunity to acquire necessary finances for
capital improvements and remit payment over time .
These general obligation bonds are among the most
common form of capital project financing and can
cover everything from stormwater and sanitary
sewers to streets, sidewalks, and trails . General obli-
gation bonds require majority approval of a popular
vote for passage.
Private Funding
Community Foundations
Community and corporate foundations can play
an important role in funding bicycle and pedes-
trian infrastructure and programs. There is growing
evidence highlighting the connection between the
built environment and community health outcomes,
and health foundations throughout the country
have joined environmental foundations to support
infrastructure projects that increase opportunities
for walking, bicycling and physical activity. National
foundations like the Surdna Foundation and the
Robert Woods Johnson Foundation have funded
initiatives to reduce obesity, increase physical
activity, and achieve other positive health-related
outcomes. Locally, the Community Foundation of
Johnson County has awarded grants to Bicyclists of
Iowa City (2014-2015) for bike rodeo support and to
The Children’s Charity (2012-2013) for their Bikes for
Community Attraction & Tourism (CAT)
As part of the IEDA’s Enhance Iowa Program, the CAT
fund assists communities in the development and
creation of attraction and tourism facilities, recre -
ational trails, heritage attractions, museums, and
recreational centers . Eligible projects include land
acquisition, construction, major renovations, site
development, and recreational trails . In 2011, Iowa
City received $1.6M in CAT funding for the develop -
ment of Terry Trueblood Recreation Area.
■https://www.iowaeconomicdevelopment.com/
Enhance
Local Funding Sources
While external funding sources for bicycle and
pedestrian projects and programs continue to be in
short supply and high demand, local funds can often
be the most reliable funding source for projects or
for development of an encouragement or education
program. In addition, local funding is often required
as match for external funding sources. With this in
mind, it is imperative that Iowa City explore, iden-
tify, and pursue one or more of these local funding
strategies as a means of implementing the plan.
Capital Improvement Plan Set-Aside
As with most cities, Iowa City has limited funds with
which to implement bicycle projects and programs .
The City’s current Complete Streets and Traffic
Calming set-asides support bicycle-related projects
within the larger framework of multi-modal trans-
portation enhancements, but will likely not provide
the funds needed to expedite the plan in a timely
and impactful manner. By creating a dedicated set-
aside in the CIP or increasing the Complete Streets
line item, the City can focus, prioritize, and plan for
capital expenditures for trails, on-street bikeways,
and other projects that improve conditions for
bicycling . This set-aside may also be used as a local
match for external funding sources, or as contribu-
tory towards bicycle elements of larger projects.
The City should also create a dedicated set-aside in
the general fund budget for equity-related bicycle
119 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
responsibilities, develop funding projections, and
provide the budget for long-term sustainability of
the system . Maintenance can be separated into
two categories: routine maintenance and remedial
maintenance .
Routine Maintenance
Routine maintenance refers to the regularly-
scheduled and day-to-day activities to keep the
greenways, trails, sidewalks, and on-street bikeways
in a functional and orderly condition. These activi-
ties, which can be incorporated in normal routine
maintenance by operations staff, include trash and
debris removal, landscaping, weed and dust control,
trail and street sweeping, snow removal, shoulder
mowing, and tree and shrub trimming . Spot main-
tenance such as sealing cracks, spot replacement
of small sections of sidewalk, filling potholes, and
replacing damaged or worn signs also fall under this
category .
Remedial Maintenance
Remedial maintenance refers to the correcting
of significant facility defects and the repairing,
replacing and restoring of major facility components.
Remedial maintenance activities include periodic
repairs like crack sealing or micro surfacing asphalt
pavement; restriping of bike lanes; replacement
of wayfinding and other signs; repainting, replace-
ment of trail amenities and furnishings (benches,
bike racks, lighting, etc .); and more substantial proj-
ects like hillside stabilization, bridge replacement,
trail or street surface repaving; and trail repairs due
to washout and flooding. Pavement markings and
striping maintenance will depend on anticipated
and actual product lifecycle, which can range from
one to ten years, depending on material type . Minor
remedial maintenance for trails and greenways can
be completed on a five to ten-year cycle, while larger
projects should be budgeted on an as-needed or
anticipated basis .
Kids program . In addition to the well-documented
health benefits, investments in bicycle facilities
and the bicycling economy can generate a signifi-
cant economic return for the community and its
investors .
People for Bikes Community Grants
Program
People for Bikes, formerly known as Bikes Belong,
is a national organization working to make bicy-
cling better throughout the United States through
programs and advocacy work. People for Bikes
has funded numerous infrastructure projects and
education and encouragement programs since it
first launched in 1999, including six projects in the
State of Iowa. These include the IBC’s economic
impact study of bicycling across the state, paving
assistance on the Raccoon River Valley Trail, and
trail project in the City of Asbury. While these are
small steps to improve bicycling, they are steps in
the right direction .
■http://www.peopleforbikes.org/
get-local#state-IA
Private and Corporate Donations
Private donations and corporate gifts can be
accepted by the city to support capital projects and
programs . Many individuals and corporations see
the value of a bicycle-friendly environment, not just
as an asset to the community as a whole, but as an
attractive amenity that can support the quality of
life for their employees as well.
Ongoing Maintenance and
Operations
Bicycle facility maintenance is important to the
overall quality and condition of the network and
supports safe and comfortable travel. Different
facility types require different maintenance activi-
ties, from trail sweeping and snow clearance to
bike lane restriping and sign replacement . Iowa
City should develop a maintenance schedule
and program to delegate maintenance roles and
IMPLEMENTATION 120
Maintenance Cost Estimates
Maintenance costs vary depending on the quality
and durability of materials, expected lifecycle, use
and wear, climate, weather, and other external
factors. Conservative planning-level maintenance
cost estimates are provided below in Table 11 to
assist in the development of maintenance budgets
and resource allocation . These are conservative esti-
mates based upon the best information available at
the time of this plan. They should be used as a guide
for allocation of resources and should be refined as
Iowa City gains more experience with maintaining
various types of bicycle facilities. These costs do
not include time and staff. As the city’s bikeway
network continues to expand, Iowa City should plan
to devote additional time and staff labor to support
maintenance of trails and on-street facilities.
