HomeMy WebLinkAboutIowaCityParksMP_2017-July_DRAFTIOWA CITY PARKS ~ MASTER PLAN
~ CITY OF IOWA CITY ~
Spring 2017DRAFT
DRAFT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................................5
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................8
Ch 01: Iowa City Today and Tomorrow ...........................................................................................................11
Ch 02: Stakeholder and Public Engagement ....................................................................................................15
Ch 03: Inventory Analysis .................................................................................................................................17
Ch 04: Master Planning ....................................................................................................................................39
Ch 05: Design Guidelines ..................................................................................................................................59
Ch 06: Recommendations, Implementation and Phasing ...............................................................................75
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................97
DRAFT
“Gather Here” is the name of this master planning process.
More than 500 Iowa City residents took part in this plan, meaning
“Gather Here” also serves as the watchwords for the future
Iowa City Parks and Recreation system.DRAFT
The City of Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department and the consulting team working to prepare this
report would like to thank the following organizations for their contributions to this report:
Project Steering Committee:
[INSERT]
Iowa City City Council
Iowa City Parks and Recreation Commission
Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department Leadership and Staff
The following stakeholder organizations:
[INSERT]
And the many individuals and residents within these organizations and the community’s neighborhoods
who gave their time to participate in small group discussions, answer survey questions, attend a
stakeholder workshop or participate in public open house events. The input has been invaluable in the
development of this plan. The Parks and Recreation Department looks forward to seeing all of you in
Iowa City’s parks and along the city’s trails and greenways. A hearty THANK YOU!
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
DRAFT
BACKGROUND AND
INTRODUCTION
DRAFT
This plan has been developed over ten months by RDG Planning & Design and HBK Engineering, working in concert with the
steering committee and Iowa City Parks and Recreation staff. The plan’s foundation is multi-fold:
• Ongoing guidance throughout the process by the
steering committee and parks and recreation
department leadership and staff
• Important input from the Parks and Recreation
Commission
• Public engagement and stakeholder input through focus
groups, on-line questions, public open houses, and a
well-attended stakeholder workshop
• Past planning efforts by the City planning department
and others to ensure alignment with Iowa City’s future
vision and goals
• Inventory of the existing parks system to identify
maintenance and accessibility needs
• A strategic direction for the system including vision,
mission and high-level goals
• Mapping of the system
• Coordination with other recent and current parks
planning efforts, including recent park-specific master
plans, an ongoing natural resources study of the park
system and current work in trails and overall bike-
pedestrian improvements within Iowa City
• Comparison of this park system to communities of
similar characteristics in the Midwest
• An overview of sustainable funding approaches for the
future park system
• Analysis of the current park system and its future needs
addressing social equity, primary park uses and current/
desired levels of service
Additionally, this plan addresses park aesthetics and architecture in ways that make sound economic sense while also
considering way-finding, signage and the system’s overall future image.DRAFT
8 CH 01 Iowa City Today and Tomorrow
Background and Introduction
The first step in the planning process was an
inventory of more than forty parks to assess
their alignment with ADA accessibility guidance
and to highlight priority maintenance needs.
This critical baseline-setting exercise was
followed by a series of public/stakeholder
engagements, resulting in a meaningful
strategic framework to underpin this plan—a
framework anchored in a desire to achieve
accessibility and service for all Iowa City
residents and visitors.
More than 500 residents of Iowa City took
advantage of opportunities to weigh in on this
Park System Master Plan, through participation
in focus groups, a key stakeholder workshop,
open house opportunities and on-line. The
input was invaluable in the development of this
visionary plan.
Vision and Mission
The strategic framework vision calls for “an
accessible parks and recreation system,
committed to building community and serving
all residents.” The mission associated with
this vision aims “to foster the community’s
engagement, sense of place and well-being”
through a parks and recreation system allied
with the LGBTQ community that includes
gathering spaces, well-maintained facilities,
quality connecting trails, nature-based quiet
places, land and water health/protection,
accessible technology, engaging programs
and fiscal responsibility. Striving for equity
underpins it all.
Strategic Directions
Access, Play, Restore, Educate, Sustain and
Measure. These six key words:
• Help drive the City’s initiative for healthy
neighborhoods and to achieve equity, ADA
access, connections and trails
• Construct the means to support year-
round active living for public health
• Look to enhance appropriate access to
restored habitats and streams within the
system
• Promote programs, partnerships and
facilities that foster learning, including
STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering,
Arts and Mathematics) initiatives
• Build mechanisms for a sustainable
system that employs Life-Cycle Cost
Analysis for guidance
• Provide opportunities to measure success
and document the system’s benefits to
the public
Key Findings
The Iowa City park system is largely beloved.
Many memories have been made in spaces
and places supported by the Parks and
Recreation Department. Overall, the system
provides reasonable park acres for the
population and some level of connectivity
between the parks and the public. Yet
resources over time have been constraining
and accessibility and maintenance issues have
surfaced. Although a majority of the parks
do not fully meet ADA guidelines, Parks and
Recreation Department personnel continue
to improve this situation, addressing ADA
guidelines during new park construction and/or
through maintenance procedures. Some parks
do require some notable changes but many
can be addressed with simple methods, such
as appropriately increasing mulch depth or
providing curb cuts for access.
Priority Needs
This plan looks at two tiers of system needs—
overall, and on a district-by-district basis. The
districts referenced here have been developed
by the planning team for purposes of analysis.
Overall Needs
District needs include:
• Significant improvements in wayfinding,
signage and ADA accessibility
• Improved and consistent support for
system maintenance
• Equity initiatives to improve park system
supports for populations challenged by
socioeconomic factors
• Improved technology—particularly within
parks to enhance young adult use/
experiences
• A rethinking of the water resources of Iowa
City, particularly the role Ralston Creek and
the Iowa River could/should play as a part
of the parks and recreation system
Executive Summary
About Equity and ICPR
The Iowa City Parks and Recreation
(ICPR) Department values diversity as
a community asset and is committed
to creating inclusive spaces that
promote the dignity and respect of all
users of ICPR services and facilities
regardless of age, race, sex, gender
identity, sexual orientation, physical
ability, economic background, country
of origin or religious practices. The
Department is also committed to the
ongoing examination of organizational
policies and practices to identify areas
of potential bias and work to dismantle
systemic barriers to park and
recreation users. A recent example:
the shift to single-stall restrooms with
welcoming signage. As Director Juli
Seydell Johnson explains:
“People encounter bathrooms,
they might not encounter
policies. We want facilities
welcoming to all.”DRAFT
9CH 01 Iowa City Today and Tomorrow
Recommendations to address these needs are
included in the implementation section of this
report.
District-by-District Needs
All districts are addressing ADA accessibility,
including a primary goal of achieving at
least one fully accessible park per district in
the first year of implementation of this plan
(2019/2020). All recommendations cannot be
listed as part of this summary, but highlights
include:
• South District
Adding a park and trail connection to
the neighborhood developing around
Alexander Elementary School
• Southeast District
Add a park and trail in the East Side
Growth Area along Snyder Creek
• West Central District
Improve the connection to Benton Hill Park
• Central District
Improve Ralston Creek to fill a recreational
gap in the system
• West District
Add parkland or improve park connections
for the neighborhood west of Mormon Trek
Magnitude-of-cost estimates to address these
needs are included in the implementation
section of the report.
Design Guidance
This plan includes recommendations to
improve the consistency of the architecture
within the parks over time by providing some
fundamental design guidance for restrooms,
shelters and a combined shelter/restroom
facility. The architecture proposed here
achieves a balance between affordability and
customization of pre-fab structures, and sets a
tone of quality and safety for the public. Further
design choice possibilities that still maintain
a level of consistency within the overall
architectural family for the parks is included
in the Appendix and divided into neighborhood
contexts—historic and contemporary. In the
Appendix one can find specific considerations
for furnishings and material choices.
Signage
A basic, affordable signage package, consistent
aesthetically with the recently developed
monument entry signs, is included here.
Concepts for a larger family of signs is included
in the Appendix.
Implementation and
Recommendations
The plan calls out priority projects that align
with the priority needs highlighted above,
including a goal of achieving at least one
park per district that is fully accessible by
2019/2020, improved signage on an ongoing
basis, and establishing (over time) Ralston
Creek as a potential greenway amenity through
restoration and access. With the Capital
Improvements Program (CIP) budget currently
set for 2017/2018, implementation of this
plan is largely intended to get underway in
2019. The recommendations further ask that
the Neighborhood Open Space Requirements
extend to Iowa City’s projected growth
boundaries (see map above).
S1
S3
N2
NE1N3N1
NE3
S2
C8
SE3SW2
NW1
SE2
SW5 C5
C6SW6C4
C1
NE2SW3SW1
NW2
SE1
C2
C7 C3
SW4
0 21 Miles
Neighborhood Open Space
District Map (2017)µ
Recommended park district boundaries for applying Neighborhood Open Space Requirements
DRAFT
DRAFT
IOWA CITY TODAY AND TOMORROW
Chapter
1
DRAFT
12 CH 01 Iowa City Today and Tomorrow
As a foundation for this plan, we need to
understand Iowa City’s current population
status and future projections. Iowa City’s
planning department has done a great deal
of work in this area. We refer you to the Iowa
City Comprehensive Plan for more detail, but
summarize the findings here.
Iowa City is a growing community with a strong
University presence. Iowa City’s demographic
highlights, based on the Census and the Iowa
City Comprehensive Plan, include the following:
Population 71K and growing.
Iowa City is one of Iowa’s larger communities
with a 2015 population estimate of 71,832.
The city’s population growth was 9.1% from
2000 to 2010 (10 years), and 5.9% from 2010
to 2015 (5 years). This continues a trend of
growth every decade for the last century. The
comprehensive plan population projection
predicts 84,000 residents in 2030.
Many students yielding a low median age.
Iowa City has approximately 31,000 university
students, resulting in a young median age of
25.8 in 2015 (compared to the state median
age of 38.1 in the same year). 32.5% of the
Iowa City population is between 18 and 24
years old.
Iowa City faces age “extremes” with
more seniors and young people and fewer
“family-age” adults and children.
From 2000 to 2010, the number of residents
aged 55–64 increased by 81% and residents
age 65 and over increased by 26.5%.
Residents ages 25–34 also increased at about
the same rate as the general population. At the
same time, the number of residents in mid-life
decreased: by 13.5% for 35–44 year olds and
by 6.9% for 45–54 year olds. And the number
of children 10–14 dropped by 8%.
Iowa City has a highly educated
population.
Of Iowa City’s residents who are 25 years and
older, 95.1% have a high school diploma and
58.6% have a bachelor’s degree and higher.
This is much higher than the state-wide
numbers of 91.5% and 26.7%, respectively
(2015).
Many renters, small households.
Because of the high student population, more
than half of Iowa City households are renter-
occupied, much higher than most communities.
The average household size is 2.24 persons,
lower than the state average of 2.42.
Park system implications.
This demographic information has important
implications for the Iowa City parks system,
including:
• A growing population will create
increased demand for parks and trails.
As challenging as resources are for
parks and trails, system growth must
be considered in population growth
scenarios.
• Growth in older adults and young adults
will influence the type of programming
and facilities that are wanted for parks.
With each end of the age spectrum taking
up such a healthy share of the population,
it will be important to plan a system that
serves the not-yet-8 year old and the 80+
year old equally. This implies a need for
facilities that support “free-range children”
on one end, and reasonably paced
activities and less adventuresome trail
grades on the other. “Free-range children”
means youngsters who are allowed to
explore parks and nature on their own
terms, not always involved in structured or
adult-supervised play.
• A declining “family” population can be
countered with quality-of-life offerings
such as parks, strengthening the
need to look at park facilities that can
accommodate family gatherings and
adult-child interactions.
• The young adult population and incoming
generations’ increasing reliance on
technology requires a thoughtful look
at how parks interact with and support
technology use.
• This highly educated population implies
an interest in access to learning/
interpretation through the parks and trails
system.
Current Demographics and Projected Growth
DRAFT
13CH 01 Iowa City Today and Tomorrow
Iowa City Demographic Profile
Current and Future Boundaries
Demographics derived from: Population Estimates, American Community Survey, Census of Population and Housing, Current Population Survey, Small Area
Health Insurance Estimates, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, State and County Housing Unit Estimates, County Business Patterns, Non-employer
Statistics, Economic Census, Survey of Business Owners, Building Permits.
The following map shows the current Iowa City boundaries and those projected for the community in the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan.
*This geographic level of poverty and health estimates are not comparable to other
geographic levels of these estimates
Race
White Alone 82.5%
While Alone, Not Hispanic or Latino 79.7%
Asian Alone 6.9%
Black or African American Alone 5.8%
Hispanic or Latino 5.3%
Two or More Races 2.5%
American Indian and Alaska Native Alone 0.2%
Income
Median Household Income (in 2015 Dollars)$42,375
Per Capita Income In Past 12 Months
(in 2015 Dollars)
$26,966
Persons in Poverty* (%)28.2%
Population Characteristics
Veterans (2011–2015)2,262
Foreign-Born Persons (2011–2015) (%)13.7%DRAFT
DRAFT
STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Chapter
2
DRAFT
16 CH 02 Stakeholder and Public Engagement
Stakeholder and Public Engagement
This study is based on a truly exceptional
commitment on the part of the Parks and
Recreation Department and the Steering
Committee to stakeholder and public
engagement. The project was kicked off with
a series of focus groups involving a variety
of stakeholders. Discussions included those
representing schools, neighborhoods and
economic development—among others.
Conversation topics varied somewhat from
group to group but stakeholders were asked to
address:
• How they and/or their organization
currently use the parks and trails
• How they would like to be able to use the
system in the future
• What they view as the system’s strengths
and challenges
• Where they find themselves creating
memories within the system
• What they value most about the Iowa City
parks and trails system
• Where they have found other systems
they value and why
• Where they feel the community benefits
most and least from the system
• Their ideas and concerns for the future of
the system
• The trends they see that could/should be
addressed through this planning process
• What they see as the system’s greatest
needs—today and tomorrow.
The input from these stakeholder discussions
was further supplemented by an input session
with the parks maintenance staff that was
well-attended with meaningful and engaging
participation. An early December public
open house was held at the Robert A. Lee
Community Recreation Center in association
with an annual holiday event, maximizing
attendance and participation. On-line survey
questions were also publicized and made
available for public input. Finally, more than
30 attended a half-day stakeholder workshop
to map out the overall strategic direction for
this plan.
The public input sessions are summarized
below:
Based on the input above, an early draft of a
strategic direction for this plan was crafted
to use at a stakeholder workshop. The
half-day workshop was well-attended by a
highly energetic group of stakeholders who
never waned in their commitment to take a
thoughtfully critical look at the system and its
needs. The strategic framework that appears in
Chapter Four is an outgrowth of the inventory,
research, public engagement and stakeholder
workshop.
Note: Approximately 300 public/stakeholder contacts have occurred in support of this master planning effort; some contacts are duplicates.
Participants for the December 1 Stakeholder Workshop were, in part, purposely recruited from small-group discussion participants.
Summary of Stakeholder/Public Engagement in Support of Iowa City Park System Master Plan
Date Group/Interview/Event Attendee(s)
10/24/2016 Accessibility Group 9
10/24/2016 Parks And Recreation Commission 7
10/25/2016 Business Group 9
10/25/2016 Seniors Group 9
10/25/2016 Non-profits Leadership 8
11/01/2016 Athletic Associations 10
11/01/2016 Recreation Center Student Group 7
11/01/2016 Maintenance Staff 30
11/02/2016 Partners 8
11/02/2016 School Partners 4
11/02/2016 Service and Health Organizations 6
11/02/2016 Neighborhood Group Representatives 6
11/02/2016 Kirkwood and U of I Reps/Students 3
12/01/2016 Strategic Stakeholder Workshop 36
12/10/2016 Open House (Held in conjunction with annual Holiday Market) 250+
First Quarter 2017 On-line comments/question responses 27DRAFT
INVENTORY ANALYSIS
Chapter
3
DRAFT
18 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Iowa City provides a good level of park service
in terms of acres of parkland and core facilities
such as park shelters and playgrounds.
However, some residential areas lack a
neighborhood park within walking distance
and certain types of park experiences are not
available in all parts of the City. The Central
and West Central areas of the City in particular
have fewer park facilities than other areas of
town. The City’s creeks and river present an
untapped opportunity for additional recreational
service.
Accessibility to park experiences and services to
lower-income areas should be prioritized in order
to provide more equity in service. The Racial
and Socioeconomic Equity Review Toolkit should
be used to reach out to underserved areas to
assess park needs. Many parks need accessible
paths and destinations to allow for participation
by the wide range of Iowa City residents
Method of Analysis
The park system was analyzed via a two-step
process:
1. Using a Geographic Information System
program, ESRI’s ArcGIS, the team
performed spatial analysis—with regard to
total park acreage, socio-economic factors,
walkability, ADA alignment, and park type
and character—and created a database for
ongoing and future park projects.
2. An on-the-ground process collected data
on each park, regarding ADA accessibility
for parking areas, play equipment,
shelters and other related buildings.
Additionally, the status of structures and
pathways was also recorded, as well
as the location of water shut-offs, park
benches, etc.
Map of Park System
A base map was created to display all current
City parks. An aerial fly-over was conducted
in fall of 2016 to assist in the performance of
GIS mapping for several park-related planning
efforts. This aerial imagery taken in the fall
season provides geographic analysis with
fewer aerial obstructions, such as tree canopy
and leaf coloration that can skew or obscure
parkland features. Each park shapefile was
provided by the City and the aerial imagery was
used as a background for the resultant map.
Summary
DRAFT
19CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Park Acres and Core Facilities
Iowa City has 1,688 acres of parkland, or
about 23.5 acres per 1,000 people. This is
significantly more than the national median
for parkland acreage of 15.2 acres per 1,000
people (2012), but is typical for other university
cities in the Midwest region. At the same time,
parks staff maintains an additional 200 acres
that are not parklands.
Table 1 shows Iowa City’s park acreage in
comparison to the national median and to other
university cities of similar size in the Midwest.
These cities have a campus integrated with
the town, similar student enrollment numbers
and a student population that makes up a
significant portion of the overall city population.
Table 2 shows a count of selected park
facilities in Iowa City and in two comparison
communities. As compared to the Midwestern
university towns of Columbia, MO and
Ann Arbor, MI, Iowa City has a relatively
small number of basketball courts and a
relatively large number of park shelters and
soccer fields. Most other facilities, such as
playgrounds and baseball fields, were similar
across the communities.
Current Park Level of Service
Table 1: Iowa City Park Acres Compared to Similar Cities
City
Population
(2015)
Appx.
university
enrollment
Square
miles
Median
household
income
Median
age
Total park
acres
Park acres/
1,000
residents
Iowa City, IA 71,832 33,000 25.3 42,375 25.8 1,688 23.5
Bloomington, IN 82,813 48,000 23.4 30,019 23.6 2,080 25.0
Champaign, IL 84,004 44,000 22.5 42,094 27.2 609.7 7.2
Columbia, MO 115,391 33,000 63.4 44,907 26.9 3,000 26.0
Ann Arbor, MI 116,194 45,000 28.7 55,990 27.8 2,110 18.2
Madison, WI 243,122 43,000 94.0 54,896 30.9 5,592 23.0
National Median (2012)------15.2
Sources: American Community Survey (ACS) 2015; City of Iowa GIS Data; Columbia Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan (2013); Ann Arbor Parks and Recreation Open Space
Plan (2017); City of Madison 2012–2017 Park & Open Space Plan (2012)
Sources: Iowa City Field Data; Columbia Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan (2013); Ann Arbor Parks and Recreation Open Space Plan (2017)
* Not maintained by City staff
Table 2: Selected Park Facilities
Iowa City
Per 10k
residents Columbia
Per 10k
residents Ann Arbor
Per 10k
residents
Basketball Courts 7 1.0 22 1.9 35 3.0
Disc Golf 2 0.3 3 0.3 3 0.3
Dog Leash Free Areas 2 0.3 5 0.4 x x
Golf Courses * (18 hole)3 0.4 2 0.2 x x
Park Shelters 45 6.3 51 4.4 20 1.7
Playgrounds / Play Areas 28 3.9 48 4.2 79 6.8
Soccer 28 3.9 18 1.6 12 1.0
Softball/Baseball 17 2.4 33 2.9 22 1.9
Spraygrounds / Splash Pads 3 0.4 3 0.3 x x
Pools 2 0.3 3 0.3 3 0.3
Tennis Courts 9 1.7 27 2.3 20 1.7
Outdoor Theatre / Band Shell 2 0.3 1 0.1 1 0.1DRAFT
20 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Level of Service by Class of Park
Parks were classified according to 2 methods:
1. Classification by Scale
It is important for cities to have a mix
of different scales of parks, from small
neighborhood parks that serve the
immediate vicinity, to large specialty parks
that draw visitors from around the region.