Network Stewardship and
Enhancement
An important element of on-going maintenance
activities is stewardship, which refers to the long-
term care and oversight of Iowa City’s active
transportation network as a resource that adds
value to the community and enhances the quality
of life for citizens of the region. The trail and bicycle
network will require active stewardship by those
who operate the facilities (and those who benefit
from it) to ensure this valuable recreation and trans-
portation infrastructure can provide a high level of
service and a quality user experience for Iowa City
residents and visitors . This will require coordination
among all agencies involved in the care and main-
tenance of the trails, bikeways, sidewalks, and their
surroundings; protection of these resources from
external factors that may reduce their value and
utility; and encouragement of community participa-
tion in the upkeep and enhancement of the network
as a valuable community asset . Community partici-
pation through Adopt-A-Trail and Adopt-A-Street
programs, annual trash cleanup events, and educa-
tional programming activities along trails and
greenways can heighten community awareness of
bicycling facilities as valuable community assets.
Bicyclists of Iowa City, Think Bicycles of Johnson
County, the Johnson County Public Health, and
other local agencies and organizations have over-
lapping missions and audiences likely to engage in
stewardship activities .
Facility Type Annualized
Cost Per Mile
Typical Maintenance Tasks
Shared-Use Path $10,000 Sweeping, trash removal, mowing, weed abatement, snow
removal, crack seal, sign repair .
Sidepath $2,500 Sweeping, trash removal, mowing, weed abatement, snow
removal, crack seal, sign repair .
Separated/Protected
Bike Lanes
$4,000 Debris removal/sweeping, repainting stripes and stencils,
sign replacement, replacing damaged barriers .
Bike Lane/Advisory Bike
Lane
$2,500 Repainting stripes and stencils, debris removal/sweeping,
snow removal, signage replacement as needed .
Bicycle Boulevard $1,500 Sign and shared lane marking stencil replacement as needed .
Shared Connecting
Route
$1,000 Sign and shared lane marking stencil replacement as needed .
Table 11. Planning-Level Maintenance Costs
121 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Additional performance measures that will be
useful for implementation evaluation purposes but
not essential to achieving Gold include:
■Bicycle counts collected through an annual
bicycle count program
■Miles of low-stress bikeways, total and as a
percentage of all bikeways
■Network coverage: land area, population, and
underserved populations within 1/2 mile of a
bicycle facility
■Number of education and encouragement
programs, classes, rides, and events
■Number of Bicycle Friendly Businesses
■Number, type, and distribution of bicycle parking
facilities/spaces
■Number of bicycle parking facilities/spaces at
transit stops and centers
■Percentage of bikeway miles annually inspected
for maintenance needs
■Percentage of bikeway miles improved through
maintenance activities (striping, pothole filling,
etc .)
Plan Monitoring and Evaluation
It will be critical to periodically monitor and eval-
uate implementation efforts to document trends
and outcomes, identify implementation strengths
and weaknesses, and realign annual action plans to
maximize the benefit of Iowa City’s investment in
plan-related projects and programs . Programs like
annual bicycle counts, bicycle-related crash anal-
yses, and an annual implementation report card,
all of which are described in the previous chapter,
will highlight efforts in Iowa City to support bicycling
and shed light on areas in need of improvement.
Additional metrics relating to the LAB’s Building
Blocks of a BFC and to the plan’s goals and objec-
tives will help Iowa City and its community partners
determine the impact of the expanding bicycle
network and bicycle-related programming . Baseline
data for many of these metrics will be collected as
the city applied for BFC designation in August 2017.
Table 12 on the following page provides a list of
performance measures and associated Gold-Level
BFC Targets. Reaching all targets identified below
is not necessary to achieve Gold; there is flexibility
with the rating system, with importance given to key
outcomes supported by a diverse and comprehen-
sive approach .
IMPLEMENTATION 122
Performance Measures LAB Gold-Level Target
Key Outcomes
Ridership: people commuting by bicycle 5 .5%
Crashes per 10k daily commuters 100
Fatalities per 10k daily commuters 0 .6
Engineering
Bike access to public transportation Very good
Total bicycle network mileage to total road mileage 30%
Arterial streets with bike lanes 65%
Education
Public education outreach Very good
Annual offering of adult bicycling skills classes At least two
Percent of primary and secondary schools offering bicycle education 50%
Encouragement
Active bike clubs & signature events Yes
Bike month and bike to work events Very good
Active bicycle advisory committee Yes
Active advocacy group Yes
Recreational facilities like bike parks and velodromes Very likely
Enforcement
Law enforcement/bicycling liaison yes
Bicycle-friendly laws/ordinances in place yes
Evaluation
Bike program staff per population 1 staff person per 32,000
Bike plan is current and being implemented yes
Table 12. Implementation Performance Measures
123 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Appendix A
BFC Feedback Report
1
BFC Spring 2013
BICYCLE FRIENDLY COMMUNITY
FEEDBACK REPORT
Iowa City, IA
Photo: Trek
The League of American Bicyclists has designated Iowa
City as a Bicycle Friendly Community at the Silver level,
because Iowa City exhibits a strong commitment to cycling.
The reviewers felt that notable steps are being taken to
address the needs of current bicyclists and to encourage
other residents to become regular cyclists as well.
Particular highlights were the Think Bicycles Coalition,
the large shared-use path network, the Light the Night
Program, the thriving local bicycle culture, and Bike to
Work Week.
Reviewers were very pleased to see the current efforts and
dedication to make Iowa City a great place for cyclists.
Below, reviewers provided key recommendations to further
promote bicycling in Iowa City and a menu of additional
pro-cycling measures that can be implemented in the short
and long term. We strongly encourage you to use this
feedback to build on your momentum and improve your
community for bicyclists. There may also be initiatives,
programs, and facilities that are not mentioned here that
would benefit your bicycling culture, so please continue to
try new things to increase your ridership, safety, and
awareness!
To learn more about what funds are available for bicycle
projects, use Advocacy Advance’s interactive Find it, Fund it
tool to search for eligible funding programs by bike/ped
project type or review the same information as a PDF here.
The key measures Iowa City should take to improve
cycling:
Have your Bicycle Advisory Committee meet monthly to
build public support for bicycle improvements and to
support the implementation of the recommendations
below.
Since arterial and collector roads are the backbone of
every transportation network, it is essential to provide
designated bicycle facilities along these roads and calm
traffic speeds to allow bicyclists of all skill levels to reach
their destinations quickly and safely. Particularly Gilbert
Street and Burlington Street are in need of safe and
comfortable bicycle facilities, especially the Burlington
Street bridge. On roads with posted speed limits of more
than 35 mph, it is recommended to provide protected
bicycle infrastructure, such as cycle tracks or buffered
bike lanes.
It is essential to make both motorists and cyclists aware
of their rights and responsibilities on the road. Continue
to expand your public education campaign promoting
the share the road message. Take advantage of your local
bicycle groups for content development and manpower.