Table 3 describes the different scales
of parks. This is a traditional method of
assessing appropriate diversity in the park
system.
2. Classification by Character
The Iowa City parks system has great
diversity of character, ranging from
relatively wild natural areas to highly
manicured ballfields. The planning
team identified ten different “character”
classifications that describe the primary
experience that the park offers. These
classifications describe both the parks the
city has, and those residents would like to
have. They were created specifically for
the Iowa City system. This classification
helps show what park experiences may be
lacking in this community, or in a specific
location within this community. Table 4
describes the character classes.
Table 3: Park Scale Classes
Classification Function Size Service Radius Iowa City example
Regional Parks that attract visitors from outside the community
due to their large size, unique offerings, and/or high
quality.
Varies Up to 60 miles Terry Trueblood
Recreation Area,
City Park
Community Meet diverse community-based recreation needs,
preserve significant natural areas and provide space for
larger recreation facilities. May include special attraction
such as a pool or trails.
30–50 acres 1/2–3 miles Wetherby Park,
Mercer Park,
Willow Creek
Neighborhood Basic unit of a community’s park system, providing
a recreational and social focus for residential areas;
accommodate informal recreational activities.
5–10 acres 1/4–1/2 mile
(walking distance)
Benton Hill Park,
North Market Park
Mini Fulfill open-space needs when space is limited, or
provide niche recreation opportunities.
Less than 1 acre Less than 1/4 mile Harlocke Hill Park
Specialty Meet a niche recreational need for the community,
such as a sports park or wilderness area.
Varies Varies Iowa City Kickers
Soccer Park
Note: Parks of 1–5 acres are classified as “mini” or “neighborhood” depending on their use and access. See Table 5 for detailed classifications.DRAFT
21CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Table 4: Park Character Classes
Class Name Description Iowa City Example
Play Typically, residents will find manicured open space, a shelter and some limited programmed
recreation space (e.g., a basketball court or a ball field). This park is dominated by mowed lawns, a
shelter and a playground.
Brookland Park,
North Market Park
Compete This park is set up to foster competitive sports, with multiple ballfields and perhaps a concession
stand and bleachers. Programmed spaces dominate.
Napoleon Park,
Iowa City Kickers
Soccer Park
Splash
Water play is the dominant theme here—specifically, constructed water play, rather than a creek or
river. Splash pads and pools are the classic features of these parks.
Fair Meadows Park,
Tower Court Park
Go Wild
Nature preservation is the focus of these parks, and natural areas with native plants and animals
shape the human experience. Natural play, woodland or creek exploration, or some level of
immersion in nature dominates here. These parks tend to support hiking, discovery and create-
your-own adventure instead of a structured event. In this way, Go Wild parks, especially the larger
ones, overlap with Reflect and Learn parks.
Ryerson’s Woods,
Terry Trueblood
Recreation Area,
Hickory Hill
Connect These parks support social connections through programming or facilities. An events lawn, a
performance space or a central shelter might be an indicator, or trails and sidewalks linking to the
park. These would support informal connections and programs like pot lucks, reunions or cultural
exchanges.
City Park,
College Green
Reflect Not every park needs to provide adventure or intense activity. Spaces for rest and reflection must
also play a role in the Iowa City Park System. This might mean strategically placed benches for
overlooks, labyrinths for inner views, integration of art, or a nature path. These parks provide
opportunities to pull away from the hustle and bustle and to de-stress.
Sand Prairie,
Black Springs
Circle Park
Learn
Parks that promote outdoor learning spaces, science-based activities or integration of the arts fit in
this class of parks. As with Connect parks, programming is as essential as physical spaces. Outdoor
classrooms, creek access for experiments, sheds with science/learning based tools, “STEAM*
stations” or direct connections to schools would all be physical attributes of a learning park.
Kiwanis Park,
Wetherby Park
Move
This category includes trails and parks that are primarily meant to get people walking, jogging or
hiking. This includes mini parks surrounding trailheads and greenways along trails.
Waterworks Prairie Park,
Longfellow Nature Trail
Thrill
When a park emphasizes adventure, it is typically associated with some requirement for increased
skill or risk. Zip line, white water or cycling challenge courses are among the elements residents
might see in a Thrill park.
None at present;
adventure playground
proposed in City Park
Master Plan
Reserve
Natural areas not intended for regular or programmed use. This designation would be applied to
sites/sub-areas within a park, not to the entirety of a public park. This designation is included here
to coordinate with the upcoming Natural Areas Study as that study will reference reserve areas
within parks.
See upcoming Natural
Areas Study for more
information.R
* “STEAM” = Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and MathematicsDRAFT
22 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Table 5: Iowa City Parks Overview: Acres, Scale, Character and Location
Park Acres Scale
Character
(Primary)
Character
(Secondary)District
Hickory Hill Park 184 Regional Go Wild Connect Central
Riverfront Crossings 18 Regional Connect Play Central
Peninsula Park 124 Regional Go Wild Move North
Waterworks Prairie Park 226 Regional Move Reflect North
Thornberry Dog Park 10 Regional Move Connect North
Terry Trueblood Recreation Area 206 Regional Go Wild Connect South
City Park 107 Regional Connect Compete West Central
Ryerson's Woods 49 Regional Go Wild Reflect West Central
Wetherby Park 24 Community Splash Learn South
Scott Park 45 Community Move Southeast
Mercer Park 31 Community Play Compete Southeast
Willow Creek–Kiwanis Park 41 Community Play Go Wild West Central
Chadek Green Park 5 Neighborhood Learn Reflect Central
Oak Grove Park 2 Neighborhood Play Central
College Green Park 2 Neighborhood Play Central
North Market Park <1 Neighborhood Play Central
Reno Street Park <1 Neighborhood Play Central
Pheasant Hill Park 4 Neighborhood Play Reflect North
Frauenholz-Miller Park 2 Neighborhood Play North
Hickory Trail Park 3 Neighborhood Play North
Happy Hollow Park 3 Neighborhood Play Connect North
Fairmeadows Park 5 Neighborhood Splash Play South
Windsor Ridge Park 21 Neighborhood Move Southeast
Court Hill Park 11 Neighborhood Play SoutheastDRAFT
23CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Table 5: Iowa City Parks Overview: Acres, Scale, Character and Location
Park Acres Scale
Character
(Primary)
Character
(Secondary)District
Cardigan Park 3 Neighborhood Play Southeast
Creekside Park 3 Neighborhood Play Go Wild Southeast
Hunters Run Park 36 Neighborhood Go Wild Move West
Villa Park 7 Neighborhood Play West Central
Brookland Park <1 Neighborhood Play Move West Central
Benton Hill Park 3 Neighborhood Reflect Play West Central
Tower Court Park <1 Neighborhood Splash Play West Central
Highland Park <1 Mini Play Central
Glendale Park 2 Mini Play Go Wild Central
Harlocke Hill Park 1 Mini Play West Central
Black Springs Circle Park 1 Mini Reflect West Central
Ned Ashton Park <1 Mini Move West Central
Chauncey Swan Park 1 Mini *Connect Central
Longfellow Nature Trail 2 Specialty Move Go Wild Central
Terrel Mill Park 34 Specialty Move Compete North
Napoleon Park 58 Specialty Compete South
Whispering Meadows Wetland 18 Specialty Go Wild Reflect South
Sycamore South Greenway 52 Specialty Move Go Wild South
Sand Prairie 38 Specialty Reflect Go Wild South
Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park 164 Specialty Compete South
East Side Sports Complex 127 Specialty Compete Southeast
Sturgis Ferry Park 11 Specialty Go Wild Move West Central
Crandic Park 4 Specialty Move West Central
Rita's Ranch Dog Park 3 Specialty Move Southeast
Summary:
Level of Service by Class
Iowa City has an appropriate mix of parks at different scales, and each area of
town offers both neighborhood parks and larger community/regional parks. The
challenge to all of these is to make the system more accessible to everyone.
While Iowa City currently has no parks listed in the “Thrill” category, Riverfront
Crossings park is about to come on-line to offer that opportunity. Similarly, the
system has few “Learn” oriented parks at this time, but many show potential and
are poised for updates that will increase “Learn” opportunities in the near future.
* While generally a mini-park in scale, Chauncey Swan Park provides a key community function when hosting the Farmer’s Market. DRAFT
24 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Level of Service by Access:
Walkability, Transit and
Waterway
Providing safe and easy access to the City’s
parks system is an essential component of the
level of service. The following maps express
the transit connectivity throughout the parks
system and the ability for residents to walk to a
nearby park.
Walkability
In order to determine walkability to each park,
a quarter-mile buffer was created to indicate
a distance that people are willing to walk
to get to a park. Trails and wide sidewalks
were included to highlight formal modes of
walkability that would make access to the
parks more appealing. Additionally, schools
can provide additional park amenities that are
available to the public, and while there are only
three 28E agreements between schools and
the City, school sites are often used informally
as after-hours parks by residents when access
is available.DRAFT
25CH 03 Inventory Analysis
There are strong trail connections in the central
part of Iowa City along the Iowa River by the
Iowa River Corridor Trail. It connects with
other Iowa City parks, such as Terry Trueblood
Recreation Area, Napoleon Park, and City Park.
With the completion of the Dubuque Street
pedestrian bridge, this trail now leads all the
way to North Liberty and is often used by
cyclists and walkers of all ages. While there is
a dedicated trail alongside Highway 6, it only
extends as far east as Broadway. One absence
is the ability for pedestrians to safely cross the
Iowa River and remain along the same trail.
This trail is ideal for residents in the southern
part of Iowa City to access walking, running,
bicycling and even fishing in Napoleon Park
and the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area, as
well as the amenities that will be available to
them in the Riverfront Crossings Park in the
near future.
Walkability Gaps
Several residential areas fall outside of the
quarter-mile walkability zone. Notable gaps are:
• Southeast: West of Kirkwood Community
College along Highway 6
• Far East: Along Scott Boulevard south of
Muscatine Avenue
• Far East: Along Scott Boulevard north of
East Court Street
• Central: West of City High, along Ralston
Creek
• West: South of University Heights, around
Sunset Street and Benton Street
• West: Areas north and south of Walden
Square, along west side of Mormon Trek
Boulevard
There are also areas that could use
improvement in terms of trails and wide
sidewalk connections, such as the eastern
part of the City. A few of the trail and sidewalk
networks appear and disappear or do not
connect to nearby trails/parks. An example of an
upcoming improvement to address this issue,
highlighted in the map below, features proposed
bridge and trail connections for Scott Park. See
5a and 5b marked on the map below.
Note: The bicycle-pedestrian aspects of
this report have been kept to a minimum in
anticipation of an upcoming Bicycle Master Plan
for the City where access to all parks has been
identified in addition to other recommendations
of interest to the Iowa City Parks System.
Walkability
About the
Iowa City
Bicycle Master Plan
The Iowa City Bicycle Master
Plan will guide city staff
and elected officials in
creating a more bike-friendly
community by identifying
recommendations for off-
street bikeways, like trails
and greenways, and on-
street bikeways like bike
boulevards (low-traffic streets
with bike-friendly features),
bike lanes, and separated
bike lanes. When complete,
these bikeways will connect
to create a complete bicycle
network that supports safe
and comfortable bicycle travel
and connects people to the
places they want to go. The
Bicycle Master Plan will also
identify programs, events and
activities to educate residents
about safe cycling and driving
and to encourage more people
to get out and enjoy life on
two (and sometimes three)
wheels. The plan is slated for
completion later in 2017. DRAFT
26 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Transit
A transit analysis was conducted to understand
the ability for residents to access parks via the
City’s bus services. These routes include all
Iowa City bus routes, such as the 7th Avenue,
Court Hill, and Lakeside bus lines and their bus
stops. While nearly all City parks reside within
a ¼ mile of a bus stop, it should be noted that
access to these parks can be hampered by the
amount of time it takes to travel to them based
on where the resident is located and which
park they want to visit.
Transit Gaps
Several regional parks, most notably the
Waterworks Park, Terry Trueblood Recreation
Area (TTRA), and Ryerson’s Woods, are not
located along transit lines; however, it should
be noted that transit is available and contracted
for transportation to special events, such as
those at TTRA
DRAFT
27CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Transit Challenge
A family living in Forest View Mobile Home Park wanting to go for a hike in Hickory Hill Park would have to ride the bus for a minimum of 52 minutes, and walk for 7 minutes. There is no bus route from Laura Drive that goes directly to an entrance to Hickory Hill.
A family living in Forest View Mobile
Home Park wanting to go for a hike
in Hickory Hill Park would have to
ride the bus for a minimum of 52
minutes, and walk for 7 minutes.
There is no bus route from Laura
Drive that goes directly to an
entrance to Hickory Hill.
A family living in Forest View Mobile Home Park wanting to go for a hike in Hickory Hill Park would have to ride the bus for a
minimum of 52 minutes, and walk for 7 minutes. There is no bus route from Laura Drive that goes directly to an entrance to
Hickory Hill.
An example
of the transit
challenge
DRAFT
28 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
Connecting Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Math
(STEAM) to Everyday Play and Adventure
An outdoor classroom
provides an excellent
opportunity for all ages
and abilities to learn
about conservation and
the great outdoors.
Nature and its sounds provide
inspiration and information.
Outdoor classrooms come in a
variety of shapes and sizes.
These children explore a world beneath their feet.
Playing freely in the landscape
nurtures a child’s imagination.
Playing with erosion
table at STEAM festivalDRAFT
29CH 03 Inventory Analysis
In addition to a traditional look at transit, this
plan notes Iowa City’s innovative approach
to active learning and recreation at bus
stops. The Parks and Recreation department
has been working on a concept to add play
areas focused on Science, Technology,
Engineering, Arts and Math (STEAM) at bus
stops. The concept offers small, teachable
play spaces in unexpected places where
families travel together (see above image).
Elsewhere in this report, the concept of
STEAM stations within parks is highlighted.
Waterway Parks
There are several parks with access to
nearby creeks and river, and based on public
input and a growing national trend, cities
have been re-orienting their designs back to
embracing these natural features. Iowa City
has three prominent creeks:
• Ralston Creek spans much of the central
part of the City east to west and has two
branches that split north and south.
• Willow Creek is located in the
southwestern portion of the City and
crosses Highway 218, down through
portions of the municipal airport.
• Snyder Creek is located in the eastern
part of the City and spans areas north
to south.
And the City is part of the Iowa Water Trails
Network with 72 unobstructed miles of
paddling available on the Iowa River from
Iowa City to the Mississippi River. An access
point is near Napoleon Park and Riverfront
Crossings park will also become part of
Iowa’s water trail system. City Park has river
accesses but use of that section of the river
is confined due to the roller dam.
There are multiple parks within the system
that have naturally graded areas where
access to the creeks is feasible. Additionally,
Applied Ecological Services, through its
upcoming Natural Areas Study, has identified
opportunities for creek connection and
learning, play or reflection (see “About
the Natural Areas Study”). As will be seen
throughout this report, improving access to
creeks and waterways could serve multiple
functions to enhance the system overall—
generally improved access and experiences
for learning, reflecting and “going wild.”
At the same time, the Parks and Recreation
Department faces current and future needs
for maintenance and care of creeks, creek
accesses and upstream impacts on water
quality and quantity. Communities throughout
Iowa are in need of additional resources to
address these maintenance issues.DRAFT
30 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
About the Natural Areas Study
A comprehensive inventory, assessment and natural
resource management planning effort began in late
2016 for Iowa City’s natural areas and public open space.
City staff and its consultant, Applied Ecological Services
(AES), are assembling and analyzing information from
forty-two City-owned sites identified by the City as
natural areas. A natural area is a spontaneous product of
nature, such as forest or wetland, but also includes places
people have allowed to return to nature or deliberately
restored to natural conditions, such as a native prairie.
Several of Iowa City’s parks contain expansive natural
areas which, given the rarity of natural areas in the
state, are a precious resource for this and future Iowa
City generations. Many natural areas are included in the
park system, addressed through this master planning
process. This master planning process classifies parks
into use categories. Parks and open space where the
primary use is as a natural area are placed in the Go
Wild category. Some natural areas that are inaccessible
or where the City wants to discourage use, such as
stormwater detention basins, would be suitable to place
in the reserve category.
The Natural Areas Study currently identifies parks
with natural areas worthy of a “preserve/protect”
classification—meaning, some level of “set aside”
should be in play to help sustain character and quality.
At the same time, these areas can still provide some
level of appropriate recreation, primarily in the category
of Reflect, Learn and/or Go Wild. These parks include
Hickory Hill, Ryerson Woods, Sand Prairie, Sycamore
Greenway, Waterworks Prairie Park and the Oxeye
Prairie and wastewater treatment plant wetland within
Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park.
AES has further identified no fewer than ten parks/
facilities where Ralston Creek connections could be of
value, particularly as a Learn opportunity for park users.
These parks include: Court Hill, Creekside, Glendale,
Hickory Hill, Hickory Trail, Scott Park Greenway,
Longfellow Natural Trail, Recreation Center Greenway,
Riverfront Crossings Greenway and Scott Park.DRAFT
31CH 03 Inventory Analysis
About the Tree Inventory
Iowa City’s tree inventory is running on a parallel course
to the development of this master plan. In December
2016, the Iowa City Parks and Forestry Division began
an inventory of publicly owned trees. Over the course of
a year, arborists with Plan-It Geo, a geo-technical firm
from Colorado, mapped, cataloged and gathered data on
the City’s urban forest. The inventory focuses on trees
within street right-of-ways, parks and public facilities.
The tree inventory is an important urban forestry tool
that will aid with planning the diversification of the City’s
urban forest, addressing damage from weather related
events and responding to pests and disease such as
Emerald Ash Borer, Asian Longhorn Beetle and Gypsy
Moth. This study and the Natural Areas Inventory will
inform the future direction of many of the natural spaces
within the Iowa City Parks and Recreation System. DRAFT
32 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
District Analysis
11 Parks:
2 Mini
5 Neighborhood
1 Community
2 Regional
1 Specialty
8 Parks:
4 Neighborhood
3 Regional
1 Specialty
8 Parks:
4 Neighborhood
3 Community
1 Specialty
1 Park:
1 Neighborhood
Iowa City Master Parks Plan
District Map
South District
West Central District
8 Parks:
1 Neighborhood
1 Community
1 Regional
5 Specialty
8 Parks:
1 Mini
3 Neighborhood
1 Community
2 Regional
1 Specialty
West District
North District
Southeast District
Central District
µ
0 21 Miles
In 2013, the City adopted an updated
Comprehensive Plan titled, Iowa City 2030.
This comprehensive plan uses a district
planning process that involves extensive citizen
participation in ten distinct areas. As of the writing
of this plan, eight of the ten areas have district
plans. For the purpose of analyzing the park
system, the planning team created districts based
on those already in use for the comprehensive
plan. The Comprehensive Planning Districts
were slightly augmented to generate a feasible
boundary for the analysis of certain aspects,
such as park type (regional, neighborhood, etc.),
park characteristic (Classic, Move, etc.), and park
accessibility within a certain district.
Left: Iowa City Comprehensive Plan
10 Planning Districts
Bottom: Master Parks Plan
6 Planning Districts
DRAFT
33CH 03 Inventory Analysis
District Analysis—Population Metric
When looking at the service level of parks
within a district, it is useful to use the number
of park acres/1,000 residents as a standard
metric of comparison. To accomplish this
metric, population estimates were generated
pulling Census track data into ArcGIS to create
centroids of data that provided an estimate of
residents living within a certain district. Looking
at the data, the North and South Districts have
relatively the same population; however, the
North District has fewer park acres/1,000
residents (40 acres) than the South District
(60 acres). Given their geographic size
difference, the population metric provides a
relative equalizer when understanding the
different characteristics within each district.
When looking strictly at park acres per
1,000 population, the West, West Central
and Central Districts all surface as potentially
challenged by a shortage of park acreage,
while the North and South Districts have high
park acres-to-population ratios. These areas
may experience more pressure over time as
they are considered poised for future growth.
The West District’s challenges may not be as
significant as they appear by the numbers,
due to an affluent segment of the population
likely served in large part through private acres.
Neighboring system services also support West
District residents as well as University of Iowa
open spaces. The West Central and Central
Districts, however, surface as areas of concern
for park service.
Iowa City Master Parks Plan
Block Group Census Data
Total Population, Acres/100 Residents, Acres/ Resident
South District
West Central District
Population: 22,142
Park Acres/ 1000 Residents: 12.46
Acres/ Person: 0.10
Population: 10,080
Park Acres/ 1000 Residents: 40.36
Acres/ Person: 0.61
Population: 10,418
Park Acres/ 1000 Residents 23.42
Acres/ Person: 0.28
Population: 9,347
Park Acres/ 1000 Residents 60.34
Acres/ Person: 0.35
Population: 16,174
Park Acres/ 1000 Residents 13.98
Acres/ Person: 0.26
Population: 3,390
Park Acres/ 1000 Residents 10.62
Acres/ Resident: 0.76
West District
North District
Southeast District
Central District
µ
0 21 Miles
Iowa City Master Parks Plan
Block Group Census Data
Total Population, Acres/1,000 Residents, Acres/Resident
Person:DRAFT
34 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
District Analysis—Equity
Iowa City Parks & Recreation (ICPR) is
committed to using a Racial and Socioeconomic
Equity Review Toolkit to guide policy, operational
and park development decisions. This process
acknowledges that race and income inequities
must be considered in all facets of parks and
recreation services to provide appropriate and
equitable services to all Iowa City residents. ICPR
is committed to building organizational capacity,
community networks and communication
strategies that allow Iowa City’s diverse
populations to be heard and participate in
leadership, planning and evaluation of programs,
facilities and services.
Methodology
This study works to address equity through
review of a socio-economic map created by
analyzing 2010 Census data at the census
tract level for the following social indicators:
• Percent of families below poverty level
• Percent disability
• Race
• Educational achievement
Each indicator category was clipped along
Iowa City census tract boundaries and a
spatial analysis was performed that weighed
poverty indicators slightly more than the others
since several of the other indicators could be
factors related to individuals and families with
incomes below the poverty level. The data was
classified to provide results to display areas
that indicate higher levels of poverty, more
racial diversity, less educational attainment,
and higher percentages of disabled residents.
Iowa City is a college town and thus, students
with lower incomes could potentially skew the
results. To adjust for this potential outcome, the
inclusion of the “percent below poverty level
with related children of householder under 18
years” census category was used to normalize
the data.
Results
This process yields a “heat map” with lower
wealth, lower education, and less mobility
in zones colorized in tans and browns, and
higher wealth, education and greater mobility
appearing in tones of deeper greens and blues.
The South District, and portions of the West
Central and Central Districts (on either side
of the river) surface as challenging zones.
Due to the lack of refinement of census
tracts, the entirety of the Western District also
appears to experience less wealth, education
and mobility—but this is misleading. Large
portions of that district are affluent, with the
lower-income areas concentrated on the west
side of Mormon Trek Boulevard. The heat map
highlights the areas of greatest concern (circled
in yellow).
Racial and Socioeconomic
Equity Review Toolkit
City staff from multiple departments
began using a racial and socioeconomic
equity review toolkit in July 2016. In
the pilot program, a series of questions
guided staff and the City Council to work
toward equity by helping to identify
when City policies, programs, initiatives
or practices could result in different
outcomes for certain populations. Among
others, the City’s Parks and Recreation
Department is applying this toolkit to its
decision-making process. This toolkit,
when coupled with the analysis included
in this master plan, should lead to
improved decision-making and outcomes
in support of racial and socioeconomic
equity. Cities using a similar toolkit
include Seattle, WA and Madison, WI.DRAFT
35CH 03 Inventory Analysis
With the exception of the South District, these
areas of concern are all under-served by the
parks system in terms of park acreage. The
following is an overview of the level of service
for each of these areas:
Central District
While the Central District appears well served
in terms of the number and mix of parks, the
park acres available per thousand (the lowest
of all the districts) demonstrates additional park
need. In particular, the most socio-economically
challenged section of this district has a dearth
of parkland/amenities.
West Central District
Similar to the Central District, the socio-
economically challenged area in the West
Central District is lacking parkland. For example,
even with a sidewalk connection on Miller Street
to the park, Benton Hill, the public parkland
in this area still faces significant accessibility
issues due to steep and busy streets.
South District
The South District is one of the more socio-
economically challenged areas in the City,
but it is also relatively well served with parks,
including two strong neighborhood parks
within the residential areas. However, access
to nearby regional parks is limited; since
most of the parkland is specialized in nature,
opportunities for traditional play (playgrounds,
open lawns) are more limited.
West District
Along the west side of Mormon Trek Boulevard
there is a large section of fairly dense housing
that is less affluent than its neighbors in the
far western portion of the district. This area is
under-served by the parks system—there is no
public parkland in this section.
11 Parks:
2 Mini
5 Neighborhood
1 Community
2 Regional
1 Specialty
8 Parks:
4 Neighborhood
4 Regional
8 Parks:
4 Neighborhood
3 Community
1 Regional
1 Park:
1 Neighborhood
Iowa City Master Parks Plan
District Analysis Map & Socio-Economic Results
South District
West Central District
8 Parks:
2 Community
2 Regional
4 Specialty
8 Parks:
1 Mini
3 Neighborhood
1 Community
2 Regional
1 Specialty
West District
North District
Southeast District
Central District
µ
0 21 Miles
Legend
Iowa City Limits
Districts
Socio-Economic Results
Weighted ValueHigher Wealth, Higher Education, Mobile
Lower Wealth, Lower Education, Less Mobile
Priority Equity Area DRAFT
36 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
ADA Assessment and Maintenance Summary
ADA Alignment
This project launched in the fall of 2016 with
an on-the-ground assessment of the current
park system’s alignment with Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. An inventory
of facilities and an overview of current
conditions was also provided. In addition to
associated databases provided to the Iowa City
Parks staff, the appendix of this report includes
highlights of this park-by-park assessment.
Of the nearly 50 parks reviewed, there are
several facilities that are scheduled to undergo
park renovations in the near future. There are
other parks in need of renovation, requiring
further study with greater detail in the future.
The City continues to work diligently to get
surfacing materials to align with ADA guidelines
and provide accessible paths to playgrounds.
This plan also recommends considering
inclusion of “full-play” playground(s) in the
system down the line.
The following recommendations for
accessibility improvements are intended to
take a comprehensive look at ADA access,
recognizing that parks and playgrounds vary in
their alignment with ADA guidelines, and those
guidelines continue to evolve.
• In some instances, playgrounds need to
have surfacing material maintained or
modified; often, simply adding depth to
the mulch will suffice
• When slated for replacement, upgrade old
playground structures with structures that
follow current ADA guidelines
• Confirm fall zones at all playgrounds
• Provide access into playgrounds at
strategic locations
• Provide accessible path connections at
strategic locations including from parking
lots and park perimeter access points
• Correct all parking accommodations:
address ADA alignment, accessible
parking space stripping and signage
• Provide seating at strategic locations
• Repair accessible surfaces along
pathways
• Adjust/repair community park restroom
grab bar/dispenser heights, fixtures and
door-opening force
• Provide hard-surface companion seating
areas at picnic areas and bleacher seating
• Provide accessible trail opportunities
• Provide access to quiet spaces to address
sensory overload
• Consider appropriate use of enclosures to
promote child safety
• Install drinking fountains according to
design guidelines included in this plan
• Install detectable warning surfaces where
park paths meet the street
• In partnership with the City’s in-fill
program, use curb cuts to help address
park access/connectivity issues
• Support lasting value of the accessible
system through Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
(LCCA) and sustainable structures.
About the ADA
Background
More than 55 million Americans—18% of our
population—have disabilities, and they, like all
Americans, participate in a variety of programs,
services and activities provided by their state and local
governments. This includes many people who became
disabled while serving in the military. And, by the year
2030, approximately 71.5 million baby boomers will be
over age 65 and will need services and surroundings
that meet their age-related physical needs.
Who has responsibilities under the ADA?
Title II of the ADA applies to all state and local
governments providing programs, services or
activities. State and local governments have an
obligation to ensure that they do not discriminate
against people with disabilities.
~ www.ada.govDRAFT
37CH 03 Inventory Analysis
District Analysis—
Neighborhood Open Space
While this plan emphasizes the physical
features of the Iowa City Parks System, an eye
must always be kept toward implementation.
The current park district boundaries applied
to the City’s Neighborhood Open Space
Requirements (NOSR) do not extend to the
City’s projected growth boundaries. This means
some new developments are coming on-line
with no commitment to support parks.
This plan recommends extending the
City’s current park districts to account for
anticipated growth. A map reflecting this plan’s
recommended NOSR park districts is included
below.
S1
S3
N2
NE1N3N1
NE3
S2
C8
SE3SW2
NW1
SE2
SW5 C5
C6SW6C4
C1
NE2SW3SW1
NW2
SE1
C2
C7 C3
SW4
0 21 Miles
Neighborhood Open Space
District Map (2017)µDRAFT
38 CH 03 Inventory Analysis
The most significant adjustment that appears
here is the use of Market/Rochester as the
boundary between the north and central
districts. This reduces the central district
population slightly. While the Market corridor
is not really an edge, it does serve as a
reasonable boundary to the University/
Downtown area. The upcoming Bicycle
Master Plan also anticipates Market/Jefferson
as protected bike lanes, so it would be an
upgraded active transportation corridor as
well. With these recommendations, the NOSR
park districts are reduced from ten to six, a
reasonable step considering the scope/scale of
other park districts in communities with similar
ordinances.
Finally, this plan also looked at the timeline for
applying the NOSR. If a municipality does not
spend the funds or develop the land received
from an impact fee within a certain period, the
municipality must refund the developer for the
developer’s contribution. In comparison to other
communities with similar ordinances, Iowa
City faces a shorter timeline, increasing the
challenges for effective use of its NOSR. Please
see table.
Iowa City, IA Lincoln, NE Draper, UT Thurston County, WA
Refunds of Impact Fees 5 years 8 years 6 years 10 years
DRAFT
MASTER PLANNING
Chapter
4
DRAFT
40 CH 04 Master Planning
Strategic Framework
The recommendations highlighted in this report relate to the strategic direction developed through research, analysis of the
system and public/stakeholder engagement. This strategic framework addresses the Iowa City Park System’s vision, mission,
high-level goals and potential measures of success.
SYSTEM VISION
An accessible parks and recreation
system, committed to building
community and serving all residents
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
An accessible parks and recreation system, committed to community and
serving all residents
1. Community Resilience
Iowa City Parks and Recreation (ICPR)
strives to further enhance community,
cultural identity and belonging, at the
same time attracting new residents and
visitors. Increasing public awareness while
preserving and enhancing the system’s
quality features drive us to the vision.
2. Neighbors Collaborating and
Engaged Through the Parks
This system is built through voices
of the community, employing best
practices and sound research. It
enhances community vitality, social
systems, public health, safety and the
community’s education mission.
3. A System for All to Gather and Enjoy
The system is intended to serve all
residents and their ever-changing needs.
4. Sustainable
Lasting value depends on healthy natural
resources, quality energy-efficient built
infrastructure, ongoing maintenance,
fiscal responsibility, community support
and flexibility—the ability to evolve with
changing times.
5. Collaboration
The support of the Iowa City community
and its leaders, coupled with public
and private partnerships, is critical to
the system’s success now and into the
future.
6. Public Stewardship
Stewarding the park system’s natural
resources provides opportunities for
wide-ranging ages and abilities to
volunteer and develop a healthy sense of
park “ownership.”
SYSTEM MISSION
To foster the community’s engagement, sense of place and well-being through a
parks and recreation system that includes:
• Gathering spaces that welcome all
residents regardless of age, background
or ability
• Current, well-maintained recreation
facilities, serving community and
neighborhoods
• Connecting quality trails for all
• Nature-based quiet places
• Land and water health/protection
• Useful, easy access to technology
• Engaging, proven programs of play,
education and public health
• Ongoing fiscal responsibility
DRAFT
41CH 04 Master Planning
The statements below provide strategic
guidelines for how to improve and plan for
the future of the parks system as a whole.
They are organized by category: Access, Play,
Restore, Educate, Sustain and Measure. These
guidelines are meant to demonstrate the
philosophical approach to parks and recreation
in Iowa City. More specific recommendations
for changes to the park system are provided in
a later section in this chapter.
Access
An inventory of the Iowa City Parks System
reveals limited ADA accessibility, so this
strategy addresses ongoing improvements
in that regard. At the same time, this
strategy uses a broad meaning of “access”
to emphasize spaces, places, facilities and
programs that welcome, engage and offer
unlimited opportunity to all people and peoples.
Access is critical to maintain “a system for all.”
1. Use inventory of current parks to develop
ADA-accessible system including access
to and through existing parks; go further
and create inclusive/immersive park
playground/recreation systems for users
of wide-ranging abilities
2. Reiterate improving transportation
access to parks (e.g., curb access),
geographically and physically
a. Engage local neighborhood leaders
to assist in assessing needs
b. Include the community’s many
diverse populations in planning
c. Routinely use Iowa City’s Racial and
Socioeconomic Equity Review Toolkit
3. Through mapping, income data and
growth projections, identify system
service gaps and secure additional and/
or expanded park facilities to meet future
growth needs; couple this strategy with
the involvement of diverse voices as
outlined above
4. Provide multi-generational facilities and
programs
a. Identify basic needs of every park
and themes of specific parks as a
check to ensure “a system for all”
b. Ensure that senior programming
and facilities are on par with youth
interests, acknowledging the aging
Iowa City population
i. Beyond ADA, ensure facilities
(swimming, outdoor exercise,
raised gardens, outdoor
classrooms, etc.) and education
programs are provided to
accommodate multiple
generations
c. Identify additional system gaps and
address
d. Include viewing and seating areas
for active play areas to allow for
generations to gather
5. Consider additional restroom facilities
along trails and park areas
6. Establish specialty gardens (e.g., sensory,
therapy, community food, educational)
based on local needs in targeted areas
7. Incorporate STEAM education
opportunities into facilities and programs
8. In partnership with upcoming bicycle
plan, identify connectivity needs (cycling,
pedestrian) and prioritize gaps to achieve
full connections of parks-to-parks, parks-
to-trails, parks-to-neighborhoods and
parks-to-community amenities
9. Improve system visibility, way-finding and
overall awareness of what is available
a. Foster nature connection through
way-finding; build a visual brand for
all City facilities
b. Consider multi-lingual signs
c. Enhance physical and visual access
to Ralston Creek and all parks (See
Restore)
d. Establish effective signs pointing
people to and through the parks
10. Identify and maintain safety features
such as lines of sight, lighting where
appropriate, etc.
a. Address the student population’s
interest in having adult supervision
in parksDRAFT
42 CH 04 Master Planning
Play
The categories of “Play” and “Restore”
(below) work in tandem to assist in creating
a “complete parks” system. Here we address
segments of the system that promote year-
round active living for many users while also
establishing some components to attract
visitors and newcomers to Iowa City. Below we
address public and natural resources health.
1. Continue establishing distributed key
park recreation features (e.g., dog parks,
STEAM stations, adventure playgrounds)
2. Consider a system-wide feature attraction
as a regional draw
a. Examples include archery,
cyclocross, enhanced water and/or
cycling trails network
b. Identify the potential of existing
features (with or without
enhancements, e.g., Terry Trueblood
Recreation Area) and/or potential
of a Ralston Creek Greenway (see
Restore) to serve as a significant
attractor
3. Incorporate fully accessible play structures
4. Complement basic playgrounds and court
play in neighborhood parks with nature
play and intergenerational play
5. Incorporate check-out and/or rental of
equipment for expanded use/enjoyment
6. Stay current in recreation programming
and include appropriate facilities
within the system; currently address
small-group sports (e.g., pickle ball);
competitive cycling/bicycle park; outdoor
skills building/paddling sports, water-
based activity access, intergenerational
programming, spaces for users with
different sensory or physical abilities and
soccer expansion
7. Address the trend in competitive sports
through establishing athletic field
complexes to support tournament play
a. Assess the potential of using partner
facilities to develop full complement
of services
8. Establish a range of year-round seasonal
activities (winter hiking, cross-country
skiing, etc.)
9. Incorporate technology in the parks,
including personal technology charging
stations and Wi-Fi
a. Address the needs of different
generations
b. Consider apps and similar tools for
engagement/up-to-date experiences
and communications
Restore
The natural and public health components of
this plan involve promoting nature-based play,
improved natural resources and programming/
facilities to restore mental health as well as
active programming to complement more
traditional parks and recreation programs and
facilities.
1. Restore the health of Ralston Creek as
a community-wide Greenway/Nature
Exploration amenity
a. Consider eventual expansion to
include entire creek network
2. Establish educational, best management
practice (BMP) demonstration areas
within the parks systems to support water,
woodland and prairie management
a. Include mechanisms for training/
involvement of volunteers in parks
system overall and stewardship of
demonstration and/or parks natural
areas in particular
b. Preserve, protect, enhance and
potentially expand the park system’s
natural areas (reference upcoming
Natural Resources Inventory and
Restoration Briefs)
3. Provide recycling containers at all park
locations with garbage receptacles
4. Consider sustainable design and use
of alternative energy sources in all new
construction
5. In conjunction with demonstration
areas, expand associated education
programming (see Educate)
6. In partnership with upcoming park
natural resources study, identify locations
for enhanced nature play, wildlife
viewing, hiking, etc., without placing
habitats at risk
7. Ensure parks have sufficient facilities
to promote parks as “outdoor fitness
centers” and build park-based outdoor
health events (runs, hikes, rides, cross-
country, etc.)
8. Provide programs and facilities that
support social interactions and therapeutic
(as well as physically active) outdoor
recreation, e.g., chess, healing gardens,
yoga, natural playscapes DRAFT
43CH 04 Master Planning
Educate
Education is woven throughout this plan, but
Iowa City as a whole is driven by an education
mission. Therefore, the strategy places some
emphasis here on the need to tap into this
community’s exceptional education community.
Partnerships with educators and students, and
coordination with facilities, allow us to better
develop programs, reach key audiences and
make efficient use of resources for cities,
schools and universities.
1. Provide facilities and programs which
teach basic outdoor recreation skills
including swimming, bicycle safety,
fishing, gardening, sports and boating.
2. Provide interpretive and educational
opportunities—including STEAM
activities—throughout the park which
showcase environmental sustainability
and regeneration.