See the excellent “Look” campaign in New York City or
the “Don’t be a Road Hog” campaign in Colorado.
Ask police officers to use targeted information and
enforcement to encourage motorists and cyclists to
3
share the road safely. This could be in the form of a
brochure or tip card explaining each user’s rights and
responsibilities. Have information material available in
Spanish, if applicable.
Continue to encourage the University of Iowa to
promote cycling and to educate students on safe cycling
practices. Many colleges and universities have embraced
the growing enthusiasm for more bicycle-friendly
campuses by incorporating bike share programs, bike
co-ops, bicycling education classes and policies to
promote bicycling as a preferred means of
transportation. The community could potentially profit
as well: Communities near a Bicycle Friendly University
such as Stanford or University of California at Davis
have a very high number of regular bicyclists (as many
students bike to campus, shops and restaurants), less
congestion around campus, safer streets and university-
hosted public bicycle events, programs and classes.
Invite a police officer to become an active member of the
Bicycle Advisory Committee and appoint a law-
enforcement point person to interact with the cyclists.
This will actively facilitate stronger connections between
bicycle advocates, the wider bicycling community and
law enforcement, which will improve road safety for all
users, and improve fair enforcement of motorist and
cyclist infractions.
Benefits of Further Improving Iowa City for
Cycling
Further increasing bicycle use can improve the environment by
reducing the impact on residents of pollution and noise, limiting
greenhouse gases, and improving the quality of public spaces; Reduce
congestion by shifting short trips (the majority of trips in cities) out
of cars. This will also make cities more accessible for public transport,
walking, essential car travel, emergency services, and deliveries; Save
lives by creating safer conditions for bicyclists and as a direct
consequence improve the safety of all other road users. Research
shows that increasing the number of bicyclists on the street improves
bicycle safety; Increase opportunities for residents of all ages to
participate socially and economically in the community, regardless of
income or ability.
Greater choice of travel modes also increases independence, especially
among seniors and children; Boost the economy by creating a
community that is an attractive destination for new residents, tourists
and businesses; Enhance recreational opportunities, especially
for children, and further contribute to the quality of life in the
community; Save city funds by increasing the efficient use of public
space, reducing the need for costly new road infrastructure, preventing
crashes, improving the health of the community, and increasing the
use of public transport; Enhance public safety and security by
increasing the number of “eyes on the street” and providing more
options for movement in the event of emergencies, natural disasters,
and major public events; Improve the health and well being of
the population by promoting routine physical activity.
4
Menu of additional recommendations to further promote
bicycling:
Engineering
Low hanging fruit and fast results
Develop and implement streetscape design guidelines
that foster a pleasant and comfortable environment for
pedestrians and cyclists. Beautiful streetscaping has also
shown to increase community livability and pride,
reduce crime and increase property values.
Offer more ongoing training opportunities on
accommodating bicyclists for engineering and planning
staff.
Consider passing an ordinance or policy that would
require larger employers to provide shower facilities and
other end-of-trip amenities.
Increase the amount of high quality bicycle parking at
popular destinations such as major transit stops. Also
consider adding some artistic bike racks to enhance the
sense of place of your community.
Paint a center stripe on popular shared-use paths to
mitigate conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists.
Join NACTO and participate in the Cities for Cycling
project. Cities for Cycling aims to catalog, promote and
implement the world’s best bicycle transportation
practices in American municipalities.
Long Term Goals
Consider a form-based code to allow for flexible land
uses and to provide a comfortable and convenient built
environment for pedestrians and cyclists.
Develop solutions to physical barriers in order to
provide convenient bicycle access to all parts of the
community.
Continue to expand the bike network and to increase
network connectivity through the use of different types
of bike lanes, cycle tracks and shared lane arrows. On-
street improvements coupled with the expansion of the
off-street system will encourage more people to cycle
and will improve safety. Ensure smooth transitions for
bicyclists between the trail network and the street
network. These improvements will also increase the
effectiveness of encouragement efforts by providing a
broader range of facility choices for users of various
abilities and comfort levels.
Ensure that all bicycle facilities conform to current best
practices and guidelines – such as the NACTO Urban
Bikeway Design Guide, 2012 AASHTO Guide for the
5
Development of Bicycle Facilities and your DOT’s own
guidelines.
Develop a system of bicycle boulevards, utilizing quiet
neighborhood streets, that creates an attractive,
convenient, and comfortable cycling environment
welcoming to cyclists of all ages and skill levels. Learn
how to do it at
http://www.ibpi.usp.pdx.edu/guidebook.php. Use the
Bicycle Boulevards section of the NACTO Urban
Bikeway Design Guide for design guidelines.
Make intersections safer and more comfortable for
cyclists. Include elements such as color, signage,
medians, signal detection, and pavement markings. The
level of treatment required for bicyclists at an
intersection will depend on the bicycle facility type used,
whether bicycle facilities are intersecting, the adjacent
street function and land use. See the NACTO design
guidelines and the 2012 AASHTO Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities for recommended
intersection treatments.
Education
Low hanging fruit and fast results
Consider creating a Bicycle Ambassador program. Have
Ambassadors attend community and private events
year-round to talk to residents and visitors of all ages
about bicycling and to give bicycle safety
demonstrations. They can also offer bike commuting
presentations for area businesses.
Offer Cycling Skills classes, Traffic Skills 101 classes and
bike commuter classes frequently or encourage a local
bicycle advocacy group or shop to do so. Ideally, the
instruction should incorporate a classroom portion as
well as on-road training. The classroom portion of
Traffic Skills 101 is now available online as well. For
more information visit:
www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/
Host a Traffic Skills 101 or bike commuter course for
engineers and planners to better understand cyclists’
needs. For more information visit:
www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/
Long Term Goals
Bicycle-safety education should be a routine part of
public education, and schools and the surrounding
neighborhoods should be particularly safe and
convenient for biking. Work with your Bicycle Advisory
Committee, local bicycle groups or interested parents to
develop and implement a Safe Routes to School or
equivalent program that emphasize bicycling for all
middle schools, and expand the existing programs to all
elementary schools and high schools. For more
information, see the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration's Safe Routes To School Toolkit or visit
www.saferoutesinfo.org.
6
Start a bicyclist ticket diversion program. Road users
given a citation are offered an opportunity to waive fees
for violations by attending a bicycling education course.
This course should include a classroom and on-road
component. See what Pima County and San Diego
County have done.
Expand the education program for professional drivers
to include City staff, taxi cab drivers and school bus
operators. See San Francisco’s Frequent Driver
Education.