3. Advance education partnerships to
enhance ICPR’s education programs,
engagement and outreach with local
educational institutions.
4. Target volunteerism for growth of
education offerings
a. Enhance engagement of retirees in
education programming (considering
the community’s exceptional pool of
senior educators)
5. Partner with educators, retirees and
volunteers to develop education curricula
to support this plan including land-water-
BMP demonstration sites, gardening,
history and culture programming, public
health promotion and outdoor skills
building
Sustain
While many features above are also critical to
the overall sustainability of Iowa City’s parks and
recreation system, here the strategy emphasizes
funding mechanisms, collaboration, efficiency
and awareness-building.
1. Maintain the character of individual parks
while establishing a brand/identity of the
overall park system
2. Build awareness of current regional
attractions (e.g., Terry Trueblood
Recreation Area, outdoor recreation
opportunities, athletic complexes) to serve
as an attractor to visitors/outside interests
3. Collaborate with surrounding communities
and counties for programs and facilities
4. Prioritize regional trails network (see Play)
5. Enhance collaborations with other City
departments for efficiency, awareness-
building, support and creative use of
space with other City operations
6. Grow use of programs and facilities with
enhanced/expanded social media and
other public communications
7. Grow baseline support through improved
telling of the parks-rec story to decision-
makers and the public (move to #2 on
this list)
8. Expand ongoing, private funding strategies
such as grants, sponsorships, etc.
9. Quantify health, economic and natural
resources benefits of the Iowa City Parks
system, monitor/measure success and
use results to feed support for the system
a. Partner to measure results
10. Establish a set of comparable University
community park and recreation systems
to aid in benchmarking the Iowa City
park system’s social, financial and
ecological health
Measure
Potential measures for success include:
1. Growth in park use, counters, shelter
reservations, education programming
attendance
2. Growth in volunteerism/volunteer time
3. Increasing capital and/or maintenance
budgets; resources generated
4. Improved physical accessibility
(associated with park improvements/
inventory as baseline)
5. Greenspace per person—maintenance
of current ratio as Iowa City continues
to grow
6. Public health improvements
7. Natural resources outcomes—biodiversity
increases (reference Natural Resources
Inventory measures established through
parallel natural resource studies)
8. Miles of trail expansion/improvement—as
established through parallel study on
connectivity
9. Improved outcomes over other
comparable university communities DRAFT
44 CH 04 Master Planning
Future Anticipated Growth—Boundaries and Population
The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan predicts a
2030 population of 84,000 for Iowa City, an
increase of approximately 12,000 residents.
Based on Iowa City’s projected population for
2030, to maintain the current level of park
service (in terms of acres per 1,000 residents),
ICPR would need to add 286 acres of parkland
by 2030. However, if no parkland is added to
the system, ICPR would still be well above the
national median level of service.
Based on these findings, the recommendation
of this plan is to focus on filling specific
gaps in the park system service, in terms
of geography or service type, rather than to
focus on acquiring more park acres.
Features of interest to the overall system as
it grows include: continued development of
thoughtful gathering spaces (including fire pits
and council circles), an emphasis on pools
over splash pads (due to the need for residents
learning to swim), integration of public art
throughout the system, community gardening
and an emphasis on public health—including
Tobacco-Free Parks. Recycling in the parks
also requires meaningful attention, as it is not a
fad but an ongoing function of the park system.
All of these features must be developed in the
context of an equitable and sustainable park
system.
District-by-District Needs
The planning team performed a district-by-
district analysis to determine specific parks
and recreation needs in each area. These are
big-picture needs for parkland and facilities—
additional parkland needs, connections to
existing parks or broad categories of service
that could be considered under-provided
(e.g., neighborhood water play, natural areas).
It does not address fine-grain needs such
as maintenance issues in specific parks, or
programming recommendations.
Future Park Needs
Iowa City Park Acreage Per Capita, Current and Projected
Population*Acres of Parkland
Acres per 1,000 residents
(level of service)
Current—Iowa City 71,832 1,688 23.5
Current—National Median (2012)NA NA 15.2
2030 projected (no acreage increase)84,000 1,688 20.1
2030 projected (maintain current level of service)84,000 1,974 23.5
* Current population is based on the 2015 ACS & 2030 projected population is taken from the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan.DRAFT
45CH 04 Master PlanningDRAFT
46 CH 04 Master Planning
South District
1. Add parkland when possible.
As redevelopment occurs within this
vicinity, watch for opportunities to
secure potential mini or neighborhood
parkland sites.
2. Add park and trail connection to
developing neighborhood around
Alexander Elementary
A new neighborhood is developing around
Alexander Elementary school on the south
edge of the City. The City’s district plan
for this area includes a new neighborhood
scenario. We suggest some modifications
to this plan with regard to the park
system:
a. The new neighborhood park should
ideally be adjacent to the elementary
school and at least 5–10 acres in
size.
b. A trail or wide sidewalk should
connect the neighborhood to Terry
Trueblood Recreational Area.
Terry Trueblood Recreation Area
Sand Prairie Park
Napoleon Park
Sycamore South Greenway
Wetherby Park Fairmeadows Park
Napoleon Park
IC Kickers Soccer Park
Whispering Meadows Wetlands
µSouth District Parks
Park Type & Park Character*
0 10.5 Miles
Sycamore St Sycamore StState Hwy 6
McCollister Blvd
*(Left to Right) Primary-Secondary CharacteristicsS. G
i
l
b
e
r
t
S
t
Scott BlvdSioux AvePARK CHARACTERPARK TYPE
Mini
Neighborhood
Regional
Specialty
Community
Play
Compete
Splash
Connect
Go Wild
Reflect
Learn
Move
DRAFT
47CH 04 Master Planning
3. Improve Connections for Wetherby,
Whispering Meadows and Sand Prairie
Although a sensitive area, Sand
Prairie needs a clear pedestrian/
bicycle connection to the neighborhood
and Wetherby Park. Generally, these
parks need improved accessibility and
connections for public use.
4. Add a park on southeast edge
of the South District and/or
enhance Wetland Park
On the southeast edge of the district,
near Wetland Park and the Mobile Home
parks, an additional park is needed. This
moderately dense area is more than half
a mile from a neighborhood park (Wetland
Park lacks the typical amenities of a
neighborhood park, such as a playground
or open lawn area). Before additional
development continues in this area, 5–10
acres of land should be acquired for use
as a park. If possible, amenities could be
added to Wetland Park to supplement the
service in this neighborhood; however, the
environmentally sensitive nature of this
park likely prevents this option.
5. Add more opportunities for
traditional “play”
The South District has a bounty of
regional and specialty parks, but
limited opportunities for traditional play
(e.g., playgrounds and open lawns in
a neighborhood park setting). These
components should be incorporated into
any new parks, such as those suggested
in items 1, 2 and 4 of this list.
1
2
3
4DRAFT
48 CH 04 Master Planning
Southeast District
1. Add a park and trail in East Side
Growth Area along Snyder Creek
The southeast district plan proposes an
East Side Growth Area concept plan for
the area east of Scott Boulevard, between
Muscatine Avenue/American Legion Road
and the railroad. The concept plan shows
a park, trail and detention basin centered
around Snyder Creek. This master plan
supports that proposal. The park should
be at least 5–10 acres in size.
2. Link future sports facility to East Side
Growth Area
A sports facility is planned near Taft
Avenue and 420th Street. A trail should
connect the facility to the planned growth
area and Snyder Creek park (see item 1).
3. Add pedestrian connections to
Mercer Park
As the only full-service neighborhood
park in this part of town, Mercer Park is
tremendously important. However, due
to the design of the street system in the
subdivision to the east of Mercer Park,
pedestrian routes to the park are limited
and longer than ideal. Look for ways to
add pedestrian walkways that provide a
more direct route to the park, such as
establishing an easement between the
side yards of adjoining properties.
Scott Park
East Side Sports Complex
Mercer Park
Court Hill Park
Creekside Park
Cardigan Park
Rita's Ranch Dog Park
Windsor Ridge Park
µSoutheast District Parks
Park Type & Park Character*
0 10.5 MilesSycamore StState
H
w
y
6
Court St
Muscatine Ave
*(Left to Right) Primary-Secondary Characteristics
420th StScott BlvdTaft AvePARK TYPE
Mini
Neighborhood
Regional
Specialty
Community
PARK CHARACTER
Play
Compete
Splash
Connect
Go Wild
Reflect
Learn
Move
DRAFT
49CH 04 Master Planning
µSoutheast District Park Needs
By Location
0 10.5 MilesSycamore StState
H
w
y
6
Court St
Muscatine Ave
420th StScott BlvdTaft Ave4. Add more diversity in park offerings
From a park character standpoint, this
district has little variety. It lacks amenities
in the categories of Connect, Learn,
Reflect, Splash and Thrill. Amenities
that could add diversity include: splash
pads (Splash), educational signage or
demonstration sites (Learn), scenic
viewpoints (Reflect), or an events lawn
(Connect). Consider possible sites for
these in new and existing parks, such as
the new park along Snyder Creek (item 1
of this list).
1
2
3
DRAFT
50 CH 04 Master Planning
West Central District
1. Add park amenities near Sunset
Street and Benton Street
There is a gap in park service between
Willow Creek Park and Benton Park.
Overall, this district has the second-lowest
amount of parkland of all the districts and
that is demonstrated in this area. Two
mini-parks offer limited service, but ideally
another neighborhood park is needed. It is
difficult to acquire parkland in a developed
neighborhood. In addition to watching for
opportunities to acquire property, another
option to help fill this gap is to partner
with Horn Elementary to allow greater
public access to their facilities.
2. Add mini-park in Manville Heights
Lincoln Elementary is partially serving the
playground need of this neighborhood,
but access is limited to non-school hours.
Watch for an opportunity to acquire
property to establish a mini-park.
3. Improve connections to Benton
Hill Park
There is no sidewalk along the south
side of Benton Street leading to Benton
Hill Park. Add a sidewalk on the south
side of the street if feasible and/or add
a pedestrian crossing across Benton.
Explore options for a trail connection to
Benton Hill from the Highway 6 trail.DRAFT
51CH 04 Master Planning
1
2
3
DRAFT
52 CH 04 Master Planning
Central District
1. Watch for opportunities to
add parkland
Overall, the Central District is lacking
parkland, with 12.5 acres per 1,000
people—the lowest of all the districts.
Due to the highly developed nature of
this district, finding new land for parks is
difficult. The planned Riverfront Crossings
Park, to be built on the site of the old water
treatment plant, is a good example of the
kind of opportunity to look for in this district.
2. Improve Ralston Creek to fill
Recreational Gap
Just south of Glendale Park and Hickory
Hill Park there is a gap where there are
no neighborhood parks within walking
distance. One way to help fill that gap is
to improve access to Ralston Creek so it
can be used as a recreational amenity. This
would likely include creating entry points
on public land and right-of-ways along
with interpretive signage and periodic
way-station features. The City also owns
a parcel near Glendale Park that could
help fill the park gap and connect to
Ralston Creek.
3. Work with developers
Encourage developers to provide rooftop
gardens and play spaces, or similar
approaches to provide recreation access in
physically tight locations.DRAFT
53CH 04 Master Planning
2
DRAFT
54 CH 04 Master Planning
West District
1. Add parkland and/or improve park
connections for neighborhood west
of Mormon Trek
On the west side of Mormon Trek
Boulevard, between Melrose Avenue and
Walden Square, there is a relatively dense
neighborhood with no neighborhood
park. Villa Park and Willow Creek Park
are just outside the quarter-mile radius
and are separated by busy Mormon Trek
Boulevard.
Given the socio-economic status of this
area, providing good park service is an
important equity issue.
There is a green space known as “King
Park” on Melrose but it is not public
land—it is owned by the Lutheran
Church. There is also a large open space
on the high school grounds.
Options for improving park service to this
neighborhood include:
a. Improve connections to Willow Creek
Park and Villa Park with an improved
crossing across Mormon Trek and
signage to direct people down
MacBride to Villa Park.
b. Initiate discussions with the church
about the potential for shared use
and maintenance of the property
between the church and the public,
or purchase of a portion of the land.
c. Initiate discussions with the school
district about the potential for shared
use and maintenance of their open
space along Melrose Avenue.DRAFT
55CH 04 Master Planning
2. Connect Hunters Run Park to Willow
Creek Park
Previous plans have discussed the
possibility of a tunnel under Highway 218
to connect Hunters Run to Willow Creek.
The City should continue to explore the
feasibility of this idea.
3. Add parkland or improve park
connections for neighborhood west
of high school
West of the high school there is a large
subdivision with no parkland, and no easy
access to nearby parks. A large green
space near Tipperary Road is for storm-
water, and not likely usable as park space.
Recommendations from points 1 and 2
could both address this issue: connecting
to Hunters Run park under Highway
218, or shared-use agreements with the
church or high school.
Additionally, south of the intersection
of Shannon Drive and Tipperary Road
there are approximately 4 acres of open
land that are part of the subdivision. The
city should initiate discussions with the
developer to discuss the possibility of
converting that into parkland.
4. Acquire land for trail west of
Hunters Run
The Southwest District plan recommends
adding a trail running west from Hunters
Run Park. The city should continue to
pursue this by reserving the trail right-of-
way before the area develops.
1
2
3
4DRAFT
56 CH 04 Master Planning
North District
1. Add neighborhood or mini parklands
to serve emerging residential areas
west/north of Dodge Street and south
of I-80
As new homes are built in these areas,
they city will need to reserve lands for
neighborhood or mini parks of 1–10
acres. Partnership possibilities with
Shimek Elementary and/or Shimek Woods
should also be explored.
2. Add park facilities near
intersection of Scott Boulevard &
Rochester Avenue
There is a gap in neighborhood or mini
park service in this area—no parks are
within walking distance. Before this area
continues to develop, the city should
acquire 1–10 acres of parkland.DRAFT
57CH 04 Master Planning
3. Add diversity in park offerings
In terms of park character, the north
district is limited in variety, primarily
offering only the “Play” and “Move”
categories. Possible additions could be a
river access point (Go Wild), educational
signage or demonstration sites (Learn)
or event spaces (Connect). These type
of offerings should be considered for
inclusion in any new parks, such as those
recommended in items 1 and 2 or this list.
µNorth District Park Needs
By Location
0 21 MilesDubuque StPark Rd
State H
w
y
6
Dodge St
US I-80
Herbert Hoover Hwy
1st AveCourt St
Scott Blvd
Governor StBurlington St
Foster Rd Whiting Ave
Linder Rd Prairie Du Chien RdHarvest RdTaft Ave2
1a
1b
DRAFT
58 CH 04 Master Planning
In addition to the district-by-district needs
identified through the multi-tiered analysis
performed, this plan also identifies needs of
a broader-based nature—themes that run
throughout the Iowa City Parks System, based on:
• The ADA and maintenance inventory
performed at the onset of this project
• Needs that surfaced initially at the district
level, but resonate throughout the system
• Equity analysis
• Strategic directions based on public input
and park trends
Way-finding/Signage
As outlined in Chapter 5, way-finding and signage
is a priority for the park system overall. The
strategic framework calls for a brand/identity
for the park system as important to its overall
success and that’s challenging to accomplish
without increased consistency through the
signage system. Nearly every park also struggles
with accessibility by virtue of little to no directional
signage. When the public is not aware of a park’s
presence or simply struggles to find it, the system
and the public are short-changed.
ADA Alignment
Iowa City’s Parks and Recreation Department
works diligently to provide improvements to
accommodate ADA accessibility throughout
the park system. This plan’s primary goal
targets at least one fully accessible park in
each park planning district within the first year
of implementation (2019/2020). The park
system’s needs to achieve ADA accessibility
vary from park to park—in some instances,
it’s a simple matter of increasing mulch depth;
in others, playgrounds may need replacement
or parking and pathway facilities may require
adjustment. This plan takes a comprehensive
look at ADA access guidelines; an inventory of
the parks, included in the Appendix, provides
suggestions for improvements at each park in
the system where changes are desired.
Maintenance
The level of maintenance varies significantly
based on the types of facilities and number
of park users visiting the park. As Iowa
City continues to grow, and the community
demographics continue to diversify, parks will
be required to be more things to more people.
This will place a strain on Parks and Recreation
staff for both programming and maintaining
park facilities. At the same time, park
maintenance is required to address upkeep of
200 acres of non-parklands.
Based on a growing number of parks and park
facilities and a limited number of professionally
trained maintenance providers, the department
will be required to be strategic in its
maintenance practices.
Equity Initiatives
While addressed more specifically within
the district-by-district analysis, with at least
three segments of the park system in need
of attention due to equity (and a fourth—the
South district—would benefit from some
additional neighborhood-style play), addressing
equity issues has to surface as a system-wide
priority as well.
Ralston Creek
The strategic direction initially called for a
closer look at the potential of Ralston Creek,
but both the upcoming natural areas inventory
and the equity analysis conducted here really
bring home the importance of converting the
City’s streams—particularly Ralston Creek—to
accessible recreational features that accentuate
learning, reflection and nature-play. Developing
this greenway is likely one of the best
opportunities for the Central District, arguably
among the most economically challenged and
underserved areas in the system, to approach
equitable access to parks and recreation.
Technology
Iowa City’s student population and the need to
address future interests in technology speaks to
the need to accommodate use of technology in
parks. Charging stations and/or Wi-Fi services
may prove an important way to provide user
security and convenience. When constructing
trail heads, welcome facilities or information
kiosks, this plan recommends considering
inclusion of a charging station—particularly in
parks likely to be frequented by young adults.
While programming is beyond the scope of
this report, the future likely holds continued
expansion of technology for recreation,
interpretation and wayfinding in parks and along
trails. Charging stations are an appropriate tool
to address that trend.
Overall Park System Needs
DRAFT
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Chapter
5
DRAFT
60 CH 05 Design Guidelines
Introduction
Park spaces have a direct impact on the users’
experience. Whether it’s a first impression
or a lasting memory, it’s not just the natural
systems in parks that can spark delight—the
built environment also influences the quality
of that experience. Parks are backdrops for
love, laughter, sorrow, joy—it’s the nature of
places where family and friends gather to evoke
meaningful emotions and connections. The
facilities in parks can enhance these interactions
or serve as an obstacle. The hope is to set the
stage for the emotions that connect people to
each other and to place through appropriate use
of color, light, texture, quality and beauty.
Purpose
The overall objective in establishing the Design
Guide for park structures and signage is to
ensure a sense of aesthetic value, environmental
sensitivity and a visual cohesiveness within the
park systems and the surrounding community.
This will be a flexible, usable document for field/
office park staff, design professionals, park
friends groups, potential donors and the Iowa
City Parks and Recreation Commission.
Key Considerations
The following are three primary design
considerations.
Economic Realities
Limited budgets, costs of improvements
and ongoing maintenance and operational
expenses are important considerations when
developing a guide for future park facilities.
Department values that are grounded in quality
and durability will need to be balanced with
affordability. The higher long-term costs vs.
lower short-term costs of improvements need
to be factored into the discussion, as does
the economic benefit of quality facilities. The
Design Guide can be helpful in informing the
design process, without necessarily always
increasing the cost of the improvement. In
other cases, an improvement may need to be
deferred until adequate resources are available
to meet basic design needs.
Community of Neighborhoods
There are both unique and diverse
neighborhoods in Iowa City. This is also true
of the architectural aesthetic in many of the
neighborhoods. Park structures are also as
diverse and interesting as the communities
in which they reside. A challenge for this
document is to understand and articulate
the unique character of the existing park
architecture, while applying a twenty-first
century sensibility.
Environmental Relationships
Architectural development within the Iowa
City parks needs to exist in harmony with the
natural environment. This can be done by
understanding and using the native geology.
The Design Guide is based on a set of Goals
and Objectives that were developed through
the course of the project. The statements below
reflect the results of those discussions.
Goals
Goals are typically defined as broad statements
of what we hope to accomplish. The goals
established for the Design Guide include the
following:
• A framework for future park infrastructure
to enhance the Iowa City park user
experience
• Sustainability principles
• Architectural identity with the surrounding
community by utilizing the best of current
sustainable design practices, materials
and construction techniques to create an
overall unified park experience and image
that is built to last
Objectives
Objectives are measurable tasks we will
undertake to achieve established goals. The
objectives established for the Design Guide
project include:
• Identify design principles for elements
common to all structures; to maintain
flexibility, create a filtering system to
guide the design of individual projects,
allowing for variations between parks,
within structure types and for varying site
contexts
• Create design templates for various park
structures, defining design elements
common to all: picnic shelters, restrooms
and basic signageDRAFT
61CH 05 Design Guidelines
Design Guide—
A process for implementation
The Iowa City Parks Design Guide is a key
component of a comprehensive planning,
design, and implementation process
administered by City staff. This Design
Guide will be a general reference to overall
planning efforts and a much more specific,
practical document during final design and
implementation efforts.
Step 1: Project Request and Pre-
Design Documentation
As capital planning priorities advance, specific
projects are identified for funding through
the annual capital improvement budget. The
Design Guide will be incorporated at the
outset with the initial project request, with an
accompanying design guide pre-documentation
questionnaire to include the following
information:
• Type of facility (restroom type, shelter
type, other), template option
• Site analysis
• Context of existing park and surrounding
neighborhood architecture; level of
influence—high, medium, low
• Type of building materials used in existing
park structures
–Type of stone
–Prevalent siding material, pattern
and color
–Prevalent shingle material and color
• Appropriate base (stone—geological
connection)
The pre-design phase will culminate with
an on-site meeting of all appropriate parties
involved in the project to confirm critical
elements identified in the project request which
include the proposed scope, purpose and
project program; site selection and conditions
to be considered; applicable design guide
template; and review of preliminary budget and
schedule/timeline.
Step 2: Project Design
The project design phase will clearly identify
key recommendations or concepts for use
during design phase. The following key
checklist items should be utilized during the
design phase.
• Review the history of the project’s park
development to understand the original
design intent as it relates to existing
facilities.
• Confirm the appropriate template option.
• Identify relevant sustainable criteria and
methods for consideration in the template.
• Determine the appropriate balance
for each project that demonstrates
a thoughtful design approach that is
balanced within the following three
domains of sustainability:
–Economic (cost)
–Environmental (natural patterns
and flows)
–Cultural (achieving equity,
park category)
• Design Templates—Each project must
identify the specific design template most
closely associated with the project and
identify the design options and detailing
being integrated. Justification should be
presented to assure compliance or to
identify the rationale for design alterations.
• Architectural Elements—All ten
statements will be supported within the
design unless specific justification is
presented supporting conflicts.
1. Scale & Mass: Consider using
contextual proportions emphasizing
the visual weight of a structure.
2. Roof: Consider integrating a visually
appropriate, pitched roof with large
overhangs.
3. Base: Consider integrating relief in
the base of a structure.
4. Form: Consider using rectilinear,
horizontal forms.
5. Walls: Consider using walls that are
visually consistent.
6. Details: Consider integrating
details at connections and material
transitions which are expressed.
7. Color: Consider using colors
that blend into the surrounding
environment.
8. Windows & Openings: Consider
integrating transition spaces linking
indoor spaces to the exterior
environment.
9. Materials: Consider integrating the
use of natural materials with textural
depth and visual weight.
10. Universal Material/Color Choices:
Each project must identify the
specific design material types,
patterns, applications, textures and
color selections. DRAFT
62 CH 05 Design Guidelines
Design Guidelines
The guidelines herein have been crafted to
be prescriptive but fall just shy of defining
all components of the finished product.
All projects will require a site survey and
detailed design and engineering. The design
process cannot be side-stepped by using this
document. It can, however, be streamlined,
more efficient, and ultimately produce a
more unified image for Iowa City’s Parks and
Recreation system.
Design Template
Facilities & Signage
The design considerations for each of the
following facility categories have been
advanced as “templates” to provide practical,
focused recommendations and requirements.
For each template, a standard format has
been established that contains overall imagery,
specific architectural requirements, and design
options for various situations. To the right is the
format for each facility. These pages feature
the following facility categories:
• Restroom (single stall)
• Restroom (double stall)
• Shelter
• Shelter with Restroom
• Identification Park Sign
• Marker Park Sign
• Interpretive Kiosks
DRAFT
63CH 05 Design GuidelinesDRAFT
64 CH 05 Design Guidelines
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with individual private
bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with public access and interior
stalls. These facilities also range from custom-built to pre-engineered,
prefabricated concrete structures.
The restroom structures use all architectural elements. Future
development of restroom facilities will most likely rely on custom-built
structural design with affordability as a major consideration.
Mass & Scale - Use appropriate proportions and members, emphasizing
the visual permanence of the structure. The roof, roof structure, columns
and base help support this development.
Form - Use rectilinear, horizontal forms. The length of the structure should
be in proportion to the size and massing of the structure.
Base - Integrate heavy relief in the base of the structure, giving visual
weight to its foundation.
Walls - Use materials that provide heavy texture and scale.
Windows & Openings - Maximize the balance between walls and
openings to provide this visual preference. The canopy over the entrance
extends the structure into the landscape.
Roof - Integrate a visually heavy, pitch roof with large overhangs.
Details - Integrate details at connections and material transitions.
Restroom (Single)
Elevation View
Plan View
Metal Roof and Wood Facia
Restroom
Storage &
Mechanical
Room
Stone Base, Stone Cap and Wood Posts
DRAFT
65CH 05 Design Guidelines
Perspective—Side View
Perspective—Front View DRAFT
66 CH 05 Design Guidelines
The multi-user restroom will provide two separate rooms. The rooms can
range in program, including single-stall, multiple stalls to family rooms.
The exterior will provide greater opportunity to incorporate drinking
fountains, maps and other park amenities.
Mass & Scale - Use appropriate proportions and members, emphasizing
the visual permanence of the structure. The roof, roof structure, columns
and base help support this development.
Form - Use rectilinear, horizontal forms. The length of the structure should
be in proportion to the size and massing of the structure.
Base - Integrate heavy relief in the base of the structure, giving visual
weight to its foundation.
Walls - Use materials that provide heavy texture and scale.
Windows & Openings - Maximize the balance between walls and
openings to provide this visual preference. The canopy over the entrance
extends the structure into the landscape.
Roof - Integrate a visually heavy, pitch roof with large overhangs.
Details - Integrate details at connections and material transitions.
Restroom (Double)
Metal Roof and Wood Facia
Stone Base, Stone Cap and Wood PostsPlan View
Rest- room Rest- roomStorage &
Mechanical
RoomDRAFT
67CH 05 Design Guidelines
Perspective—Side View
Perspective—Front View DRAFT
68 CH 05 Design Guidelines
Shelters are a flexible, open-air facilities ranging in size and use. They
serve a variety of functions while providing park users protection from the
elements. Shelters include the vertical structure and plaza space adjacent
to the canopy.
The architectural elements that are critical to the development of the
shelter structures are mass and scale, form, base, roof and details. An
open, visually accessible experience is preferred with flexible plaza space
extending beyond the canopy of the roof.
Mass & Scale - Use appropriate proportions and members, emphasizing
the visual permanence of the structure. The roof, roof structure, columns
and base help provide this preferred visual preference.
Form - Use rectilinear, horizontal forms. The length of the structure should
be in proportion to the size and massing of the structure. The form should
be supported by oversized structure for support.
Base - Integrate significant relief in the base of the structure. The four
corner columns extend this expression vertically.
Walls - Use heavily textured pylons at the corners. Balance is found
between the massing of corner supports and the visually open
structure above.
Openings - Maximize the balance between support structure and an open
visual preference. Also, integrate plaza space beyond the canopy of the
structure. This will increase the flexibility of the space and improve the
open access of the shelter.
Roof - Integrate a pitch roof with large overhangs.
Shelter
Plan View
Metal Roof and Wood Facia
Stone Base, Stone Cap and Wood Posts
DRAFT
69CH 05 Design Guidelines
Perspective—Side View
Perspective—Front View DRAFT
70 CH 05 Design Guidelines
Shelter/Restroom
Plan View
Shelters are a flexible, open-air facility ranging in size and use. They
serve a variety of functions while providing park users protection from the
elements. Shelters include the vertical structure and plaza space adjacent
to the canopy.
The architectural elements that are critical to the development of the
shelter structures are mass and scale, form, base, roof and details. An
open, visually accessible experience is preferred with flexible plaza space
extending beyond the canopy of the roof.
Mass & Scale - Use appropriate proportions and members, emphasizing
the visual permanence of the structure. The roof, roof structure, columns
and base help provide this preferred visual preference.
Form - Use rectilinear, horizontal forms. The length of the structure should
be in proportion to the size and massing of the structure. The form should
be supported by oversized structure for support.
Base - Integrate significant relief in the base of the structure. The four
corner columns extend this expression vertically.
Walls - Use heavily textured pylons at the corners. Balance is found
between the massing of corner supports and the visually open
structure above.
Openings - Maximize the balance between support structure and an open
visual preference. Also, integrate plaza space beyond the canopy of the
structure. This will increase the flexibility of the space and improve the
open access of the shelter.
Roof - Integrate a pitch roof with large overhangs.
Metal Roof and Wood Facia
Stone Base, Stone Cap and Wood Posts
DRAFT
71CH 05 Design Guidelines
Perspective—Side View
Perspective—Front View DRAFT
72 CH 05 Design Guidelines
Elevation
Existing Identification Sign
Park Identification Sign
Park or Trail Markers
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Option B: Concrete Base @ Grade
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Map: By Other
Decorative Powder Coated Donor Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Concrete Base @ Grade
Option B: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Decorative Powder Coated Trail Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Proposed
Identification Sign
Proposed
Trail Marker
Existing
Identification Sign
Current
Parks & Recreation
Logo
In 2008, the Parks And Recreation Department developed a park
identification sign (see photo). This sign is made out of an aluminum metal,
powder coated with white accent, placed on a stone base supported by
a concrete footing. The new park identification sign will be of the same
components.
In addition, a park and trail marker sign will be included into the family of
park signs. This sign will be constructed of the same materials at a height
of four feet for the larger sign and three feet for the smaller marker. Details
for these signs are included here.
Other park signs to consider to include in the family of signs are as follows:
• Information Center (Kiosk)
• Information Panels
• Destination
• Way-finding/Directional Signage
Concepts for these signs appear in the Appendix of this report and this
plan recommends developing details for the complete family of signs.
Way-finding and Signage
DRAFT
73CH 05 Design Guidelines
Elevation
Existing Identification Sign
Park Identification Sign
Park or Trail Markers
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Option B: Concrete Base @ Grade
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Map: By Other
Decorative Powder Coated Donor Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Concrete Base @ Grade
Option B: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Decorative Powder Coated Trail Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Proposed
Identification Sign
Proposed
Trail Marker
Existing
Identification Sign
Current
Parks & Recreation
Logo DRAFT
DRAFT
IMPLEMENTATION AND PHASING
Chapter
6
DRAFT
76 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
This table summarizes the actions recommended in this plan and provides a timeline for each, beginning in fiscal year 2019,
as the CIP budget has been set for 2017/2018. The table also identifies the highest-priority items. In terms of timeline, actions
are categorized as 1–2 year, 3–5 year, or 5+ years from 2019. Actions with a * are considered to be the highest-priority items.
Actions are also classified by type: Capital Project, Operations and Maintenance Need (O&M), Program, Policy or Organizational.
** Identify opportunities for early win access points and associated amenities, while recognizing the thrust of the Ralston Creek Greenway project is likely medium to long term due to the stream’s
current conditions in both bank stability and water quality.
Recommended Actions Beginning 2019
Action Timeline (beginning 2019)Type
System-Wide Actions
* ADA Alignment Immediate and ongoing Capital
O&M
Organizational
* Wayfinding and Signage Immediate and ongoing Capital
* Maintenance Improvements Immediate and ongoing O&M
Organizational
* Ralston Creek—Greenway/Access 3–5 years (see below and footnote)Capital
* Addressing Equity Needs of Four Districts (See District Needs below) See below Primarily Capital
District Needs
South District
Add 1-acre park on Sycamore Street 1–2 years (to secure opportunity); 3–5 years for build-out Capital
* Add park and trail connection to developing neighborhood around
Alexander Elementary
1–2 years to secure parkland; 5+ years for build-out,
depending on neighborhood development
Capital
Improve access to Sand Prairie from South District residential areas 3–5 years Capital
* Add a park on southeast edge of the South District and/or enhance
Wetland Park
1–2 years to secure parkland; 5+ years for build-out;
Wetland Park enhancements 3–5 years
Capital
Add more opportunities for traditional “play”3–5 years (equity issue; look for early-win opportunities) Capital
Southeast District
* Add a Park and Trail in East Side Growth Area along Snyder Creek 1–2 years to secure parkland; 5+ years for build-out,
depending on neighborhood development
Capital
Link Future Sports Facility to East Side Growth Area 3–5 years Capital
Add pedestrian connections to Mercer Park 3–5 years Capital
Add more diversity in park offerings 5+ years Capital
West Central District
Add park amenities near Sunset Street and Benton Street 3–5 years Capital
Add mini-park in Manville Heights 1–2 years to secure opportunity; 5+ years for build-out Capital
* Improve connections to Benton Hill Park 1–2 years, potential equity issue Capital
Central District
Watch for opportunities to add parkland in the Central District Ongoing—secure opportunity; 1–2 years post-
opportunity for “play” option build-out
Capital
* Improve Ralston Creek to fill Recreational Gap 3–5 years ** (equity issue; see footnote) CapitalDRAFT
77CH 06 Implementation and Planning
General Implementation
Approach
The Parks and Recreation Commission should
work with parks and recreation staff members
to create a yearly action plan based on the
recommendations of this plan. This plan should
be approved at the beginning of each year (or
fiscal year) and a progress report should be
created at the end of each year (or fiscal year).
Wayfinding and Signage
Implementation
Near-and-in-park signage can be addressed
on a project-by-project basis. This is proposed
for the priority district projects identified in
District-by-District Implementation. A broader
wayfinding study may be warranted. Associated
costs of wayfinding and signage depend on the
park scale, i.e., community or regional parks
typically require a larger network of wayfinding
and interior signage than neighborhood parks.
* Type-dependent
Recommended Actions Beginning 2019
Action Timeline (beginning 2019)Type
West District
* Add parkland and/or improve park connections for neighborhood
west of Mormon Trek
1–2 years Capital
Connect Hunters Run Park to Willow Creek Park 5+ years, coordinate with HWY 218 tunnel Capital
Add parkland or improve park connections for neighborhood west of
high school
3–5 years Capital
Acquire land for trail west of Hunters Run Link to Johnson County Poor Farm Planning and
upcoming connectivity study, likely 5+ years
Capital
North District
Add neighborhood park to serve emerging residential area west of
Dubuque Street and south of I-80
Secure opportunity; 5+ years for build-out Capital
Add park facilities near intersection of Scott Blvd & Rochester Ave 3–5 years Capital
Add diversity in park offerings 5+ years Capital
Park Signage Package:
Cost Estimates
Item Cost
Community/Regional Parks
Park Identification Sign $2.5K
Information Center (Kiosk) *$8–35K
Information Panels *$3–8K
Destination *$400–2K
Marker
Large Marker $2K
Small Marker $600
Wayfinding/Directional
Pedestrian Range
(size & message)
Vehicular Range
(size & message)
Neighborhood Parks
Park Identification Sign $2.5K
Information Panels *$3–8K
Destination *$400–2K
Pedestrian Range
(size & message)
Mini-Parks
Park Identification Sign $2.5K
Destination *$400–2KDRAFT
78 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Program Cost
Lawn
2 Acres of Unobstructed Open-Space Seeding
(86,512 SF @ $0.10/SF)
$8,651
Landscape
5.5 Acres of Lawn and Landscaping
$40,000
Parking
New Parking: 15 Stalls x $2,500/Stall
Resurfacing and Striping Existing 15 Stalls
$37,500
$7,000
Pathways
New Sidewalks: 6’W x 1,652 LF @ $5.50/SF $54,516
Shelter
New Shelter: 30’ x 30’
Remodel Existing Shelter:
• Re-Roofing @ $20/SF
• Staining
• Upgrade Electrical and Lighting
• New Concrete Slab (40’ x 40’ @ $5.50/SF)
• Replace 2 Grills
• Drinking Fountain (Wall-Mounted)
$200,000
$38,800
$18,000
$4,000
$3,000
$8,800
$2,000
$3,000
Park Identification Sign $5,000
Back Stop (Baseball/Softball)$12,000
Playground
New Play Structure
Upgrade Existing Play Structure
New Play Surface (Rubber)
Replace Existing Play Surface (Mulch)
Concrete Edging
$200,000
$50,000
$70,000
$6,000
$3,600
Site Furniture Package
Benches (4 @ $1,400 each)
Picnic Tables (6 @ $1,500 each)
Drinking Fountain
$5,600
$9,000
$3,500
District-by-District
Implementation
The following summary begins to address
anticipated capital costs associated with the
higher-priority district-by-district improvements
proposed here. These figures do not include
engineering/design, permitting costs, etc.
A multiplier of 1.3 would serve as a typical
factor to reach a more complete project cost.
These rough estimates are also based on 2017
costs. Again, typically, we would use 4% per
year to grow these costs over time. We do not
project other project costs as, after 1–3 years,
new base figures should likely be applied for
projections. These figures should be considered
appropriate as a “magnitude of cost” estimate
only. No project can be truly budgeted without
greater detail in its scope/design and location.
Neighborhood Park
Redevelopment
The following assumptions and cost estimates
are used to provide a general overview of
neighborhood park redevelopment. Note the
highlighted line items indicate the cost of
“building new.” A remodel/replacement is also
included in several instances.
Assumptions:
Park and Program
Considerations
Category:
Neighborhood Park
Size:
5 to 8 Acres
Context:
Surrounded by
Residential Neighborhood
Connectivity:
• Direct Connection to
Adjacent Sidewalks
• Requires Minimal
Parking
• Not on Transit Line
• Not Connected to the
Trail System
DRAFT
79CH 06 Implementation and Planning
SOUTH DISTRICT
Add a Park and trail connection to developing
neighborhood around Alexander Elementary
Item Cost
Land Acquisition (5–10 Acres)$40K/Acre
(required?)
Shelter & Restroom $250K–$325K
Playground $100K
Play Resilient Surface $10K
Pathways $8K
Landscaping $10K
Signage $2.5K
CENTRAL DISTRICT
Improve Ralston Creek to Fill Recreational Gap
Item Cost
Creek Restoration See “About Ralston Creek
Restoration” later in this chapter
Pathways $8K
Landscaping $10K
Signage $2.5K
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
Add a Park and Trail in East Side Growth Area
along Snyder Creek
Item Cost
Land Acquisition (5–10 Acres)$40K/Acre
(required?)
Shelter & Restroom $250K–$325K
Playground $100K
Play Resilient Surface $10K
Pathways $8K
Landscaping $10K
Trail $650K–$850K
per Mile
Signage $2.5K
WEST DISTRICT
Add Parkland and/or Improve Park Connections
for Neighborhood West of Mormon Trek
Item Cost
Option A—Add Parkland
Land Acquisition $40K/Acre
(required?)
Shelter & Restroom $250K–$325K
Playground $100K
Play Resilient Surface $10K
Pathways $8K
Landscaping $10K
Signage $2.5K
Option B—Improve Park Connection
Land Acquisition $40K/Acre
(required?)