Increase your efforts to ensure your bicycle education
programs reach traditionally underserved populations,
particularly seniors, women, minorities, adult non-
English speakers and the disabled.
Encouragement
Low hanging fruit and fast results
Host, sponsor and/or encourage a greater variety of
social and family-friendly bicycle-themed community
events year-round, such as a bike movie festival, a 4th of
July bike parade, an “increase-your-appetite”
Thanksgiving community ride, a dress-like-Santa
community ride before Christmas, a Halloween bike
decoration competition, a bike to the arts event, etc.
Work closely with local bicycle groups, bike shops and
schools. Provide appropriate safety measures such as
road closures or police escorts.
Consider offering a ‘Summer Streets’ type event, closing
off a major corridor to auto traffic and offering the space
to cyclists, pedestrians and group exercise events.
Encourage more local public agencies, businesses and
organizations to promote cycling to the workplace and to
seek recognition through the free Bicycle Friendly
Business program. Businesses will profit from a
healthier, happier and more productive workforce while
the community would profit from less congestion, better
air quality, public bike parking in prime locations
provided by businesses, new and powerful partners in
advocating for bike infrastructure and programs on the
local, state and federal level, and business-sponsored
public bike events or classes. Your community’s
government should be the model employer for the rest
of the community.
Long Term Goals
Recreational bicycling can be promoted through bicycle
amenities such as a mountain bike park, a cyclocross
course or a pump track. Ensure that the facilities are
accessible by bicycle, so that there is no need to drive to
ride.
Develop a series of short (2-5 mi.) (themed) loop rides
around the community and provide appropriate way-
finding signage. Integrate these rides into local bike
maps.
7
Consider launching a bike share system that is open to
the public. Bike sharing is a convenient, cost effective,
and healthy way of encouraging locals and visitors to
make short trips by bike and to bridge the “last mile”
between public transit and destinations. See what is
being done across the country at
http://nacto.org/bikeshare/
Enforcement
Low hanging fruit and fast results
Have police officers distribute helmets and bike locks (or
coupons to the local bike shop for each item) in addition
to lights to encourage all types of cyclists to ride more
safely, discourage bike theft and remove the barriers to
attaining these essential bike accessories.
Ask police officers to target both motorist and cyclist
infractions to ensure that laws are being followed by all
road users. Ensure that bicycle/car crashes are
investigated thoroughly and that citations are given
fairly.
Enforcement practices could also include positive
enforcement ticketing. Police officers could team up
with local stores to reward safe cycling practices by
handing out gift certificates to cyclists who are “caught”
following the law.
Increase the number of officers that patrol streets on
bikes, as it gives officers a better understanding of the
conditions for cyclists. Also ensure that secluded off
road paths are regularly patrolled to improve personal
safety and encourage more people to take advantage of
this amenity.
Pass more laws that protect cyclists, e.g., implement
penalties for motor vehicle users that ‘door’ cyclists, ban
cell phone use while driving, specifically protect all
vulnerable road users, and formalize a legal passing
distance of 3 feet.
Evaluation/Planning
Low hanging fruit and fast results
Ensure that there is dedicated funding for the
implementation of the bicycle master plan.
Routinely conduct pre/post evaluations of bicycle-
related projects that study the change in use, car speed
and crash numbers. This data will be valuable to build
public and political support for future bicycle-related
projects.
Adopt a target level of bicycle use (e.g. percent of trips)
to be achieved within a specific timeframe, and ensure
data collection necessary to monitor progress.
8
Expand efforts to evaluate bicycle crash statistics and
produce a specific plan to reduce the number of crashes
in the community. Available tools include Intersection
Magic and the Pedestrian and Bicyclist Crash Analysis
Tool. See the report Bicyclist Fatalities and Serious
Injuries in New York City 1996-2005
Consider measuring the Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS)
on community roads and at intersections, to be able to
identify the most appropriate routes for inclusion in the
community bicycle network, determine weak links and
hazards, prioritize sites needing improvement, and
evaluate alternate treatments for improving bike-
friendliness of a roadway or intersection:
http://www.bikelib.org/bike-planning/bicycle-level-of-
service/ (roads) and
http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/library/details.cfm?id=44
25 (intersections).
Consider individualized marketing to identify and
support current and potential bike commuters in your
community. See what Bellingham, WA is doing:
www.whatcomsmarttrips.org
Consider conducting an economic impact study on
bicycling in your community. Read about what Portland,
OR has done.
Establish a mechanism that ensures that bicycle
facilities and programs are implemented in traditionally
underserved neighborhoods.
For more ideas and best practices please visit the