Trail $650K–$850K
per Mile
WEST CENTRAL DISTRICT
Improve Connection to Benton Hill Park
Item Cost
Sidewalk (1,024LF @ 5’W)$25/LF = $25.6K
Curb Cut @ Benton St. $3K
See the funding opportunities matrix that appears later in this chapter for
potential funding opportunities beyond Iowa City’s Capital Improvements
Program.DRAFT
80 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
ADA Implementation
Program Cost
Lawn
2 Acres of Unobstructed Open-Space Seeding
$0
Landscape
5.5 Acres of Lawn and Landscaping
$0
Parking
Resurfacing and Striping Existing 2 Stalls
$2,500
Pathways
New Sidewalks: 6’W x 1,652 LF @ $5.50/SF $54,516
Shelter
Remodel Existing Shelter:
• New Concrete Slab (40’ x 40’ @ $5.50/SF)
$8,800
Drinking Fountain (Wall-Mounted)$3,000
Playground
New Play Structure
Upgrade Existing Play Structure
New Play Surface (Rubber)
Replace Existing Play Surface (Mulch)
Concrete Edging
$0
$50,000
$70,000
$6,000
$0
Site Furniture Package
Benches (1 @ $1,400 each)
Picnic Tables (1 @ $1,500 each)
Drinking Fountain
$1,400
$1,500
$3,500
ADA Alignment
A worthy early goal for this plan is to reach
alignment with ADA guidelines in at least one
park per district in 2019/2020. This table
highlights what is generally required to reach
that goal for one park. Highlighted features look
at the costs associated with building new.
Assumptions:
Park and Program
Considerations
Category:
Neighborhood Park
Size:
5 to 8 Acres
Context:
Surrounded by
Residential Neighborhood
Connectivity:
• Direct Connection to
Adjacent Sidewalks
• Requires Minimal
Parking
• Not on Transit Line
• Not Connected to the
Trail SystemDRAFT
81CH 06 Implementation and Planning
An effective implementation strategy will be
achieved through two efforts.
Develop an Implementation
Team
City staff responsible for the implementation of
accessibility improvements shall include:
• Parks and Recreation Director
• Superintendent of Park and Forestry
• Facilities Manager
• Superintendent of Facilities
• City Engineering
This team shall coordinate the implementation
of the improvements as these measures are
integral to park and facility maintenance,
operations, capital planning and budgeting.
Plan Review and Locating
Candidates for Improvement
All existing and future park improvements
should strive to achieve accessibility throughout
the design. To accomplish this, an integrated,
physical evaluation of the site, including a site
inspection, facility ADA evaluation and program
evaluation, will be conducted at the beginning
of each project. To facilitate this assessment,
one of several certified ADA coordinators
could assist, including Jack McMahan, an
Accessibility Management Consultant.
The Comprehensive Parks and Recreation
Plan recommends a focused approach for
achieving accessibility throughout the Iowa City
Park system. In each of the districts, a priority
should be placed on the following:
• A reasonable number of parks within
a district
• Park type and distribution within a district
• Specific type of park facility
This plan recommends a 1–2 park per
planning district focus over the next 1–2 years,
beginning with parks most readily able to
achieve alignment with ADA guidelines. This
might occur due to scheduled maintenance/
remodel or new facilities going in at a particular
park, or due to the park’s current level of
alignment (i.e., it’s poised for a series of simple
fixes to achieve alignment). Staff can consult
a combination of the ADA inventory database
provided to staff through this planning process
as well as maintenance and CIP schedules to
determine the strongest candidates for parks
that can achieve success.
Upon success with the initial wave of ADA
improvement efforts, the annual action plan
can continue down a path of focusing on the
next tier of park candidates for addressing
ADA accessibility. DRAFT
82 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
The Iowa City Park system offers a wide range
of gathering spaces—landscapes, facilities
and user experiences. As its parks are diverse,
so too are its people. As an ever-changing
demographic of park users enjoy the continued
renewals, revisions and additions of park
facilities, one common theme connects all park
advocates and their shared enthusiasm for the
park system: safe and well-maintained facilities.
Planning, designing, building and experiencing
parks are always at the forefront of the
communities and the boards and councils that
govern them; it is the ongoing maintenance
and long-term care that is often overlooked
and inadequately budgeted for when focusing
on the next big park project or the addition of
a new park property. The condition of parks
expresses the City’s values and commitment to
providing places and experiences that add to
the quality of life of its residents.
Successful park systems provide a sustainable,
accessible and well-balanced approach
to preserving, restoring, developing and
maintaining park facilities. This in turn improves
the quality of the built and natural environment
and improves and enhances the quality of life
for park users. Well-maintained parks balance
the need to enhance or restore park amenities
with the need to provide active and passive
play opportunities. These types of parks are
created through sustainable maintenance
practices.
The level of maintenance varies from park to
park and among types of facilities. Based on
this diversity of park assets, some parks or park
types need greater attention or a specialized
maintenance program. To sustain an ever-
growing park system with growing complexities
in park operations and maintenance, a multi-
prong approach will be required to meet existing
and future maintenance needs:
• Invest
Grow maintenance expertise through
well-trained park personnel. As the
park system grows and individual parks
continue to evolve with more unique
facilities, park staff resources will need to
evolve to meet future needs and demands
of an ever-changing park system.
• Prioritize
Make maintenance a priority. Identify,
schedule and fund the required time,
material and effort to properly maintain
existing facilities, rather than deferring
maintenance on park assets.
• Engage
Grow community engagement by reaching
out to community volunteers and park
advocates. Encourage neighborhoods to
take an interest in maintaining the public
spaces near them.
• Create unique partnerships
Identify and foster positive relationships
with both corporate and community
leaders. As the community diversifies,
promote partnerships throughout the
community.
Maintenance Implementation
“We are in the business of creating memories. The
commitment to maintain our parks is a direct reflection of
our community values.”
~ Juli Seydell Johnson
Iowa City Parks and Recreation DirectorDRAFT
83CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Maintenance Implementation
for the First Two Years
This plan recommends a comprehensive
approach to maintenance: a Maintenance
Manifesto. Upon adoption of this
Comprehensive Parks and Recreation plan,
and within the first six months, this plan
recommends staff use the park inventory and
assessment to identify all structures, pathways
and plantings that are in poor condition. Staff
can then identify projects that can be led and
completed in the following categories:
• By Volunteers
Identify projects that can be managed
by staff but completed by volunteers
from neighborhoods, businesses or
organizations. These projects are typically
the low-hanging fruit that require a bit of
direction and support. They would include:
painting, limited carpentry, landscape care
(weeding, trimming, garbage collection)
and other meaningful but low-risk duties.
In some communities, there has been a
call for carpenters, electricians, plumbers,
concrete experts and gardeners. In other
communities, the focus for volunteers
has been around “their neighborhood
park.” What is important for the volunteers
is that work is meaningful and clearly
defined. A committed staff person that
is organized with good communication
skills would be an excellent lead. Other
organizations find that the cost of
volunteer coordinators is often more than
offset by volunteer contributions they
organize and lead.
• By Staff
This requires a realistic assessment of
current staff skills and capacity. This
can also lead to a determination of
gaps or shortages in capacity and aid in
identifying future hiring needs.
• By Contracted Work
Work with contractors and the business
community to determine the best and
most cost-effective method to complete
work in this category. This work should
be beyond the capacity for volunteers and
staff to accomplish.
This effort will be a shared commitment
by community partners and city staff. This
“Maintenance Manifesto” would serve as a
two-year commitment to upgrade all facilities
and structures that are in poor condition due
to deferred maintenance. Once the tasks are
assigned on the basis of volunteer, staff or
contractor responsibility, costs to address
deferred maintenance are more easily
determined.
“The general objectives of maintenance are to ensure the clean
and orderly appearance of grounds, structures and facilities, and
to protect the health, safety and convenience of the park user.”
~ Alexander Garvin
Public Parks: The Key to Livable Communities
Parks increase property value
5–22% for a home within 500 feet
of a well-maintained park.DRAFT
84 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Concept
Ralston Creek runs through the eastern part
of Iowa City, winding between residential
structures and commercial buildings along a
narrow corridor. Grading and the addition of
impervious surfaces have increased surface
runoff volumes and flow rates over time. This
has increased the potential for streambank
erosion, debris and flooding. These changes
have increased the risks of damage to private
property and public infrastructure.
There is also a need to increase public
access to parks and greenspace in the
areas surrounding this corridor. A restoration
effort along Ralston Creek could increase
access along a greenbelt corridor while also
addressing stability issues along the creek.
As most of the stream and its tributaries are
located on private property, such an effort will
require cooperation and easement (or property)
acquisition from adjacent landowners for
construction and continued public access.
Restoration efforts should focus on the
following:
• Dense tree cover along the banks of
the creek limits sunlight available at the
surface, which is needed to sustain more
erosion-resistant vegetation. Many trees
have or will become undercut, potentially
falling into the creek—deflecting flows
toward banks or blocking flow along the
stream or at bridge or culvert entrances.
Clearing will be required in some areas
to increase available sunlight and to
accommodate required stabilization
techniques. Clearing should be done only
as needed to accomplish these goals, to
maintain existing, healthy, mature trees as
much as possible.
• Grading activities should shape banks
to more stable slopes. This increases
the cross-sectional area of the stream,
reducing flood potential. Lower
flow velocities and approach angles
can reduce shear forces along the
streambanks, further reducing erosion
potential. Any grading or shaping needs to
be done in ways to continue to effectively
transport sediment through the corridor.
• Along longer reaches, rock riffle structures
may be needed in areas with more slope
along the stream length. In such areas,
the stream may currently be lower than
outlets of culverts or other crossings at
the upper end of a reach.
• The restored corridor would employ
native wildflowers, grasses and forbs to
resist erosion. These plants create roots
that drive several feet into the ground.
Along outer bends, stone materials can
be buried into the lower sections of the
bank and integrated with soil and compost
materials to allow native vegetation to
create an interlacing web of roots through
the stone armor—providing the necessary
stone protection while maintaining the
aesthetics of the native prairie.
• Trails can be placed parallel to the
stream, providing public access to green
spaces and allowing for required ongoing
maintenance.
• In some locations, retaining walls may be
needed where space is most restricted. To
minimize cost, walls should only be used
where necessary to provide stable slopes
and should be located as far upslope from
the stream as possible.
About Ralston Creek Greenway Implementation
Photos show a creek restoration project of similar
cross-section to Ralston Creek.DRAFT
85CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Locations
While all segments of Ralston Creek within the
developed part of the City show potential for
restoration, certain areas seem best suited for
early implementation.
• Segments of Ralston Creek located
downstream of North Dodge Street are
generally commercial or higher-density
residential properties. These areas include
larger land parcels, requiring coordination
with fewer property owners.
–Some of these segments run parallel
to public streets, such as along the
west side of South Van Buren Street
from East Washington to East Court
Street. This location along parking
lots and the adjacent street may
allow for easier construction access
and less direct impact to private
property.
–South of East Prentiss Street, the
stream appears to fall within City-
owned land. The cross-section of
the stream is larger in this area,
leading to additional restoration
opportunities.
• The stream segments downstream of
Glendale Park, between East Jefferson
and Evans Street has larger parcels and
greater distances between the stream and
surrounding structures. The confluence
of Ralston Creek with its tributary South
Ralston Creek is within this area. The
stream runs adjacent to East Jefferson
Street through a part of this area. The
fewer parcels and additional space in this
area could allow restoration and access
to be provided, while still preserving the
privacy of the adjacent residences.
• South Ralston Creek between Longfellow
Nature Trail and Muscatine Avenue
primarily follows what appears to be a
platted “alley” right-of-way, along the
rear yards of single-family residential
structures. Stream restoration in this area
could be achieved through acquisition of
temporary easements for construction, or
permanent easements for access.
Cost
Restoration efforts of this type often cost
between $300–$450 per foot of stream length
improved, or about $400–600k per 1/4 stream
mile of restoration. These costs do not include
retaining walls or other steep slope protection,
which would need to be evaluated on a site-by-
site basis to determine the type of wall needed
and its size.
Next Steps
To better define construction costs, a more
detailed concept plan should be prepared
for the early phases of implementation. This
effort should review existing topography and
infrastructure in greater detail to determine
the need for retaining wall structures or other
features that could exceed the costs listed
above. Such a planning effort should include
preliminary coordination with permitting
agencies such as the Corps of Engineers
and Iowa Department of Natural Resources,
to address any concerns with the proposed
concept and better define the level of effort
required to obtain construction permits. It also
makes sense to include stream evaluation,
wetland delineation and endangered species
surveys as a part of the planning effort, to
identify any impacts and needs for mitigation.DRAFT
86 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Matrix
A plan of this caliber needs many partners and wide-
ranging strategies for successful implementation.
The funding strategies include: local and/or regional
bond referendums and/or local option sales taxes;
advocacy for effective state supports; partnering
with other agencies; private fundraising; and
public and private grants/foundational supports.
Highlights of some of the most immediately available
resources are included in the funding matrix on
the next few pages of this report. Meanwhile, this
plan recommends contacting those who have
been successful with local bond referendums in
the past. Johnson County succeeded in passing
a $20 million bond referendum. The City of West
Des Moines, Iowa, is currently considering a similar
strategy. In 2016, ballot measures in support of
conservation and/or recreation were on the ballot in
86 locations across the country. Sixty-eight passed
(79%), achieving $6.9 billion in support, including a
$40 million bond referendum in Linn County, Iowa,
garnering 74% support.
Potential Funding Sources
Description Program
Element Possible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
Federal Transportation Enhancement Program; IDOT through Regional Planning Affiliate (RPA)
Funding for enhancement or preservation activities of
transportation related projects.
T, L, O, W The following projects are funded: facilities for pedestrians and
bicyclists; safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists;
scenic or historic highway programs; acquisition of scenic or historic
sites; landscaping and scenic beautification; historic preservation;
rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation facilities;
preservation of abandoned railway corridors; control and removal or
outdoor advertising; archaeological planning and research; mitigation of
water pollution due to highway runoff; or transportation museums.
Typically October 1 for statewide applications;
Check with RPA for deadlines.
Dependent on allocation as part of reauthorization
of MAP-21. Funding has historically been $4.5 million
annually statewide. Funds available vary by region.
Varies by region; Contact RPA.
Recreational Trails Program (Federal)
Funding for creation and maintenance of
motorized and non-motorized recreational trails
and trail related projects.
T Recreational trail extension.Typically October 1 Varies each year 20%
Recreational Trails Program (State); IDOT
Funding for public recreational trails.T Trail projects that are part of a local, area-wide, regional, or
statewide trail plan.
Typically July 1 Varies each year 25%
Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP); IDOT
Funding for highway/street, transit, bicycle/pedestrian
or freight projects or programs
which help maintain Iowa’s clean air quality by
reducing transportation related emissions.
T, O Projects which will reduce vehicle miles traveled or
single-occupant vehicle trips; Transportation improvements to
improve air quality.
Typically October 1 Approximately $4 million annually
Minimum $20,000 total project cost
20%
Land and Water Conservation Fund; Iowa DNR
Federal funding for outdoor recreation area
development and acquisition.
T, P Improvements to existing recreation facilities and development
of new facilities.
March 15, or closest working day Varies annually 50%
General Obligation Bonds
Allows cities to secure funding by pledging
future tax revenues to repay the bond.
W, T, P, L, O Capital improvements, such as street projects NA Varies NA
Community Attraction and Tourism – Enhance Iowa – Iowa Economic Development Authority (IEDA)
To assist projects that will provide recreational,
cultural, entertainment and educational attractions.
T, P, A Packaged amenities and connections to existing tourist attractions October 1; often times other deadlines
throughout the year
In flux; contact Nicole Shala at
enhanceiowa@iowaeda.com
1:1 (typically)DRAFT
87CH 06 Implementation and Planning
H Health
N Nature/Habitat
W Water Resources/Streambank/Stormwater Management
T Trail
P Parks
A Art
L Land Acquisition
O Other Amenities
Potential Funding Sources
DescriptionProgram
ElementPossible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
Federal Transportation Enhancement Program; IDOT through Regional Planning Affiliate (RPA)
Funding for enhancement or preservation activities of
transportation related projects.
T, L, O, W The following projects are funded: facilities for pedestrians and
bicyclists; safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists;
scenic or historic highway programs; acquisition of scenic or historic
sites; landscaping and scenic beautification; historic preservation;
rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation facilities;
preservation of abandoned railway corridors; control and removal or
outdoor advertising; archaeological planning and research; mitigation of
water pollution due to highway runoff; or transportation museums.
Typically October 1 for statewide applications;
Check with RPA for deadlines.
Dependent on allocation as part of reauthorization
of MAP-21. Funding has historically been $4.5 million
annually statewide. Funds available vary by region.
Varies by region; Contact RPA.
Recreational Trails Program (Federal)
Funding for creation and maintenance of
motorized and non-motorized recreational trails
and trail related projects.
TRecreational trail extension.Typically October 1 Varies each year 20%
Recreational Trails Program (State); IDOT
Funding for public recreational trails.TTrail projects that are part of a local, area-wide, regional, or
statewide trail plan.
Typically July 1 Varies each year 25%
Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP); IDOT
Funding for highway/street, transit, bicycle/pedestrian
or freight projects or programs
which help maintain Iowa’s clean air quality by
reducing transportation related emissions.
T, OProjects which will reduce vehicle miles traveled or
single-occupant vehicle trips; Transportation improvements to
improve air quality.
Typically October 1 Approximately $4 million annually
Minimum $20,000 total project cost
20%
Land and Water Conservation Fund; Iowa DNR
Federal funding for outdoor recreation area
development and acquisition.
T, PImprovements to existing recreation facilities and development
of new facilities.
March 15, or closest working day Varies annually 50%
General Obligation Bonds
Allows cities to secure funding by pledging
future tax revenues to repay the bond.
W, T, P, L, OCapital improvements, such as street projects NA Varies NA
Community Attraction and Tourism – Enhance Iowa – Iowa Economic Development Authority (IEDA)
To assist projects that will provide recreational,
cultural, entertainment and educational attractions.
T, P, APackaged amenities and connections to existing tourist attractions October 1; often times other deadlines
throughout the year
In flux; contact Nicole Shala at
enhanceiowa@iowaeda.com
1:1 (typically)DRAFT
88 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Sources
Description Program
Element Possible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
Iowa Great Places – Cultural Affairs
Supports the development of new and existing
infrastructure intended to cultivate the unique qualities
of neighborhoods, communities and regions in Iowa.
T, P, A Streetscape, façade repair, community spaces Online application typically due May 1; June
site visits; August letter of intent for grant
funding
$1,000,000 annually; communities can apply for
$15,000–$400,000; can only apply for three years of
funding after designation; average award $185,000
1:1
Iowa Arts Council Grants – Cultural Affairs
To support the creation and presentation of new
artwork, development of an arts experience or
formation of an arts education program.
A Functional art; event space art; other community art projects Usually May and November rounds $1,000 to $10,000 grants At least 1:1
Brownfield/Grayfield Redevelopment Tax Credit – IEDA
Tax credit incentive for the rehabilitation of
dilapidated/underutilized commercial properties with
environmental challenges.
H, W, O Dilapidated/hazardous buildings and other redevelopment sites September 1 Up to 30%, up to $1,000,000 per project; up to
$10,000,000 each fiscal year.
None
Brownfields Program – Iowa DNR
Cost reimbursement for Phase I, asbestos/lead
inspection; free Phase II services; 50% reimbursement
for environmental cleanup.