Bicycle Friendly Community Resource Page.
A9 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Appendix B
Prioritization and Cost Estimates
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B1
Table 1. Corridor Prioritization
Corridor
Priority LevelPriority ScoreGap ClosureSafetyDemographic EquityConnections to Existing FacilitiesNearby Parks and SchoolsAll-Ages FacilityGilbert Corridor High 90 25 25 15 12 8 5
Central Corridor High 89 25 25 12 12 9 6
Campus / Melrose Corridor High 86 17 25 15 15 6 8
Hwy 6 Corridor High 78 25 15 9 12 7 10
Clinton Corridor High 73 17 20 15 12 5 4
College Corridor High 72 25 15 12 6 6 8
Governor Corridor High 66 17 10 15 12 6 6
Iowa River Trail Corridor High 65 0 15 15 15 10 10
Mormon Trek Corridor High 64 8 15 12 15 6 8
1st Avenue Corridor High 62 25 5 6 9 9 8
Madison Corridor High 61 17 20 6 12 2 4
Hwy 1 Sidepath High 60 25 10 6 6 5 8
Muscatine Corridor High 58 17 15 6 6 10 4
Dodge Corridor High 57 17 0 15 12 7 6
Kirkwood Corridor Medium 57 25 5 6 9 8 4
Greenwood/Myrtle Corridor Medium 57 17 15 6 9 6 4
Melrose Sidepath Medium 56 17 10 9 9 3 8
Hollywood Corridor Medium 55 17 10 9 6 5 8
Benton Corridor Medium 54 17 15 3 9 4 6
South Crosstown Corridor Medium 54 8 10 15 6 7 8
Washington Bikeway Medium 54 17 15 9 6 1 6
McCollister Corridor Medium 52 25 0 3 12 4 8
Westminster / Dover Corridor Medium 52 17 10 3 9 5 8
Wetherby Corridor Medium 50 8 10 9 9 6 8
B2 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Corridor
Priority LevelPriority ScoreGap ClosureSafetyDemographic EquityConnections to Existing FacilitiesNearby Parks and SchoolsAll-Ages FacilityWillow Creek Trail Corridor Medium 50 8 10 9 9 4 10
Church Corridor Medium 49 17 5 9 6 4 8
Riverside Drive Sidepath Medium 49 17 10 3 6 5 8
East Court Sidepath Medium 48 17 10 3 6 4 8
Davenport Corridor Medium 47 8 10 9 6 6 8
Normandy Sidepath Medium 46 25 0 3 6 4 8
Court Corridor Medium 44 8 10 12 3 3 8
Rochester Corridor Medium 41 17 0 6 6 8 4
Huntington Trail Extension Medium 39 17 0 3 6 3 10
Ridgewood / Friendship Corridor Medium 38 8 5 6 3 8 8
Windsor Ridge Trail Extension Medium 37 17 0 3 6 1 10
Sunset Corridor Medium 36 17 0 6 6 3 4
7th Avenue Corridor Low 35 8 10 3 0 6 8
Court Hill Trail Low 35 0 5 3 9 8 10
River to River Corridor Low 35 8 0 6 9 4 8
Gilbert Sidepath Low 34 17 0 0 6 3 8
Foster Sidepath Low 33 17 0 0 6 2 8
Newton Road Corridor Low 33 8 5 3 9 3 5
Rohret Corridor Low 33 8 0 12 6 3 4
Iowa River Trail West Extension, Phase 1 Low 31 8 0 3 6 4 10
Clear Creek Trail Low 30 0 0 6 12 2 10
Emerald Corridor Low 30 8 5 3 3 3 8
Ridge / Broadway Corridor Low 30 8 0 9 3 2 8
Southeast Corridor Low 30 8 0 3 6 5 8
Highland Corridor Low 29 8 5 0 3 5 8
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B3
Corridor
Priority LevelPriority ScoreGap ClosureSafetyDemographic EquityConnections to Existing FacilitiesNearby Parks and SchoolsAll-Ages FacilitySummit Corridor Low 29 8 0 6 3 4 8
Arlington Corridor Low 28 8 0 3 6 3 8
Park Road Corridor Low 28 8 0 3 9 4 4
Taft Corridor Low 28 8 0 3 6 3 8
Orchard Sidepath Low 27 0 10 3 3 3 8
Foster Corridor Low 26 8 0 6 3 1 8
Hickory Hill Corridor Low 26 8 0 0 6 4 8
Camp Cardinal Corridor Low 25 8 0 6 6 1 4
Sycamore - Sand Connector Low 23 8 0 0 6 1 8
Oakcrest Corridor Low 22 0 0 6 3 5 8
Whispering Meadow / Pinto Connector
Route
Low 22 8 0 6 6 2 0
Kennedy Neighborhood Connector Low 21 8 0 6 6 1 0
Prairie Du Chien Corridor Corridor Low 21 8 0 6 6 1 0
Keokuk Corridor Low 20 8 0 0 3 5 4
McCollister to Sycamore Greenway Trail Low 19 0 0 0 6 3 10
Duck Creek Neighborhood Connector Low 18 8 0 6 3 1 0
Iowa River Trail West Extension, Phase 2 Low 18 0 0 0 6 2 10
College - Jefferson Link Low 17 0 0 3 0 4 10
3rd Avenue Corridor Low 16 0 0 0 3 5 8
Mackinaw / Manitou Neighborhood
Connector
Low 15 8 0 0 6 1 0
Union / Fairmeadows Neighborhood
Connector
Low 15 0 5 6 0 4 0
Windsor Ridge Trail Low 15 0 0 3 0 2 10
Lower West Branch Corridor Low 15 0 0 3 6 2 4
B4 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Corridor
Priority LevelPriority ScoreGap ClosureSafetyDemographic EquityConnections to Existing FacilitiesNearby Parks and SchoolsAll-Ages FacilityBurns Neighborhood Connector Low 14 0 0 9 3 2 0
Wetherby Park Trail Extension Low 14 0 0 0 0 4 10
Heinz Corridor Low 12 0 0 0 3 1 8
Capitol Neighborhood Connector Low 10 0 0 6 3 1 0
Longfellow Neighborhood Connector Low 7 0 0 3 0 4 0
Sandusky Neighborhood Connector Low 7 0 0 0 0 3 4
Covered Wagon Neighborhood Connector Low 6 0 0 0 3 3 0
Ferson Neighborhood Connector Low 5 0 0 3 0 2 0
Deforest Neighborhood Connector Low 3 0 0 0 0 3 0
B5 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Benton Corridor
Myrtle Bicycle Boulevard Riverside to
Greenwood
0.25 $20,180 Imm.
Greenwood Bicycle Boulevard Myrtle to Benton 0.39 $31,225 Imm.
Benton Bike Lanes Greenwood to Sunset 0.47 $44,019 Near
Benton Bike Lanes Sunset to Mormon Trek 0.77 $71,858 Near
Benton Crossing Corridor
Benton Bike Lanes Orchard to Greenwood Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
0.46 Unsch.
Benton Bike Lane (One Way)Gilbert to Dubuque 0.08 $4,386 Long
Benton Bike Lane (One Way)Dubuque to Clinton 0.08 $8,333 Long
Benton Bike Lanes Clinton to Capitol 0.08 $12,212 Long
Benton Bike Lanes Capitol to Riverside 0.21 $22,229 Long
Benton Bike Lane (One Way)Riverside to Orchard Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
0.07 Unsch.
Camp Cardinal Corridor
Camp Cardinal Bike Lanes Melrose to Kennedy Wide shoulders in
place. Add mark-
ings and signs.
1.11 $19,036 Imm.