H, W, O Dilapidated/hazardous buildings and other redevelopment sites Rolling Varies (up to $25,000 each for investigation and
cleanup)
50% for cleanups
National Endowment for the Arts
Several grant programs that foster art and culture –
Challenge America, ArtWORKS, and OurTown
A Creative placemaking, community art Varies Varies Varies
Public Works Program – EDA
Provides resources to meet construction and design of
infrastructure essential to economic development
O Workforce facilities; shipping/logistics; business incubators;
telecommunications
Rolling – Discuss with ECIA (project must meet
CEDS goals)
$100,000–$3,000,000
Community Foundation of Johnson County
The foundation supports operational or capital
projects in five key areas: arts, culture & humanities;
education; environment; health & human services;
public & societal benefit.
H, P, T, A, O Potential to apply to nearly any aspect of the master plan Grant application window: June 1–July 7, 2017 Unclear; available to non-profits (unclear)DRAFT
89CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Sources
DescriptionProgram
ElementPossible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
Iowa Great Places – Cultural Affairs
Supports the development of new and existing
infrastructure intended to cultivate the unique qualities
of neighborhoods, communities and regions in Iowa.
T, P, AStreetscape, façade repair, community spaces Online application typically due May 1; June
site visits; August letter of intent for grant
funding
$1,000,000 annually; communities can apply for
$15,000–$400,000; can only apply for three years of
funding after designation; average award $185,000
1:1
Iowa Arts Council Grants – Cultural Affairs
To support the creation and presentation of new
artwork, development of an arts experience or
formation of an arts education program.
AFunctional art; event space art; other community art projects Usually May and November rounds $1,000 to $10,000 grants At least 1:1
Brownfield/Grayfield Redevelopment Tax Credit – IEDA
Tax credit incentive for the rehabilitation of
dilapidated/underutilized commercial properties with
environmental challenges.
H, W, ODilapidated/hazardous buildings and other redevelopment sites September 1 Up to 30%, up to $1,000,000 per project; up to
$10,000,000 each fiscal year.
None
Brownfields Program – Iowa DNR
Cost reimbursement for Phase I, asbestos/lead
inspection; free Phase II services; 50% reimbursement
for environmental cleanup.
H, W, ODilapidated/hazardous buildings and other redevelopment sites Rolling Varies (up to $25,000 each for investigation and
cleanup)
50% for cleanups
National Endowment for the Arts
Several grant programs that foster art and culture –
Challenge America, ArtWORKS, and OurTown
ACreative placemaking, community art Varies Varies Varies
Public Works Program – EDA
Provides resources to meet construction and design of
infrastructure essential to economic development
OWorkforce facilities; shipping/logistics; business incubators;
telecommunications
Rolling – Discuss with ECIA (project must meet
CEDS goals)
$100,000–$3,000,000
Community Foundation of Johnson County
The foundation supports operational or capital
projects in five key areas: arts, culture & humanities;
education; environment; health & human services;
public & societal benefit.
H, P, T, A, OPotential to apply to nearly any aspect of the master plan Grant application window: June 1–July 7, 2017 Unclear; available to non-profits (unclear)
H Health
N Nature/Habitat
W Water Resources/Streambank/Stormwater Management
T Trail
P Parks
A Art
L Land Acquisition
O Other Amenities DRAFT
90 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Sources
Description Program
Element Possible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
Other Private Funders
Additional private foundations and corporate giving
programs are available for a variety of projects.
N, W, T, P, A,
L, O
Varies Varies Varies Varies
Healthy Watershed Consortium
The goal of the Healthy Watersheds Consortium Grant
Program is to accelerate protection and enhancement
of healthy watersheds.
N, W The Ralston Creek restoration need is notable Typically March Grant range $50,000–$200,000 25% minimum match required
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) – Sustainable Community Demonstration
Provides grants for varied projects demonstrating
comprehensive innovative approaches to support
community sustainability. Applications must meet at
least one HUD national objective.
N, W, O,
Varied
Varied Contact in flux Max award: $500,000 Unclear
Iowa Initiative for Sustainable Communities (IISC)
IISC partners with communities through a formal
request for proposals process. Typically, the RFP
is released each Fall for the following academic
year. Each partnership is one year long, with the
opportunity to extend into two years. If all partners
choose to extend their partnerships each year, the RFP
may be released on an every other year basis.
Many varied The Ralston Creek Greenway or the plan’s other equity projects
might be on interest
Typically January Appears focused on technical assistance Unclear
Resource Enhancement and Protection (REAP)
REAP-CEP; roadside vegetation; historical resources;
public land management; city parks and open space;
soil and water enhancement; county conservation;
state open space. Administered through four state
agencies: DNR, IDALS, DCA and DOT.
N, W, T, P, L Varied County Conservation – Aug
City Parks – Aug
Cost Share – Aug
REAP – CEP:
May and Nov
Depends on annual allocation; REAP-CEP consistently
$350,000, however; $12,000,000 allocation for
upcoming fiscal year
Cost Share requires 25% DRAFT
91CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Sources
DescriptionProgram
ElementPossible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
Other Private Funders
Additional private foundations and corporate giving
programs are available for a variety of projects.
N, W, T, P, A,
L, O
Varies Varies Varies Varies
Healthy Watershed Consortium
The goal of the Healthy Watersheds Consortium Grant
Program is to accelerate protection and enhancement
of healthy watersheds.
N, WThe Ralston Creek restoration need is notable Typically March Grant range $50,000–$200,000 25% minimum match required
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) – Sustainable Community Demonstration
Provides grants for varied projects demonstrating
comprehensive innovative approaches to support
community sustainability. Applications must meet at
least one HUD national objective.
N, W, O,
Varied
Varied Contact in flux Max award: $500,000 Unclear
Iowa Initiative for Sustainable Communities (IISC)
IISC partners with communities through a formal
request for proposals process. Typically, the RFP
is released each Fall for the following academic
year. Each partnership is one year long, with the
opportunity to extend into two years. If all partners
choose to extend their partnerships each year, the RFP
may be released on an every other year basis.
Many variedThe Ralston Creek Greenway or the plan’s other equity projects
might be on interest
Typically January Appears focused on technical assistance Unclear
Resource Enhancement and Protection (REAP)
REAP-CEP; roadside vegetation; historical resources;
public land management; city parks and open space;
soil and water enhancement; county conservation;
state open space. Administered through four state
agencies: DNR, IDALS, DCA and DOT.
N, W, T, P, LVaried County Conservation – Aug
City Parks – Aug
Cost Share – Aug
REAP – CEP:
May and Nov
Depends on annual allocation; REAP-CEP consistently
$350,000, however; $12,000,000 allocation for
upcoming fiscal year
Cost Share requires 25%
H Health
N Nature/Habitat
W Water Resources/Streambank/Stormwater Management
T Trail
P Parks
A Art
L Land Acquisition
O Other Amenities DRAFT
92 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Sources
Description Program
Element Possible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF)
NFWF provides funding to projects that sustain,
restore and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, habitats.
Initiatives have science-directed business plans
approved by the board. Grant available to support
actions in the plan.
N, W,
Possibly L
Habitat, possibly water quality Various Grants; www.nfwf.org Various Cost Share requires 25%
Wellmark Foundation
Focus on active living and healthy nutrition H, T Community gardens and/or ped/trail links May $75,000 max 1:1
Kresge Foundation
Works to reduce health disparities among children
and adults by addressing conditions that lead to poor
health outcomes. Many programs. www.Kresge.org/
opportunities; receive updates on Twitter for current
opportunities @kresgefdn
H Highly varied. Many potential fits. Equity initiatives could be of
interest
Varied – some rolling; some with deadlines Varied Varied
RW Johnson Foundation
Culture of Health Prize places priority on communities
emphasizing health and partnerships to meet the
needs of all, especially those with health challenges.
Other funding sources through Robert Wood Johnson
also available.
H Varied. November 3, 2016 and annually $25,000 “Prize”N/A
De Beaumont Foundation
Health related – many programs; not typically
awarded to communities, but this appears possible
H, Varied Varied Varied Varied Varied
Meredith Foundation; Edwin T. Meredith Foundation
Grants largely for youth agencies, higher education,
cultural programs, and historic preservation areas;
some support for hospitals and health agencies, as
well as for conservation; sustainability
N, W, T, P, O Conservation, youth programming, capital campaigns, varied Appears rolling Edwin T. Meredith $500K in giving annually; Meredith
$1,500,000
Preferred; requirements unclearDRAFT
93CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Sources
DescriptionProgram
ElementPossible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF)
NFWF provides funding to projects that sustain,
restore and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, habitats.
Initiatives have science-directed business plans
approved by the board. Grant available to support
actions in the plan.
N, W,
Possibly L
Habitat, possibly water quality Various Grants; www.nfwf.org Various Cost Share requires 25%
Wellmark Foundation
Focus on active living and healthy nutrition H, TCommunity gardens and/or ped/trail links May $75,000 max 1:1
Kresge Foundation
Works to reduce health disparities among children
and adults by addressing conditions that lead to poor
health outcomes. Many programs. www.Kresge.org/
opportunities; receive updates on Twitter for current
opportunities @kresgefdn
HHighly varied. Many potential fits. Equity initiatives could be of
interest
Varied – some rolling; some with deadlines Varied Varied
RW Johnson Foundation
Culture of Health Prize places priority on communities
emphasizing health and partnerships to meet the
needs of all, especially those with health challenges.
Other funding sources through Robert Wood Johnson
also available.
HVaried. November 3, 2016 and annually $25,000 “Prize”N/A
De Beaumont Foundation
Health related – many programs; not typically
awarded to communities, but this appears possible
H, VariedVaried Varied Varied Varied
Meredith Foundation; Edwin T. Meredith Foundation
Grants largely for youth agencies, higher education,
cultural programs, and historic preservation areas;
some support for hospitals and health agencies, as
well as for conservation; sustainability
N, W, T, P, OConservation, youth programming, capital campaigns, varied Appears rolling Edwin T. Meredith $500K in giving annually; Meredith
$1,500,000
Preferred; requirements unclear
H Health
N Nature/Habitat
W Water Resources/Streambank/Stormwater Management
T Trail
P Parks
A Art
L Land Acquisition
O Other Amenities DRAFT
94 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Sources
Description Program
Element Possible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
State Revolving Fund Sponsored Projects
Municipalities that borrow funds to complete sanitary
collection or treatment projects can potentially
support a stormwater project through the Sponsored
Projects Program. The state adjusts the interest rate
on the project loan, allowing an extra 10% to be
borrowed, but the repayment amount remains the
same. Essentially, for every $1 million spent on a
sanitary project, $100,000 can be borrowed toward
construction of a stormwater quality project, at no
additional cost to the municipality receiving the loan.
N, W Stormwater management projects, streambank stabilization,
might apply to some aspects of habitat restoration, Ralston
Creek Greenway
2016 deadline was September 1 Depends on status of Wastewater Reclamation Authority
loans; statewide total was $35,000,000 for 2016
“Match” provided through sewer
projects; technically this is not a
grant but it functions similarly
Roy J. Carver Charitable Trust
Interest in scientific research and the educational and
recreational needs of youth.
H, O Parks development and programming focused on youth/education
and recreation
Contact Trust staff 501(c)(3) institutions eligible, awards to Iowa projects;
awarded $15,000,000+ in 2016
Unclear
Maytag Family Foundation
Interests unclear, but they have participated in the
past in restoration/habitat projects
N, possibly
others
Would consider researching potential interest in habitat/stream
restoration or acquisition; possibly park development, other projects
may be of interest
Unknown; personal contact likely required Unknown but believed to have awarded $7,000,000+
in years past
UnclearDRAFT
95CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Potential Funding Sources
DescriptionProgram
ElementPossible Uses Deadline Available Funds Required Match
State Revolving Fund Sponsored Projects
Municipalities that borrow funds to complete sanitary
collection or treatment projects can potentially
support a stormwater project through the Sponsored
Projects Program. The state adjusts the interest rate
on the project loan, allowing an extra 10% to be
borrowed, but the repayment amount remains the
same. Essentially, for every $1 million spent on a
sanitary project, $100,000 can be borrowed toward
construction of a stormwater quality project, at no
additional cost to the municipality receiving the loan.
N, WStormwater management projects, streambank stabilization,
might apply to some aspects of habitat restoration, Ralston
Creek Greenway
2016 deadline was September 1 Depends on status of Wastewater Reclamation Authority
loans; statewide total was $35,000,000 for 2016
“Match” provided through sewer
projects; technically this is not a
grant but it functions similarly
Roy J. Carver Charitable Trust
Interest in scientific research and the educational and
recreational needs of youth.
H, OParks development and programming focused on youth/education
and recreation
Contact Trust staff 501(c)(3) institutions eligible, awards to Iowa projects;
awarded $15,000,000+ in 2016
Unclear
Maytag Family Foundation
Interests unclear, but they have participated in the
past in restoration/habitat projects
N, possibly
others
Would consider researching potential interest in habitat/stream
restoration or acquisition; possibly park development, other projects
may be of interest
Unknown; personal contact likely required Unknown but believed to have awarded $7,000,000+
in years past
Unclear
H Health
N Nature/Habitat
W Water Resources/Streambank/Stormwater Management
T Trail
P Parks
A Art
L Land Acquisition
O Other Amenities DRAFT
96 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Policy, guidance and/or high-level strategic direction resulting from this plan includes:
Addressing parkland
acquisition
Currently, relatively fine-grained park districts
are used to assign parkland set-asides
provided by developers per existing policy.
The consulting team conducted an analysis of
the park system based on six districts. While
slightly broader districts could help with overall
parkland distribution in the system, the team
suggests a review of this policy in light of the
community’s commitment to achieving equity
through municipal services. In some instances,
areas with the greatest need have limited
access to new lands—perhaps more flexibility
can be developed in the policy to assist in
achieving equity.
Focusing on equity
The parkland acquisition piece identified above
is really a subset of a greater policy piece—
how can the Iowa City Parks system routinely
guide its work toward achieving community
equity? Setting in place guidance for assessing
a project, program or initiative’s ability to help
reach equity goals might be worthy of a task
force assignment.
Preserving/protecting quality
natural spaces
The team anticipates the upcoming natural
areas study will address this in greater detail,
but sees value in identifying segments of parks
and trails where habitat could be restored and
enhanced through appropriate protections.
Providing a policy to protect some subsections
of public spaces for the benefit of the overall
natural environment might be warranted.
Measuring success
The strategic framework included in Chapter
4 highlights a series of potential measures for
the Iowa City Parks system. Developing some
of these benchmarks and measures into a
dashboard applicable to the system over time
provides Iowa City Parks with tangible goals.
Communicating benefits
Park systems throughout the Midwest are
continually financially strapped. Iowa City’s
commitment to its parks is refreshing, but
ongoing support of park systems at the
local, state, regional and national levels is
likely required to make sure public-private
partnerships remain balanced. The public
sector needs to provide sufficient park system
support to ensure the public maintains its voice
in park systems of the future. Ongoing parks/
trail funding sources in Iowa (e.g., Enhance
Iowa/Vision Iowa, Resource Enhancement
and Protection (REAP) and initiatives such as
water trails (defunded in 2016)) are always at
risk, and the state has yet to fund the Natural
Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust
Fund approved by voters in 2010. Ongoing
communication of the park system’s benefits
is a critical piece of success for this or any
park plan.
Policy and this Plan
DRAFT
APPENDIX
PARKITECTURE EXTERIORDRAFT
98 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
QUESTIONS TO ASK!
1.When would you use this Architectural Character?
2.What other City resources would influence this
guideline?
3.Other Considerations.
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
HISTORIC, GO WILD & CONTEMPORARY CHARACTER
Porch /
Vestibule
Restroom
Mechanical
Room
Restroom
Mechanical
Room
HISTORIC
GO WILD
CONTEMPORARY4’-0”8’-0”4’-0”8’-0”8’-0”DRAFT
99CH 06 Implementation and Planning
QUESTIONS TO ASK!
1.When would you use this Architectural Character?
2.What other City resources would influence this
guideline?
3.Other Considerations.
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
HISTORIC, GO WILD & CONTEMPORARY CHARACTER
Porch /
Vestibule
Restroom
Mechanical
Room
Restroom
Mechanical
Room
HISTORIC
GO WILD
CONTEMPORARY4’-0”8’-0”4’-0”8’-0”8’-0”DRAFT
100 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Elevation View
Elevation View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.
Gary Enerson to provide
Gary Enerson to provide
ROOF
EAVES
SOFFIT
STRUCTURE
Metal Roof: Berridge Manufacturing Co.
www.berridge.com
SW 7028
Urbane Bronze
Dark Bronze
SW 7044
Amazing Gray
SW 7045
Intellectual Gray
SW 7046
Anonymous
Fond du Lac
Country Squire
A
A
B
B
CD
D
D
E
D
D
FF
D
E
FF
Facia / Rake: Hardie Trim
Under-Decking Tongue and Groove
Option: Hardie Soffit
When would you use this Architectural Character?
•If the park structure is located in a park within a
designated historic district or neighborhood character
similar to the photo at right.
What other City resources would influence this guideline?
•Iowa City Historic Guidelines
Other Considerations.
•Maintenance
•Cost
•Environmental and Flood Plain
Historic Community Context
B C
Post
Heavy Timber Truss Members
Corner Board & Trim: Hardie Plank
Porch /
Vestibule
SIDING
Lap Siding: Hardie Plank
BASE
Cap Stone: Cast Stone or Dressed Stone
Coping
Stone Veneer
Stone Option: Mill Creek Tailored
Blend, Buechel Stone Corp
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
HISTORIC CHARACTER
Iowa City Guideline
DRAFT
101CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Elevation View
Elevation View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.
Gary Enerson to provide
Gary Enerson to provide
ROOF
EAVES
SOFFIT
STRUCTURE
Metal Roof: Berridge Manufacturing Co.
www.berridge.com
SW 7028
Urbane Bronze
Dark Bronze
SW 7044
Amazing Gray
SW 7045
Intellectual Gray
SW 7046
Anonymous
Fond du Lac
Country Squire
A
A
B
B
CD
D
D
E
D
D
FF
D
E
FF
Facia / Rake: Hardie Trim
Under-Decking Tongue and Groove
Option: Hardie Soffit
When would you use this Architectural Character?
•If the park structure is located in a park within a
designated historic district or neighborhood character
similar to the photo at right.
What other City resources would influence this guideline?
•Iowa City Historic Guidelines
Other Considerations.
•Maintenance
•Cost
•Environmental and Flood Plain
Historic Community Context
B C
Post
Heavy Timber Truss Members
Corner Board & Trim: Hardie Plank
Porch /
Vestibule
SIDING
Lap Siding: Hardie Plank
BASE
Cap Stone: Cast Stone or Dressed Stone
Coping
Stone Veneer
Stone Option: Mill Creek Tailored
Blend, Buechel Stone Corp
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
HISTORIC CHARACTER
Iowa City Guideline
DRAFT
102 CH 06 Implementation and PlanningPlan View
Elevation View
Elevation View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.
Gary Enerson to provide
EAVES
SOFFIT
STRUCTURE
Metal Roof: Berridge Manufacturing Co.
www.berridge.com
Or Equal
SW 7027
Urbane Bronze
Copper Brown
SW 7024
Functional Gray
SW 7025
Backdrop
SW 7026
Griffin
Mill Creek Tailored Blend
Buechel Stone Corp
A
A
B
B
CD
D
D
E
F
F
D
E
FF
Facia / Rake: Hardie Trim
Under-Decking Tongue and Groove
Option: Hardie Soffit
Iowa City Guideline
When would you use this Architectural Character?
•If the park structure is located in a park within a
designated wild park or neighborhood character
similar to the photo at right
What other City resources would influence this guideline?
•Designated natural area
Other Considerations.
•Maintenance
•Cost
•Environmental and Flood Plain
Historic Context –US Forest Service
B C
Post
Heavy Timber Truss Members
Trim: Hardie Plank
SIDING
Lap Siding: Hardie Plank
BASE
Cap Stone: Cast Stone or Dressed Stone
Coping
Stone Veneer
Stone Option: Mill Creek Tailored
Blend, Buechel Stone Corp
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
GO WILD (NATURE) CHARACTER
Historic Context –Iowa DNR Guideline
Porch /
Vestibule Optional Colors; Dark Structure vs LightDRAFT
103CH 06 Implementation and PlanningPlan View
Elevation View
Elevation View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.
Gary Enerson to provide
EAVES
SOFFIT
STRUCTURE
Metal Roof: Berridge Manufacturing Co.
www.berridge.com
Or Equal
SW 7027
Urbane Bronze
Copper Brown
SW 7024
Functional Gray
SW 7025
Backdrop
SW 7026
Griffin
Mill Creek Tailored Blend
Buechel Stone Corp
A
A
B
B
CD
D
D
E
F
F
D
E
FF
Facia / Rake: Hardie Trim
Under-Decking Tongue and Groove
Option: Hardie Soffit
Iowa City Guideline
When would you use this Architectural Character?
•If the park structure is located in a park within a
designated wild park or neighborhood character
similar to the photo at right
What other City resources would influence this guideline?
•Designated natural area
Other Considerations.
•Maintenance
•Cost
•Environmental and Flood Plain
Historic Context –US Forest Service
B C
Post
Heavy Timber Truss Members
Trim: Hardie Plank
SIDING
Lap Siding: Hardie Plank
BASE
Cap Stone: Cast Stone or Dressed Stone
Coping
Stone Veneer
Stone Option: Mill Creek Tailored
Blend, Buechel Stone Corp
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
GO WILD (NATURE) CHARACTER
Historic Context –Iowa DNR Guideline
Porch /
Vestibule Optional Colors; Dark Structure vs LightDRAFT
104 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Elevation View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.EAVES
SOFFIT
STRUCTURE
Metal Roof: Berridge Manufacturing Co.
www.berridge.com
Or Equal
SW 6074
Spalding Gray
Champagne
SW 6071
Popular Gray
SW 6073
Perfect Greige
Mill Creek Tailored Blend
Buechel Stone Corp
A
B
CD
E
F
F
D
E
F
F
Facia / Rake: Hardie Trim
Under-Decking Tongue and Groove
Option: Hardie Soffit
Iowa City Guideline
When would you use this Architectural Character?
•If the park structure is located in a park within a
designated historic district or neighborhood character
similar to the photo at right
What other City resources would influence this guideline?
•Iowa City Historic Guidelines
Other Considerations.
•Maintenance
•Cost
•Environmental and Flood Plain
B
C
Post
Heavy Timber Members
Trim: Hardie Plank
SIDING
Lap Siding: Stained Wood
BASE
Cap Stone: Cast Stone or Dressed Stone
Coping
Stone Veneer
Stone Option: Mill Creek Tailored
Blend, Buechel Stone Corp
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
CONTEMPORARY
Porch /
Vestibule
D
C
DRAFT
105CH 06 Implementation and Planning
Elevation View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.EAVES
SOFFIT
STRUCTURE
Metal Roof: Berridge Manufacturing Co.
www.berridge.com
Or Equal
SW 6074
Spalding Gray
Champagne
SW 6071
Popular Gray
SW 6073
Perfect Greige
Mill Creek Tailored Blend
Buechel Stone Corp
A
B
CD
E
F
F
D
E
F
F
Facia / Rake: Hardie Trim
Under-Decking Tongue and Groove
Option: Hardie Soffit
Iowa City Guideline
When would you use this Architectural Character?
•If the park structure is located in a park within a
designated historic district or neighborhood character
similar to the photo at right
What other City resources would influence this guideline?
•Iowa City Historic Guidelines
Other Considerations.
•Maintenance
•Cost
•Environmental and Flood Plain
B
C
Post
Heavy Timber Members
Trim: Hardie Plank
SIDING
Lap Siding: Stained Wood
BASE
Cap Stone: Cast Stone or Dressed Stone
Coping
Stone Veneer
Stone Option: Mill Creek Tailored
Blend, Buechel Stone Corp
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
CONTEMPORARY
Porch /
Vestibule
D
C
DRAFT
DRAFT
APPENDIX
PARKITECTURE INTERIORDRAFT
108 CH 06 Implementation and PlanningPlan View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.
Interior Package
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
INTERIORS
Porch /
Vestibule
Sky Light
Velux Sun Tunnel 10”
www.veluxusa.com
Drinking Fountain: Most
Dependable Fountains wall
mount hydration station
Napkin Disposal Hand Dryer
Xlerator Thermoset Resin
(BMC) XL-BW –High Vel.
Toilet:
Kohler Vitreous China WallSink: Kohler
Vitreous China Wall Hung
Soap Dispenser:
GOJO® ADX-12™ Push-Style
Dispenser GOJO® Foam Soap
Mirror:
Bradex Mirror
24”x36” Stainless Steel
Toilet Tissue Twin Dispenser
Papernet Confidence
Jumbo Roll Code 410262
Baby Changing Station
Stainless Steel
Walls
Burnish Block
Floor –Sealed Concrete
This hardware will only be provided for the restroom door, not the maintenance/storage door.
Fold Out Step Stool
Restroom Direct
Stainless Steel SNW-SS 975
Step 'n Wash
Self-Retracting Safety Step
DRAFT
109CH 06 Implementation and PlanningPlan View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.
Interior Package
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES:
INTERIORS
Porch /
Vestibule
Sky Light
Velux Sun Tunnel 10”
www.veluxusa.com
Drinking Fountain: Most
Dependable Fountains wall
mount hydration station
Napkin Disposal Hand Dryer
Xlerator Thermoset Resin
(BMC) XL-BW –High Vel.
Toilet:
Kohler Vitreous China WallSink: Kohler
Vitreous China Wall Hung
Soap Dispenser:
GOJO® ADX-12™ Push-Style
Dispenser GOJO® Foam Soap
Mirror:
Bradex Mirror
24”x36” Stainless Steel
Toilet Tissue Twin Dispenser
Papernet Confidence
Jumbo Roll Code 410262
Baby Changing Station
Stainless Steel
Walls
Burnish Block
Floor –Sealed Concrete
This hardware will only be provided for the restroom door, not the maintenance/storage door.
Fold Out Step Stool
Restroom Direct
Stainless Steel SNW-SS 975
Step 'n Wash
Self-Retracting Safety Step
DRAFT
DRAFT
APPENDIX
SITE FURNITURE INTERIORDRAFT
112 CH 06 Implementation and PlanningPlan View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.
Bike Rack
Plastisol (Classic) Rack
www.cyclesafe.com
Litter Receptacles:
Scarborough Litter Recep.
Side Opening, 30 Gallon
Picnic Tables
www.pilotrock.com
Grills & Cooking
www.pilotrock.com
Drinking Fountain:
Most Dependable Fountains –
10155 SM(Pet Fountain Included)
with added hose bib
Benches:
Barco Products 6” Cassidy
Style Straight Back Color Black
Limestone Seating:
Weber Stone Company Inc. 17” Cut Wall Stone with an 18” depth cut at 5’ length for
the large stones and 2.5’ length for the small stones.
SITE FURNISHINGS GUIDELINES:
FIXED & MOVEABLE
Bigbelly
www.bigbelly.com
Site Furnishing Package
Dyna Cushion
playground mats for
underneath egresses &
swings 4’x6’x2”
Fold Out Step Stool
Restroom Direct
Stainless Steel SNW-SS 975
Step 'n Wash
Self-Retracting Safety Step
•LED lighting and
occupancy sensors for
new facilities
•LED lighting and
occupancy sensors in
remodeled facilities must
meet MidAmerican’s DHL
and UL requirements for
rebate opportunities
Lighting
Bicycle Dero Fixit Station:
Model # FIXIT w/AK2DRAFT
113CH 06 Implementation and PlanningPlan View
Restrooms will range from a single-user facility with
individual private bathrooms to multi-user restrooms with
public access and interior stalls. These facilities also
range from custom built to pre-engineered, prefabricated
concrete structures.
The restroom structures utilizes all architectural
elements. Future development of restroom facilities will
most likely rely on custom built structures design with
affordable as a major consideration.
Bike Rack
Plastisol (Classic) Rack
www.cyclesafe.com
Litter Receptacles:
Scarborough Litter Recep.
Side Opening, 30 Gallon
Picnic Tables
www.pilotrock.com
Grills & Cooking
www.pilotrock.com
Drinking Fountain:
Most Dependable Fountains –
10155 SM(Pet Fountain Included)
with added hose bib
Benches:
Barco Products 6” Cassidy
Style Straight Back Color Black
Limestone Seating:
Weber Stone Company Inc. 17” Cut Wall Stone with an 18” depth cut at 5’ length for
the large stones and 2.5’ length for the small stones.
SITE FURNISHINGS GUIDELINES:
FIXED & MOVEABLE
Bigbelly
www.bigbelly.com
Site Furnishing Package
Dyna Cushion
playground mats for
underneath egresses &
swings 4’x6’x2”
Fold Out Step Stool
Restroom Direct
Stainless Steel SNW-SS 975
Step 'n Wash
Self-Retracting Safety Step
•LED lighting and
occupancy sensors for
new facilities
•LED lighting and
occupancy sensors in
remodeled facilities must
meet MidAmerican’s DHL
and UL requirements for
rebate opportunities
Lighting
Bicycle Dero Fixit Station:
Model # FIXIT w/AK2 DRAFT
DRAFT
APPENDIX
SIGNAGEDRAFT
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Signs
Large Park Sign
•Speed Limit
•Scale of Park
Medium Park Sign
•Speed Limit
•Scale of Park
Markers Information Centers (Kiosks)Destination Signs
Large Marker
•Location
•Information
Small Marker
•Information
Surface and Ground Mounted
•Information
Center / Hub / Kiosk
•Information
•Location
Signage Goals
•A Thorough Approach ‐ develop a system to address the varied needs of pedestrians, drivers, and trail users
•Aesthetic Appeal ‐ develop the right balance between costs, and quality of design (cost‐effective materials/methods)
•Simplicity. – develop a system that is eliminates visual clutter
Information Centers / Panel are
vertical structures, often double
sided, intended to inform though the
use of displays that include maps,
information panels and in some cases
technology. These Kiosks are to be
located at strategic locations
including trailheads and major trail
crossroads.
Trail Markers will be vertical
structures located adjacent to trails
Trail Markers would be placed at
uniform intervals: ½ mile in urban
areas and 1 mile or at road crossings
in rural areas. The Marker will
display the trail system logo. The
post can support reference or
distance indicators, as well as names
of rivers, watersheds, jurisdictional
boundaries, and/or major streets by
adding a small message blade where
needed.
Destination Signs will range in size and proportion. The signs can be
mounted on a pole, building or other structure. The purpose of the
Destination Sign will be to clearly identify public facilities.
P
Parking
Facility
Name
Facility
Name
Park Identifications Signs will be vertical structures located
at park entrances adjacent the exterior roads
Parking
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Signage Goals
• A Thorough Approach—develop a system to address the varied needs of
pedestrians, drivers, and trail users
• Aesthetic Appeal—develop the right balance between costs, and quality of design
(cost-effective materials/methods)
• Simplicity—develop a system that is eliminates visual clutter
DRAFT
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Signs
Large Park Sign
•Speed Limit
•Scale of Park
Medium Park Sign
•Speed Limit
•Scale of Park
Markers Information Centers (Kiosks)Destination Signs
Large Marker
•Location
•Information
Small Marker
•Information
Surface and Ground Mounted
•Information
Center / Hub / Kiosk
•Information
•Location
Signage Goals
•A Thorough Approach ‐ develop a system to address the varied needs of pedestrians, drivers, and trail users
•Aesthetic Appeal ‐ develop the right balance between costs, and quality of design (cost‐effective materials/methods)
•Simplicity. – develop a system that is eliminates visual clutter
Information Centers / Panel are
vertical structures, often double
sided, intended to inform though the
use of displays that include maps,
information panels and in some cases
technology. These Kiosks are to be
located at strategic locations
including trailheads and major trail
crossroads.
Trail Markers will be vertical
structures located adjacent to trails
Trail Markers would be placed at
uniform intervals: ½ mile in urban
areas and 1 mile or at road crossings
in rural areas. The Marker will
display the trail system logo. The
post can support reference or
distance indicators, as well as names
of rivers, watersheds, jurisdictional
boundaries, and/or major streets by
adding a small message blade where
needed.
Destination Signs will range in size and proportion. The signs can be
mounted on a pole, building or other structure. The purpose of the
Destination Sign will be to clearly identify public facilities.
P
Parking
Facility
Name
Facility
Name
Park Identifications Signs will be vertical structures located
at park entrances adjacent the exterior roads
Parking
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Signs
Large Park Sign
•Speed Limit
•Scale of Park
Medium Park Sign
•Speed Limit
•Scale of Park
Markers Information Centers (Kiosks)Destination Signs
Large Marker
•Location
•Information
Small Marker
•Information
Surface and Ground Mounted
•Information
Center / Hub / Kiosk
•Information
•Location
Signage Goals
•A Thorough Approach ‐ develop a system to address the varied needs of pedestrians, drivers, and trail users
•Aesthetic Appeal ‐ develop the right balance between costs, and quality of design (cost‐effective materials/methods)
•Simplicity. – develop a system that is eliminates visual clutter
Information Centers / Panel are
vertical structures, often double
sided, intended to inform though the
use of displays that include maps,
information panels and in some cases
technology. These Kiosks are to be
located at strategic locations
including trailheads and major trail
crossroads.
Trail Markers will be vertical
structures located adjacent to trails
Trail Markers would be placed at
uniform intervals: ½ mile in urban
areas and 1 mile or at road crossings
in rural areas. The Marker will
display the trail system logo. The
post can support reference or
distance indicators, as well as names
of rivers, watersheds, jurisdictional
boundaries, and/or major streets by
adding a small message blade where
needed.
Destination Signs will range in size and proportion. The signs can be
mounted on a pole, building or other structure. The purpose of the
Destination Sign will be to clearly identify public facilities.
P
Parking
Facility
Name
Facility
Name
Park Identifications Signs will be vertical structures located
at park entrances adjacent the exterior roads
Parking
DRAFT
118 CH 06 Implementation and PlanningElevation
Existing Identification Sign
In 2008, the Parks Department developed a park
identification sign (below left). This sign is made out of
an aluminum metal, powder coated with white accent,
placed on a stone base supported by a concrete footing.
The new park identification sign will be of the same
components.
In addition, a park and trail marker sign will be included
into the family of park signs. This sign will be
constructed of the same materials at a high of 4 feet for
the larger sign and 3 feet for the smaller marker.
Other park sign to consider are as follows.
The sign included in these guidelines are:
•Park Identification Sign -Below
•Information Center (Kiosk)
•Information Panels
•Destination
•Marker
•Large Marker -Below
•Small Marker -Below
•Wayfinding / Directional
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Sign
Park or Trail
Markers
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Option B: Concrete Base @ Grade
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Map: By Other
Decorative Powder Coated Donor Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Concrete Base @ Grade
Option B: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Concrete con fjd Footing Reinforced
Decorative Powder Coated Trail Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Proposed
Identification Sign
Proposed
Trail Marker
Existing
Identification Sign
Current
Parks & Recreation
Logo DRAFT
119CH 06 Implementation and PlanningElevation
Existing Identification Sign
In 2008, the Parks Department developed a park
identification sign (below left). This sign is made out of
an aluminum metal, powder coated with white accent,
placed on a stone base supported by a concrete footing.
The new park identification sign will be of the same
components.
In addition, a park and trail marker sign will be included
into the family of park signs. This sign will be
constructed of the same materials at a high of 4 feet for
the larger sign and 3 feet for the smaller marker.
Other park sign to consider are as follows.
The sign included in these guidelines are:
•Park Identification Sign -Below
•Information Center (Kiosk)
•Information Panels
•Destination
•Marker
•Large Marker -Below
•Small Marker -Below
•Wayfinding / Directional
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Sign
Park or Trail
Markers
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Option B: Concrete Base @ Grade
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Map: By Other
Decorative Powder Coated Donor Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Concrete Base @ Grade
Option B: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Concrete con fjd Footing Reinforced
Decorative Powder Coated Trail Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Proposed
Identification Sign
Proposed
Trail Marker
Existing
Identification Sign
Current
Parks & Recreation
Logo DRAFT
120 CH 06 Implementation and Planning
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Sign
Trail Markers
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Option B: Concrete Base @ Grade
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Map: By Other
Decorative Powder Coated Donor Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Concrete Base @ Grade
Option B: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Decorative Powder Coated Trail Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Base: 48” x 12” Trail Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Graphic Map:
•Concrete Footing:
•Installation:
Options
•Stone Base:
Base: 60” x 48” Park Identification Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
•Installation:
Options
•Stone Base:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
•3” deep and fabricate them:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
Base: 30” x 4” Trail Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
•Installation
Options
•Rusted Aluminum
Finish:
Painted
Aluminum
Painted (Ox)
Aluminum
Painted
Aluminum
Base
Concrete
Base
Stone
Color Options
Base: 72” x 60” Park Identification Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
Options
•Stone Base:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
Restroom Sign
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Sign
Trail Markers
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Option B: Concrete Base @ Grade
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Map: By Other
Decorative Powder Coated Donor Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Concrete Base @ Grade
Option B: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Decorative Powder Coated Trail Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Base: 48” x 12” Trail Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Graphic Map:
•Concrete Footing:
•Installation:
Options
•Stone Base:
Base: 60” x 48” Park Identification Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
•Installation:
Options
•Stone Base:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
•3” deep and fabricate them:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
Base: 30” x 4” Trail Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
•Installation
Options
•Rusted Aluminum
Finish:
Painted
Aluminum
Painted (Ox)
Aluminum
Painted
Aluminum
Base
Concrete
Base
Stone
Color Options
Base: 72” x 60” Park Identification Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
Options
•Stone Base:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
Restroom Sign
DRAFT
121CH 06 Implementation and Planning
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Sign
Trail Markers
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Option B: Concrete Base @ Grade
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Map: By Other
Decorative Powder Coated Donor Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Concrete Base @ Grade
Option B: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Decorative Powder Coated Trail Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Base: 48” x 12” Trail Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Graphic Map:
•Concrete Footing:
•Installation:
Options
•Stone Base:
Base: 60” x 48” Park Identification Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
•Installation:
Options
•Stone Base:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
•3” deep and fabricate them:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
Base: 30” x 4” Trail Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
•Installation
Options
•Rusted Aluminum
Finish:
Painted
Aluminum
Painted (Ox)
Aluminum
Painted
Aluminum
Base
Concrete
Base
Stone
Color Options
Base: 72” x 60” Park Identification Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
Options
•Stone Base:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
Restroom Sign
WAYFINDING & SIGNAGE
Park Identification Sign
Trail Markers
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Park
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Option B: Concrete Base @ Grade
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Map: By Other
Decorative Powder Coated Donor Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Graphic
Primary Accent Color #2
Option A: Concrete Base @ Grade
Option B: Stone Base (Anamosa Limestone)
Concrete Footing Reinforced
Decorative Powder Coated Trail Name
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Logo
Primary Accent Color #1
Decorative Powder Coated Sign Panel
Primary Color #1
Base: 48” x 12” Trail Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Graphic Map:
•Concrete Footing:
•Installation:
Options
•Stone Base:
Base: 60” x 48” Park Identification Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
•Installation:
Options
•Stone Base:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
•3” deep and fabricate them:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
Base: 30” x 4” Trail Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
•Installation
Options
•Rusted Aluminum
Finish:
Painted
Aluminum
Painted (Ox)
Aluminum
Painted
Aluminum
Base
Concrete
Base
Stone
Color Options
Base: 72” x 60” Park Identification Sign
•1/2” Thick Aluminum:
•Standard Painted Finish:
•Graphic Text:
•Graphic Grass:
•Concrete Footing
Options
•Stone Base:
•Rusted Aluminum Painted Finish:
Restroom Sign
DRAFT