Campus / Melrose Corridor
Burlington Cycle Track Madison to Iowa River
Bridge
0.10 $142,026 Near
Burlington St Bridge Buffered
Bike Lanes
East end of bridge to
Riverside Drive
Road diet, remove
outermost lanes
0.12 $18,329 Near
Grand Climbing Lane Riverside to
Roundabout
Lane diet for WB
climbing lane
0.19 $10,598 Near
Byington Bike Lane (One Way)Grand to Melrose Lane diet on
one-way road
0.12 $6,445 Near
Grand Shared Connecting
Route
Melrose to Roundabout 0.13 $2,163 Near
Melrose Bike Lanes Olive to Sunset 0.37 $34,805 Long
Melrose Bike Lanes Sunset to Emerald 0.26 $24,014 Long
Table 2. Principal Bikeway Cost Estimates and Phasing
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B6
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Melrose Bike Lanes Emerald to Hawkeye
Park Rd
Lane diet 0.99 $149,839 Long
Melrose Bike Lanes Hawkeye Park Rd to
Camp Cardinal
0.56 $52,431 Long
Central Corridor
Market Bike Lanes Clapp to Union 0.11 $9,789 Near
Clapp Shared Connecting
Route
Rochester to Jefferson 0.13 $2,162 Near
Jefferson Buffered Bike Lane
(One Way)
Clinton to Madison 0.16 $9,673 Near
Jefferson Buffered Bike Lane
(One Way)
Clapp to Madison 0.75 $45,300 Near
Market Buffered Bike Lane
(One Way)
Clapp to Governor 0.07 $4,247 Near
Market Buffered Bike Lane
(One Way)
Governor to Gilbert 0.38 $23,008 Near
Market Buffered Bike Lane
(One Way)
Gilbert to Madison 0.39 $23,572 Near
Jefferson / Glendale / Heather
path Bicycle Boulevard
Hwy 1 to Clapp Right-of-way
likely required for
Heather path
0.97 $77,897 Near
Washington Bicycle Boulevard Scott to Hwy 1 1.07 $86,112 Near
Clinton Corridor
Clinton Bike Lanes Benton to Kirkwood Programmed with
road diet
0.11 Imm.
Clinton Bike Lanes Church to Jefferson Programmed with
road diet
0.39 Imm.
Clinton Bike Lanes Jefferson to Burlington Programmed with
road diet
0.32 Imm.
Clinton Bike Lanes Burlington to Court Programmed with
road diet
0.09 Imm.
Clinton Bike Lanes Church to Harrison Programmed with
road diet
0.08 Imm.
Clinton Bike Lanes Harrison to RR S/O
Wright
Programmed with
road diet
0.15 Imm.
Clinton Bike Lanes RR to Benton Programmed with
road diet, parking
removal required
0.15 Imm.
B7 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Dodge Corridor
Dodge Buffered Bike Lane
(One Way)
Summit to Burlington 1.30 $78,546 Near
Dodge Bike Lanes Burlington to Bowery Parking removal
required
0.26 $27,067 Near
Dodge Bike Lanes Bowery to Kirkwood Road diet 0.32 $48,993 Near
Foster Corridor
Foster Bike Lanes Prairie Du Chien to
Dubuque
New road to city
standards
0.67 Unsch.
Governor Corridor
Governor Bike Lanes Burlington to Bowery Programmed
project, parking
removal required
0.26 Imm.
Governor Buffered Bike Lane
(One Way)
Brown to Burlington Programmed
project
0.85 Imm.
Dewey / Summit / Brown
Bicycle Boulevard
Dodge to Dodge 0.42 $33,716 Imm.
Keokuk Corridor
Keokuk Bike Lanes Kirkwood to Highland Parking removal
required
0.24 $22,742 Near
Keokuk Shared Connecting
Route
Highland to Hwy 6 0.20 $3,408 Near
Keokuk Bike Lanes Hwy 6 to Sandusky 0.37 $56,730 Imm.
Kirkwood / Lower Muscatine Corridor
Dubuque Shared Connecting
Route
Benton to Kirkwood 0.14 $2,475 Near
Lower Muscatine Shared
Connecting Route
Fairmeadows to 1st Ave 0.31 $5,363 Near
Kirkwood Bike Lanes Dubuque to Clinton Road diet 0.08 $11,424 Near
Kirkwood Bike Lanes Lower Muscatine to
Clinton
0.91 $84,302 Near
Lower Muscatine Bike Lanes Sycamore to Kirkwood 0.26 $24,180 Near
Lower Muscatine Bike Lanes 1st Ave to Friendly Lane diet 0.45 $47,172 Near
Longfellow Underpass
Court / Grant / Longfellow
Shared Connecting Route
Ridgewood to Railroad
Underpass Trail
0.52 $8,918 Long
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B8
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Longfellow Tunnel Trail
Shared Use Path
Longfellow to Lower
Muscatine
Improvements
to visilibilty and
wayfinding
0.10 $113,240 Long
Madison Corridor
Madison Bike Lanes Iowa River Trail to
Market
0.11 $34,074 Imm.
Madison Bike Lanes Market to Court Programmed
project
0.48 Imm.
Madison Bike Lanes Court to Prentiss 0.15 $14,114 Imm.
McCollister Corridor
McCollister Protected Bike
Lanes
Gilbert to Sycamore New road to city
standards
0.85 Near
McCollister Protected Bike
Lanes
Hwy 6 to Gilbert New road to city
standards
1.68 Unsch.
McCollister Bike Lanes Gilbert to Old Highway
218
Lane diet 0.85 $90,390 Long
Mormon Trek Corridor
Mormon Trek Bike Lanes Melrose to Hwy 1 Road diet 1.72 Imm.
Mormon Trek Bike Lanes Hwy 1 to Old Highway
218
Lane diet 1.31 $139,070 Long
Mormon Trek Bike Lanes Hwy 6 to Melrose Lane diet 1.02 $155,496 Long
Muscatine Corridor
Evans Shared Connecting
Route
Iowa to Market 0.16 $2,668 Near
Muscatine Bike Lanes 1st Ave to Iowa 1.29 $120,413 Near
Muscatine Bike Lanes Scott to 1st Ave 0.58 $53,637 Unsch.
Muscatine Bike Lanes Scott to 1st Ave Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
0.41 Unsch.
American Legion Bike Lanes Taft to Scott Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
1.07 Near
B9 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Park Road Corridor
Park Road Bike Lanes Rocky Short to
Riverside
Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
0.61 Long
Iowa River Trail Bridge Shared
Use Path
Park / Rocky Shore to
Peninsula Park
0.10 $110,229 Long
Rochester Corridor
Prairie Du Chien Shared
Connecting Route
Linder to Dodge 1.02 $17,387 Long
Rochester Corridor
Rochester Bike Lanes 1st Ave to Mt Vernon Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
0.39 Long
Rochester Bike Lanes Mt Vernon to Scott 0.65 $60,532.10 Long
Rochester Bike Lanes Rochester Ct to Market Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
0.56 Long
Rochester Bike Lanes 1st Ave to Rochester Ct Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
0.51 Long
Herbert Hoover Bike Lanes Scott to Taft Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
1.10 Long
Rohret Road Corridor
Rohret Bike Lanes Lake Shore to Kansas Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
2.10 Unsch.
Taft Corridor
Taft Bike Lanes Herbert Hoover to 420 Widen road with
new construction
to meet city street
standards
3.00 Unsch.
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B10
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Washington Corridor
Washington Cycle Track Gilbert to Madison 0.39 $582,490 Long
Wetherby Bicycle Boulevard Corridor
Southgate - Iowa River Trail
Connector Shared Use Path
Gilbert to Iowa River
Trail
0.21 $241,562 Imm.
Southgate Bike Lanes Keokuk to Gilbert 0.44 $41,413 Imm.
Sandusky / Taylor Bicycle
Boulevard
Burns to Keokuk 0.52 $42,100 Imm.
Wetherby Bicycle Boulevard Hwy 6 to Wetherby
Park Trail
0.24 $19,457 Imm.
Lakeside Bicycle Boulevard Hwy 6 to Wetherby
Park Trail
0.80 $64,122 Imm.
Table 3. Secondary Bikeway Cost Estimates and Phasing
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
3rd Avenue Bicycle Boulevard
3rd Bicycle Boulevard G to J 0.22 $17,854 Long
3rd Bicycle Boulevard A to G 0.40 $31,935 Long
A St Bicycle Boulevard 3rd to 4th 0.07 $5,990 Long
4th Ave Bicycle Boulevard City High to A 0.18 $14,389 Long
7th Avenue Bicycle Boulevard
7th Bicycle Boulevard Rochester to F 0.92 $74,036 Long
Arlington Bicycle Boulevard
Chadwick Bicycle Boulevard Lower West Branch to
American Legion
0.20 $16,128 Long
Arlington Bicycle Boulevard Lower West Branch to
Court
0.29 $23,624 Long
Arlington Bike Lanes Court to American
Legion
0.71 $66,592 Long
Church Bicycle Boulevard
Church Bicycle Boulevard Governor to Clinton 0.60 $48,398 Near
College Bicycle Boulevard
College Bicycle Boulevard Morningside to Linn 1.20 $96,221 Imm.
Court Bicycle Boulevard
B11 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Court Bicycle Boulevard Gilbert to Madison 0.39 $31,379 Long
Davenport Bicycle Boulevard
Davenport Bicycle Boulevard Bloomington to Capitol 1.16 $93,648 Long
Emerald Bicycle Boulevard
Emerald Bicycle Boulevard Melrose to Benton 0.42 $33,554 Near
Highland Bicycle Boulevard
Highland Bicycle Boulevard Keokuk to Gilbert 0.45 $35,833 Long
Highland Bicycle Boulevard Sycamore/Lower
Muscatine to Keokuk
0.63 $50,841 Long
Hollywood Bicycle Boulevard
Hollywood Bicycle Boulevard Hwy 6 to W/O Taylor 1.12 $90,355 Long
Lower Branch Bike Lanes
Lower West Branch Bike
Lanes
Taft to Scott 1.12 $104,202 Long
Oakcrest Bicycle Boulevard
Woodside / Oakcrest / Koser
Bicycle Boulevard
Greenwood to Emerald
Connector Trail
0.90 $72,769 Long
Koser-Emerald Connector
Shared Use Path
Koser to Emerald 0.05 $54,079 Long
Ridge/Broadway Bicycle Boulevard
Ridge Road Bicycle Boulevard Highland to Brookwood 0.27 $21,378 Long
Ridge-Hwy 6 Connector
Shared Use Path
Ridge to Hwy 6 0.07 $80,794 Long
Broadway Bicycle Boulevard Hwy 6 to Sandusky 0.32 $25,621 Long
Ridgewood/Friendship Bicycle Boulevard
Friendship / Ridgewood
Bicycle Boulevard
Court to Court 1.71 $137,678 Long
Court St Sidepath Ridgewood to
Muscatine
0.05 $30,019 Long
River to River Bicycle Boulevard
River St Bicycle Boulevard Riverside to Woolf 0.52 $41,888 Near
Woolf Ave Bicycle Boulevard River to Newton 0.30 $24,425 Near
Rider / Dill / Black Springs
Bicycle Boulevard
Woolf to Rocky Shore 0.41 $32,934 Near
Sandusky Secondary Bikeway
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B12
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Sandusky Bikeway Keokuk to Future
Wetherby Park Trail
Connector
0.28 $4,842 Long
South Crosstown Bicycle Boulevard
Prentiss Bicycle Boulevard Gilbert to Madison 0.39 $31,319 Imm.
Bowery Bicycle Boulevard Summit to Gilbert 0.47 $37,773 Imm.
Sheridan Bicycle Boulevard 7th Ave to Summit 0.49 $39,664 Long
F / 5th / G Bicycle Boulevard 7th Ave to 3rd Ave 0.42 $33,903 Long
Southeast Bicycle Boulevard
J St Bicycle Boulevard 3rd Ave to 1st Ave 0.15 $11,909 Long
Bradford Bicycle Boulevard 1st Ave to Dover 0.42 $33,664 Long
Wayne / Village / Wellington
Bicycle Boulevard
Wellington to Dover 0.33 $26,257 Long
Wellington Bicycle Boulevard Scott to Dover 0.40 $32,463 Long
Summit Bicycle Boulevard
Summit Bicycle Boulevard College to Kirkwood 0.65 $52,386 Long
Sunset Bikeway
Sunset Bike Lanes Benton to Hwy 1 0.61 $57,119 Near
Westminster/Dover Bicycle Boulevard
Westminster / Teton Bicycle
Boulevard
Rochester to Court Hill
Trail
0.79 $63,604 Near
Court Hill Trail Extension
Shared Use Path
Westminster to
Friendship
0.12 $134,342 Near
Dover / Meadow Bicycle
Boulevard
Friendship to Bradford 0.57 $45,574 Near
B13 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
7th / Winston Neighborhood Connector
7th / Winston Neighborhood
Connector
Woodridge to
Rochester
0.36 $6,229 Long
Burns Neighborhood Connector
Burns Neighborhood
Connector
Sycamore to Taylor 0.34 $5,889 Long
Capitol Neighborhood Connector
Capitol Neighborhood
Connector
Davenport to Market 0.15 $2,605 Near
Covered Wagon Neighborhood Connector
Covered Wagon
Neighborhood Connector
Future Wetherby Park
Trail Connector to
McCollister
0.24 $4,133 Long
Deforest Neighborhood Connector
Deforest Neighborhood
Connector
Sycamore to Ridge 0.37 $6,370 Long
Duck Creek Neighborhood Connector
Duck Creek Neighborhood
Connector
Hunter's Run Park Trail
to Rohret
0.41 $7,069 Long
Ferson Shared Neighborhood Connector
Ferson Shared Neighborhood
Connector
Park to Hwy 6 0.52 $8,891 Long
Hickory Neighborhood Connector
Hickory Neighborhood
Connector
Tamarack to 1st Ave 0.46 $7,951 Long
Kennedy Neighborhood Connector
Kennedy Neighborhood
Connector
Camp Cardinal to
Melrose
1.65 $28,299 Long
Mackinaw / Manitou Neighborhood Connector
Mackinaw / Manitou
Neighborhood Connector
Existing Trail to Foster 0.39 $6,635 Long
Union / Fairmeadows Neighborhood Connector
Union / Fairmeadows
Neighborhood Connector
Hwy 6 to Fairmeadows
Park
0.31 $5,346 Long
Table 4. Neighborhood Connector Bikeway Cost Estimates and Phasing
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B14
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Whispering Meadow / Pinto / Paddock Neighborhood Connector
Whispering Meadow / Pinto
/ Paddock Neighborhood
Connector
Heinz to Sycamore
Greenway Trail
1.20 $20,568 Long
Willow Creek Dr Neighborhood Connector
Willow Creek Dr
Neighborhood Connector
Hwy 1 to Willow Creek
Park
0.18 $3,136 Imm.
B15 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Table 5. Multi-Use Trail Project Cost Estimates and Phasing
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Hickory Hill Corridor
Hickory Hill Park Trail Shared
Use Path
1st Ave to Bloomington 0.94 $1,069,250 Long
Hickory Trail Connector
Shared Use Path
Scott to Hickory 0.34 $387,068 Long
Iowa River Trail Corridor
Kirkwood - River Trail Link 1
Shared Use Path
to 0.07 $84,505 Unsch.
Kirkwood - River Trail Link 2
Shared Use Path
to 0.09 $103,491 Unsch.
Iowa River Trail West Extension, Phase 1
Iowa River Trail West
Extension, Phase 1 Shared
Use Path
Benton to McCollister 1.62 $1,833,670 Unsch.
Iowa River Trail West Extension, Phase 2
Iowa River Trail West
Extension, Phase 2 Shared
Use Path
McCollister to Izaak
Walton
1.26 $1,427,710 Unsch.
Willow Creek Trail Corridor
Willow Creek Trail Extension
Shared Use Path
West Terminus of
Willow Creek Trail to
Hunter's Run Park trail
0.30 $2,900,000 Unsch.
Willow Creek Trail Extension
Shared Use Path
South Willow Creek
Trail Terminus to Hwy 1
0.16 $184,512 Unsch.
Windsor Ridge Trail Corridor
Windsor Ridge Trail Extension
Shared Use Path
American Legion to
Hwy 6
1.94 $2,201,320 Long
College - Jefferson Link
College - Jefferson Link
Shared Use Path
Jefferson to College 0.37 $416,586 Unsch.
Huntington Trail Corridor
Huntington Trail Extension
Shared Use Path
Lower West Branch to
Huntington Trail
0.34 $389,924 Long
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B16
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
McCollister to Alexander Elementary Diagonal Connector
McCollister to Alexander
Elementary Diagonal
Connector Trail
Sycamore Greenway
Southwestern
Terminus to McCollister
Extension
0.71 $800,170 Unsch.
Wetherby Park Trail Extension
Wetherby Park - Covered
Wagon Connector Trail
Shared Use Path
Covered Wagon to
Wetherby Park Trail
0.22 $249,037 Long
Windsor Ridge Trail Corridor
Windsor Ridge Trail Extension
Shared Use Path
American Legion to
Hwy 6
0.89 $1,010,010 Long
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
1st Avenue Sidepath
1st Sidepath S/O Bradford to Hwy 6 0.53 Long
1st Sidepath Rochester to Court Hill
Trail
1.02 $648,752 Near
Court Sidepath
Court Sidepath Lindemann to Scott 0.16 Near
Court Sidepath Lindenmann to
Peterson
0.09 Near
Court Sidepath Taft to Huntington Trail 0.13 Near
Foster Sidepath
Foster Sidepath Laura to Calibria Incorporated into
future design
project
0.27 Long
Foster / Bjaysville Sidepath Prairie Du Chien to
Dubuque
0.67 Unsch.
Gilbert Sidepath
Gilbert Sidepath Existing Sidepath @
Napoleon Park to
Trueblood Trail
0.83 $530,422 Long
Table 6. Sidepath Project Cost Estimates and Phasing
B17 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Heinz Sidepath
Heinz Sidepath Paddock to McCollister
Extension
New construction
to meet city street
standards
0.32 Long
Hwy 1 Sidepath
Hwy 1 Sidepath Sunset to Mormon Trek Programmed
project
0.52 Imm.
Hwy 1 Sidepath Iowa River Trail to
Orchard
0.29 $183,483 Long
Hwy 6 Sidepath
Hwy 6 Bridge Sidepath Iowa River Trail to
Orchard
0.06 $39,873 Long
Hwy 6 Sidepath Heinz to Hollywood Programmed
project
1.66 Near
Hwy 6 Sidepath Sioux to Heinz 0.50 $319,217 Long
Kirkwood Sidepath
Lower Muscatine /
Fairmeadows Sidepath
1st Ave to Hwy 6 0.31 $199,122 Near
McCollister Corridor
McCollister Extension
Sidepath
Gilbert to Sycamore New construction
to meet city street
standards
0.84 Near
McCollister Extension
Sidepath
Gilbert to Hwy 6 New construction
to meet city street
standards
1.68 Unsch.
Melrose Sidepath
Melrose Sidepath Emerald to Hawkeye
Park
New construction
to meet city street
standards
1.00 Near
American Legion Sidepath
American Legion Sidepath Taft to Scott New construction
to meet city street
standards
1.08 Near
Riverside Drive Sidepath
Riverside / Old Highway 218
Sidepath
Benton to McCollister 1.44 $916,735 Long
PROIRITIZATION AND COST ESTIMATES B18
Corridor & Project Project Limits Notes Project
Length
Cost
Estimate
Project
Phasing
Rochester Sidepath
Rochester Sidepath Mt Vernon to 1st Ave New construction
to meet city street
standards
0.42 Long
Rohret Sidepath
Rohret Sidepath Lake Shore to Kansas New construction
to meet city street
standards
2.02 Unsch.
Sycamore Sidepath
Sycamore Sidepath Sycamore Greenway
Extension to Sand
New construction
to meet city street
standards
0.48 Long
Taft Sidepath
Taft Sidepath Herbert Hoover to 420 New construction
to meet city street
standards
3.00 Unsch.
Normandy Sidepath
Normandy Sidepath Park Trail to Park Trail 0.49 Unsch
127 IOWA CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN