The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTTAC 10-10-06 ~JCCOG ...(...... Meeting Notice JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee Tuesday, October 10, 2006 City Manager's Conference Room Iowa City City Hall Agenda 1. Call to order; recognize alternates; consider approval of meeting minutes 2. Public discussion of any item not on the agenda 3. Consider a recommendation on modifications to the JCCOG public comment process 4. Consider a recommendation on distribution of FTA Small Transit-Intensive Communities funding 5. Consider a recommendation on amendments to the FY07-10 JCCOG TIP; Iowa City Transit and CAMBUS projects 6. Update on JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board decision on how to proceed regarding the proposed JCCOG Arterial Street Plan amendment to add the extension of Forevergreen Road between 1ih Avenue and County Road W-66 (Dubuque Street) 7. Discuss update of JCCOG Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan a. Review of arterial street model inputs for 2030 to 2035 conversion b. Consider modification of MPO transportation planning boundary c. Review base information 8. Discuss JCCOG Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee discussion of bicycle accommodation in the Iowa City Central Business District 9. Consider a recommendation on a Complete Streets policy 10. Update on passenger rail study 11. Update on coordinated human services transportation plan 12. Status report on area transportation projects and update on recent activities of the JCCOG Transportation Planning Division 13. Other business 14. Adjournment s:/pcd/agenda/JCCOG/ltac-agd 1 0-6-06 .doc MINUTES JCCOG TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, JUNE 8, 2006 -10:30 A.M. EMMA HARV AT HALL IOWA CITY CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Coralville: Iowa City: Dan Holderness, Scott Larson, Vicki Robrock Brian Boelk, Rick Fosse, Joe Fowler, Ron Knoche, Ron Logsden Kathy Davis Brian James Karin Oils George Hollins, Brian McClatchey Terry Dahms Lee Benfield Johnson County: North Liberty: Tiffin: University of Iowa: RTBC: Iowa DOT: STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Davidson, Brad Neumann, Kent Ralston, Anissa Williams, John Yapp 1. CALL TO ORDER: RECOGNIZE ALTERNATES: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Yapp called the meeting to order at 10:31 a.m. Kathy Davis was recognized as alternate for Tom Brase of Johnson County. Scott Larson was recognized as alternate for Kelly Hayworth of Coralville. It was moved by Knoche and seconded by Dahms to approve the meeting minutes of March 7, 2006. The motion carried unanimously. Yapp introduced new JCCOG Assistant Transportation Planner Kent Ralston. 2. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Susan Bork of Pembrokeshire Drive in Coralville stated that she still would like to have Oakdale Boulevard completed between its existing terminus in Coralville and Dubuque Street. 3. CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO THE JCCOG URBANIZED AREA POLICY BOARD ON AMENDMENTS TO THE JCCOG ARTERIAL STREET PLAN REGARDING FOREVERGREEN ROAD EXTENSIONS EAST TO COUNTY ROAD W66 (DUBUQUE STREET) AND WEST TO HALF MOON AVENUE Yapp introduced the two proposed Arterial Street Plan amendments. Yapp stated that what was proposed were concept designs, not specific engineered alignments. Identifying the arterial street link on the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan serves as a notice to developers and property owners, and is helpful as communities plan infrastructure investments. Yapp asked if the applicants for the Arterial Street Plan amendments wished to make any comments. Holderness stated that the new elementary school and junior high school along Forevergreen Road are factors in these being developing areas which make the Arterial Street Plan amendments necessary. Holderness stated that Earth Tech consultants had been hired to look at alternative alignments in the corridor between 1 ih Avenue extended and County Road W66. Holderness reviewed the criteria used to narrow the initial 36 alignments to the five best alignments. Holderness stated the five alignments were further refined and a preferred alternative selected. Holderness stated a factor in adopting the recommended alignment was the desire to improve a single corridor and not have to improve a new arterial street corridor plus the existing Johnston Way. Holderness stated that an issue had been raised involving the new house constructed by the Davidsons on their property, and that this had resulted in a slight adjustment to the preferred alternative alignment. Holderness stated that the new preferred alternative alignment resulted in the new road being approximately 135 feet from the Davidsons' new house. McClatchey asked about the potential development in this area. Holderness replied that this was currently an area of large lot development in unincorporated Johnson County, but that it was in the Coralville growth area. There were no further comments from the applicants. Yapp opened the floor for public comments. JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee June 8, 2006 Page 2 Paul Mort stated he was an attorney representing the Davidsons and that he had not had time to carefully review the adjusted alignment presented by Holderness. Mort stated he appreciated Holderness and Kelly Hayworth coming out and walking the Davidsons' property with him. Mort stated he had problems with the planning process which was followed in evaluating alternative alignments and the scope of the work done by Earth Tech. Mort described how he felt Earth Tech had not done an adequate job in investigating properties and talking to property owners. Mort stated other alignments needed to be evaluated and context-sensitive design taken into consideration. Mort stated he disagreed with Holderness's characterization of why the alignment was changed from the initial recommended alignment to the final recommended alignment. Mort reviewed reasons why he felt the Johnston Way alignment was flawed. Mort handed out materials on how the Davidsons are impacted and on how other neighbors are impacted. Mort stated a letter had been sent to the DNR and that the Davidsons had hired a bat expert from Central College. Mort stated the bat expert disputed Earth Tech's characterization of the woodlands in the area. Yapp passed out an email message which had been received from Mark Mysnyk, who owns property in the vicinity. Brad Houser of Johnston Way stated he agreed with Mort's comments. Houser stated he was not allowed to provide input and was not invited to meetings where the subject was discussed. Houser stated he did not allow Earth Tech onto his property. Houser stated he had multiple reasons to disagree with the preferred alignment. Barbara Beaumont of Naples Avenue stated she had not been notified of meetings and that her neighbors had not been notified either. Beaumont stated she had heard from various sources that the road corridor would be 50 feet, 100 feet, and 150 feet wide, and wondered what the true width is. Frank Colony of Front Street stated he owned Naples Avenue and that this was a private drive, not a public street. Linda Wilson of Naples Avenue stated she had not been notified that this planning process was being conducted and that her property was impacted. Beverly Davidson of Johnston Way stated that the consultant report did not accurately represent the environmental features of the area and that the report needed to evaluate moving the road further north. Herb Loops of North Liberty Road stated his only contact with Coralville was after the decision had been made on the road alignment. Loops stated Johnston Way is hardly maintained at the present time. Loops stated that the need for the Forevergreen Road extension was developer-driven. Dan Gerot of Johnston Way stated he was not apprised of the possibility of the new road when he bought his house. Gerot stated many animals in the vicinity would be impacted. Gerot stated the terrain was not suitable for a new arterial street and that common sense should be used. Craig Albrecht stated that he objected to the proposed road for the same reasons that others had stated. Dennis Craven stated he represented Southgate Development Company and the Scanlon family. Craven stated his clients do not prefer the recommended alignment. Curt Hamen of Naples Avenue stated he was concerned about traffic volume and speeds on the proposed new road when the interchange of Forevergreen Road with 1-380 was constructed. Kent Gedlinski of Johnston Way stated he agreed with what had been said by others. Gedlinski stated the new road would have a huge impact on his property. Colleen Gedlinski of Johnston Way stated that the preferred route for the new road did not make JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee June 8, 2006 Page 3 sense. Gedlinski stated they could not afford to hire an attorney. Gedlinski stated they moved out of Coralville for various reasons and now they were having to deal with Coralville again. Gedlinski stated Johnston Way was not much more than a farm lane. Mike Haight of North Liberty Road stated he has a business at the intersection of First Avenue and Oakdale Boulevard. Haight asked when Oakdale Boulevard would be extended through to Dubuque Street and stated he felt this should be the major arterial street. Haight stated that the planning process should have provided more opportunities for residents of the area to have input. Diane Pratt of North Liberty Road stated an earlier speaker had stated that the proposed new road would go through their orchard, but in fact it will go through much more of their property than just the orchard. Pratt stated although she is a developer, they do not intend to develop the property on which they live. Pratt stated the proposed road would split their property but not be near their house. Pratt stated the proposed road was being driven by the Tiggeses, who wished to redevelop their property, but that she did not wish to be impacted. Pratt also stated that hunting would no longer be safe if the road was completed. Jay Davidson of Johnston Way stated that he wished to reiterate what his wife said. Davidson stated the committee should take their time in formulating a recommendation. Brad Houser stated he was concerned about high speeds on the proposed new road. Houser stated speeds are too high already on North Liberty Road. Houser stated Oakdale Boulevard is the arterial street that should be emphasized. Beverly Davidson stated she had spoken with Dr. Plugge of the Iowa City Community School District and that he was concerned about traffic speeds around schools. Davidson stated County elected officials needed to be involved in the evaluation of this issue. Paul Mort stated he thinks the planning process needs to be more stringent, and reiterated his desire for a process that emphasizes context sensitive design. Brandon Pratt of Auburn East stated the new road was developer driven. Pratt stated the new road should be located where property development will occur. Frank Colony stated he did not know anything about the alternative route that had been presented which impacts his farm. Yapp clarified that the route referred to by Colony had been proposed by a private citizen but was not one of the routes being evaluated by JCCOG. Paul Rotman of Whitetail Lane stated the planning process being followed was flawed. Yapp closed public comment and explained that the Transportation Technical Advisory Committee would be making a recommendation to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board, who would make the ultimate decision on whether or not to amend the Arterial Street Plan. Yapp stated the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board was made up of elected officials and that they would meet on June 28, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the County Administration Building to consider this matter. It was moved by Holderness and seconded by Oils to recommend approval of the Arterial Street Plan amendment to add Forevergreen Road between Jasper Avenue and Half Moon Avenue in the North Tiffin growth area. The motion carried unanimously. It was moved by Larson and seconded by Holderness to recommend approval of the Forevergreen Road Arterial Street Plan amendment between 1 ih Avenue and County Road W66, including the slight change in the recommended alignment based on the location of the Davidsons' new house. James stated he had heard concerns raised about the planning process which had been followed, and that he felt his elected officials would not agree with approving the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee June 8, 2006 Page 4 amendment at this time. James stated that the proposed action does not proceed with constructing the road, but only identifying the preferred corridor. James stated he was doubtful the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board would accept the planning process that has been conducted so far. Logsden stated he concurred and would have difficulty supporting the proposed action at this time. McClatchey asked if alignments had been considered significantly north or south of the corridor that had been investigated. James replied yes. Holderness stated that the desired one mile spacing of arterial streets was the reason for identifying the half-mile wide study area that the consultant had investigated. Holderness stated the study'committee was multi-jurisdictional and involved Coralville, North Liberty, Johnson County, JCCOG, and the Iowa City Community School District. Holderness stated that meetings had been held with individual property owners, but it may have been an oversight not to have a general meeting. Holderness stated there were not currently funds to build the proposed Forevergreen Road extension, and that for the time being construction of segments would be done by private developers. Holderness stated that preserving the corridor for the road would be the principal function of the proposed action. Holderness clarified that the proposed road would have a 100-feet wide right-of-way and that the pavement would be 31-feet wide and designed similar to recently constructed portions of Oakdale Boulevard. Boelk asked why the proposed action needed to be taken. Holderness replied that with the schools being constructed in the area, it was a principal residential growth area. Holderness stated that the proposed interchange at Forevergreen Road was also a consideration. McClatchey stated that he agreed with the need to identify the corridor and that he imagined there would be objection by someone to whatever alignment is identified. McClatchey stated he felt it would be a good idea to revisit the planning process. Dahms agreed with McClatchey's comment on revisiting the planning process, and stated he felt that the recommendation to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board should be postponed. Dahms stated lots of questions had been raised. Dahms asked that people not forget that the proposed road would have an 8-foot sidewalk on one side, which would be an amenity for the neighborhood. Dahms stated he recommended postponing the action to gather additional information. James stated that with the road being constructed far in the future, property in the area may turn over and new property owners may wish to redevelop. Boelk asked the significance of amending the Arterial Street Plan. Yapp explained that having a road corridor in the Arterial Street Plan identified it as a corridor for future development and that a corridor preservation agreement between Coralville, North Liberty, and Johnson County would be a likely next step. Hollins stated he felt it was important to have an arterial street corridor identified in this area, but that maybe it should be delayed and discussed further. Dahms stated he did not disagree. Yapp stated the motion on the floor was to approve the Forevergreen Road Arterial Street Plan amendment between 1ih Avenue and County Road W66. The motion failed, with Larson, Holderness and Robrock voting in favor. It was moved by Knoche and seconded by Dahms to recommend deferral of the Forevergreen Road Arterial Street Plan amendment between 1 ih Avenue and County Road W66. The motion carried unanimously. Davidson stated he would try to have draft TTAC meeting minutes ready for the Board's consideration on June 28. 4. CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO THE JCCOG URBANIZED AREA POLICY BOARD ON AMENDMENTS TO THE FY2007-2010 JCCOG TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP): IOWA CITY TRANSIT WHEELCHAIR LIFT PROJECTS Neumann presented the proposed amendments to rehabilitate wheelchair lifts for 14 Iowa City Transit vehicles and replace the hoists for paratransit vehicles. It was moved by Hollins and seconded by JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee June 8, 2006 Page 5 McClatchey to approve. The motion carried unanimously. 5. DISCUSS THE JCCOG LONG RANGE MULlTMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE Yapp stated JCCOG would be updating the JCCOG Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan over the following year. Yapp outlined the elements of the plan and stated that he would like to hear from TTAC members on their opinions on how to improve the JCCOG Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan. Dahms stated that context-sensitive road design should be examined. Davidson stated that the existing long range plan had some information on context-sensitive road design, but that this could be augmented. Yapp stated it was intended to have the plan update to the TTAC for consideration by February 2007. 6. UPDATE ON JCCOG INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS) PLAN Williams reviewed proposed amendments to the JCCOG Intelligent Transportation Systems Plan. Williams stated that techniques such as dynamic messaging signs and cameras linked to a public website and emergency response providers would be used on the upcoming 1-80 reconstruction project. Dahms stated the Dubuque Street interchange needed to have a bike/ped overpass constructed. Fosse stated that the City of Iowa City had gone on record with Iowa DOT as requesting such a facility. Williams stated she would likely come to JCCOG annually with amendments to the ITS architecture plan of general nature. 7. UPDATE ON PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE STUDY IN CEDAR RAPIDS-CORALVILLE/IOWA CITY- AMANA COLONIES CORRIDOR Davidson updated the TT AC on the passenger rail service study being coordinated by JCCOG and the City of Cedar Rapids. Davidson stated a draft report had been received which would be reviewed by the project managers and the railroads. Davidson stated he anticipated the report being released to the public through the City of Cedar Rapids 15-in-5 Committee in late summer. Davidson stated he was confident that there would be some realistic strategies for slowly beginning passenger rail service as well as a plan for growing the service in the future. James asked if entities which contributed to the funding of the study would get copies of the final report. Davidson replied that copies of the report would be available and that he hoped to have the final report on the Web. 8. UPDATE ON RECENT ACTIVITIES Davidson reviewed recent activities of the JCCOG Transportation Planning Division. Boelk provided information on two projects which would detour traffic on Melrose Avenue and Burlington Street. McClatchey thanked JCCOG, and particularly Neumann, for all of the help with state and federal transit grant administration. 9. ADJOURNMENT Yapp declared the meeting adjourned at 12:13 p.m. S/pcd/mi ns/ttac-06-08-06. doc Date: September 27,2006 ~JCCOG r~ m e m 0 1'.... To: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: John Yapp, Assistant Transportation Planner I ~y-"..- Re: Agenda Item #3: Consider a recommendation on modifications to the JCCOG public comment process As part of the recent review of the JCCOG organization by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Iowa DOT, it was suggested that JCCOG review and readopt its public input process. The JCCOG public input process is used to solicit input when amendments are proposed to the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan, Transportation Improvement Program, and other planning documents such as the Long-Range Multimodal Transportation Plan, and when grant applications are being considered by JCCOG. JCCOG summarizes and solicits input on grant applications for locally determined Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds. The public input process consists of four steps: 1. Direct mailing to JCCOG public input organizations (see list below) regarding proposed plan amendments and funding applications. We find a direct mail approach to be more effective than publishing notices in the newspapers or holding general hearings at our meetings, although these techniques are used occasionally. 2. Direct mailing to directly affected property owners regarding proposed arterial street plan amendments; 3. Information and meeting agendas are posted on the JCCOG website for JCCOG board and committee meetings; 4. Public input is always scheduled at JCCOG meetings, including the Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee, Transportation Technical Advisory Committee, and JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board. JCCOG public comment organizations: The backbone of our efforts to notify a cross section of the general public of our work in transportation planning has been to notify existing organizations of proposed plan amendments and funding applications. These organizations are a combination of citizen groups and local government committees, but share some interest in transportation plans and policies. As part of an internal review of our process this summer, we added to the list a trucking representative, local railroad companies, the Soil and Water Conservation Service, the local realtor association and Goodwill Industries. These groups are directly notified by mail of proposed JCCOG plan amendments and funding applications, and are asked to give input. The main benefit of notifying groups like this is to share information and provide a contact name and phone number if they have questions. Allen Lund Co. (a trucking brokerage) Bicyclists of Iowa City Clear Creek Amana School District Conner Center for Independent Living Coralville Parks and Recreation Commission CRANDIC Railroad Environmental Advocates Friends of Historic Preservation Friends of the Iowa River Scenic Trail Goodwill Industries of Southeast Iowa Greater Iowa City Chamber of Commerce Iowa Bicycle Coalition Iowa City Area Association of Realtors Iowa City Area Development Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Iowa City Neighborhood Services Office Iowa City School Board Iowa City/Johnson County Senior Center Iowa City Sierra Club JCCOG Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee Johnson County Historic Preservation Commission Johnson County Historical Society Johnson County League of Women Voters Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission Soil and Water Conservation Service North Liberty Parks and Recreation Commission Project Green Systems Unlimited Tiffin Planning & Zoning Commission 2 This summarizes our practice for soliciting input and providing information on JCCOG business. Other opportunities for citizen input occur at the municipal level at public meetings of city councils and numerous commissions and committees. Let's discuss if this allows for adequate opportunity for public input and for sharing information about JCCOG business. Please consider a recommendation to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board on readopting the JCCOG public input process. Jccogadm/memo/jy-publicinput. 9-14-06.doc Date: September 25, 2006 ~JCCOG ...,....... m e m 0 To: From: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee Brad Neumanrt~tant Transportation Planner Re: Agenda Item #4: Consider a recommendation to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board on the distribution of FTA Small Transit Intensive Communities Funding between Coralville Transit, Iowa City Transit, and Cambus. This fall JCCOG will again divide up federal transit operating assistance for FY07 between Coralville Transit, Iowa City Transit, and Cambus. For approximately the last 20 years we have used a locally derived formula that includes the following transit system performance factors: total operating cost, locally determined income (LDI), revenue miles, and fare revenue. This year there is also the issue of an additional source of federal transit operating assistance that we have become eligible for: Small Transit Intensive Communities (STIC) funding. This is a new source of funding through SAFETEA-LU for small transit intensive communities that otherwise receive a relatively small amount of federal transit operating assistance under the population/population density formula. The STIC funding is made available by comparing the performance factors from small transit intensive cities with the performance factors of larger transit intensive cities. There are six performance factors evaluated, and if you meet or exceed at least one of the factors you become eligible for STIC funding. The more performance factors you meet or exceed, the more funding you are eligible for. In Iowa, only Ames and the Iowa City Urbanized Area are eligible for these funds. Ames is one of three small urbanized areas in the United States that meet or exceed at least five of the thresholds, and we are one of six urbanized areas that meet or exceed four of the thresholds. There has been a question on the distribution of these funds locally between our three transit systems because Coralville Transit has not been reporting into the National Transit Database System that is used for determining the performance factors. Coralville Transit filed their first NTD report last year and will continue to report into this system each year, as do Iowa City Transit and Cambus. However, the performance factors used to determine this year's STIC funding are from FY04, one year before Coralville began reporting into the system. We have been able to determine that the four STIC performance factors we meet or exceed are the four that are per capita based. This means that Coralville's population is already included, and adding Coralville Transit's performance data in future years will only improve them. What we need is a recommendation to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board on how JCCOG should apportion the STIC funding we receive. One option is to distribute it according to the existing formula that is used for regular federal transit operating assistance. In discussion of this matter with the transit subcommittee of the JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee, Cambus representatives requested that we evaluate taking fare revenue out of the distribution formula as a specific factor. The University has always felt it is unfair to have fare revenue included as a specific factor since it is also included in the locally determined income performance factor. This has meant that Cambus is "penalized" twice in the formula for being a free-fare system. This formula has been in use by JCCOG for approximately the last 20 years and the Board has not voted to make any changes to it during that time. Attached to assist in the discussion of this matter is a memorandum which was prepared for the transit subcommittee of the JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee evaluating different formula options. We have calculated multipliers for each transit system with and without fare revenue as a specific factor. Several scenarios are presented for distributing the funds. There are, of course, other distribution formulas which could be considered. Please be prepared to make a recommendation regarding this matter at the October 10 meeting. Jccogadm/agenda/ba-item4sticfunds ~JCCOG .....-..... Date: August 10, 2006 To: From: Vicky Robrock, Ellen Habel; Coralville Transit Joe Fowler, Ron Logsden; Iowa City Transit Dave Ricketts, Brian McClatchey; University of Iowa CAMBUS - ~/ Jeff Davidson, Transportation Planner r" ~ Brad Neumann, Assistant Transportation Plann~ Re: Distribution of FT A Small Transit Intensive Communities (STIC) funding At our meeting to discuss this issue you expressed a desire to see what the impact would be of taking fare revenue out of our locally-derived formula for splitting up FT A transit operating assistance. Using FY06 performance factors results in the following multipliers with and without fare revenue included as a specific multiplier factor. Locally Current Multiplier Total Determined Revenue Fare FY06 Without Operating Cost Income (LDI) Miles Revenue Multiplier Fare Rev Coralville Transit $1,182,699 $900,838 211,516 $304,513 .1682 .1424 (.1533) (.1494) (.1244) (.2456) Iowa City Transit $4,057,878 $3,322,701 746,291 $935,225 .5676 .5053 (.5258) (.5512) (.4390) (.7544) Cambus $2,476,096 $1,804,972 742,164 0 .2642 .3523 (.3209) (.2994 ) (.4366) (0.0) Total $7,716,673 $6,028,511 1,699,971 $1,239,739 1.000 1.000 (1.000) (1.000) (1.000) (1.000) Our current estimate for regular FT A operating assistance in FY07 is $860,674. This is the regular FT A operating assistance that is based on population and population density. The FY07 estimate for STIC funds which are based on transit system performance is $463,440. The total is $1,324,114. Here's how these funds would be split if we use the current multiplier which includes fare revenue as a separate category. FY07 Reg FY07 FY07 Operating STIC Total Coralville Transit $144,765 $77,951 $222,716 Iowa City Transit $488,519 $263,048 $751,567 Cambus $227.390 $122.441 $349.831 Total $860,674 $463,440 $1,324,114 . August 10, 2006 Page 2 Here's how the same funds would be split out using the multiplier without fare revenue included as a separate category. Under this formula each remaining performance factor makes up one- third of the multiplier. FY07 Reg FY07 FY07 Difference from Operating STIC Total current multiplier Coralville Transit $122,560 $65,994 $188,554 (-$34,162) Iowa City Transit $434,899 $234,176 $669,075 (- $82,492) Cambus $303.215 $163.270 $466.485 (+ $116.654) Total $860,674 $463,440 $1,324,114 For the purposes of comparison, we have also calculated using the current multiplier for regular FT A operating assistance, and the multiplier with fare revenue not included as a factor for the STIC funds. FY07 FY07 Reg STIC Operating (fare revenue not FY07 Difference from (current multiplier) included in multiplier) Total current multiplier Coralville Transit $144,765 $65,994 $210,759 (-$11,957) Iowa City Transit $488,519 $234,176 $722,695 (- $28,872) Cambus $227.390 $163.270 $390.660 (+ $40.829) Total $860,674 $463,440 $1,324,114 Let us know how you would like to proceed regarding this matter. We can meet again as a subcommittee if you would like, or we can present this information as you see it here to the full JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee at the meeting which is to be scheduled in September. The recommendation from the JCCOG TT AC will be forwarded to the JCCOG Board for a decision on splitting up these funds at the October JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board meeting. Please use "reply to all" when forwarding your responses to us. Let us know if you have any questions. jccogadm/memos/sticfu nding. doc ~JCCOG rr..... m e m 0 Date: September 26,2006 To: JCCOG Transp~rta;1Pn Technical Advisory Committee From: Brad Neuman~sistant Transportation Planner Re: Agenda item #5: Consider recommendations to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board on amendments to the FY07-FY10 JCCOG TIP, Iowa City Transit and CAMBUS projects Iowa City Transit and CAMBUS have requested that the following projects be amended in the FY07-10 JCCOG TIP. Iowa City: Add the following items to FY07: .:. New Freedom program operating funds for Chatham Oaks Express fixed route- Operating funds - $70,180 FTA 5317/$70,180 Local .:. New Freedom program capital funds - One (1) 40' heavy-duty bus for fleet expansion - $40,000 FTA 5317/$10,000 Local Change the following existing item in the FY07-10 TIP: .:. Three (3) 40' heavy-duty buses for expansion - $930,000 total - $744,000 FTA 5309/$186,000 Local change to: .:. Two (2) 40' heavy-duty buses for expansion - $620,000 total - $496,000 FTA 5309/$124,000 Local This is the first year that FTA New Freedom program funds have been available to urban transit agencies. The funding is for projects for persons with disabilities that go above and beyond current ADA requirements. Iowa City Transit began running an express route to Chatham Oaks in August of 2006. This route is designed specifically for persons with disabilities. The changes to the TIP listed above reflect Iowa City Transit's programming of this project. Iowa City Transit conducted two public hearings regarding this new route. Copies of the hearing transcripts will be filed with the TIP. 2 Cambus: Move the following project from FY07 to FY08: .:. Maintenance facility replacement - $4,000,000 total - $3,200,000 FTA 5309/$800,000 Local Change the funding amount for the following project: From: .:. ITS systems development hardware/software for 32 vehicles - Expansion - $320,000 total - $256,000 FTA 5309/$64,000 Local To: .:. ITS systems development hardware/software for 20 vehicles - Expansion - $200,000 total- $160,000 FTA 5309/$40,000 Local. These changes are programming adjustments to Cambus projects. We are asking the TTAC for recommendations to the JCCOG Board regarding these amendments. Please bring any questions you may have to the October 10, 2006 TTAC meeting. cc: Jeff Davidson jccogadm/agd/transamendments.doc Date: October 2, 2006 ~JCCOG r~ ,-.... m e m o To: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: Jeff Davidson --rII Re: Agenda Item #6: Update on JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board decision on how to proceed regarding the proposed JCCOG Arterial Street Plan amendment to add the extension of Forevergreen Road between 1 ih Avenue and County Road W66 (Dubuque Street) At the August 30 JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board meeting, the Board unanimously defeated the proposed JCCOG Arterial Street Plan amendment to add the extension of Forevergreen Road between 1ih Avenue and County Road W66 (Dubuque Street). The Board had two principle concerns. First, they wished to have a more inclusive public input process during the development of the proposed alignment. I emphasized to them that the alignment identified for the purposes of the Arterial Street Plan amendment is a rough "planning level" design, and not an engineered alignment. The second concern expressed by the Board were the many public comments they received regarding the inadequacies in the existing arterial street system in this area. Specifically, North Liberty Road and Dubuque Street were cited as having numerous existing traffic problems. The Board instructed JCCOG staff to make this project a priority in our FY07 work program. I indicated to them that there are projects in the work program which cannot be pushed back, particularly, the update of the JCCOG Long- Range Multi-Modal Transportation Plan. For this reason the JCCOG Board indicated they would support a consultant-assisted process for reconsideration of this issue. I was instructed to bring information back to them for consideration at the October JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board meeting. It appears to me that there are two reasonable ways to proceed regarding this matter, although variations on both of theses ideas could also be explored. It is certainly possible to go back to square one and send out an RFP for proposals to conduct the requested alignment study and investigation of traffic issues. Given the expense of the consultant study which has been conducted so far, I estimate we would be in the ballpark of $100,000 for such a project. A second possibility is to take the existing engineering study which has been completed by Earth Tech, and continue working with Earth Tech to address the questions which have been raised. The majority of citizen comments at the last JCCOG Board meeting seem to fall into the following areas: . The half-mile wide study corridor is too narrow and other alignments for the Forevergreen Road extension should be examined . Public input was lacking early in the study . Traffic and safety concerns on Dubuque Street and North Liberty Road . Opposition to annexation and development of the Scanlon Farm by Coralville . Impacts to private property owned by persons who do not want to redevelop JCCOG would work with Earth Tech on the investigation of these issues. This would obviously be a much less expensive way to proceed, although I do not have an estimated expense at this time. It may be that the JCCOG Board will not consider the latter alternative to be politically viable because of some of the comments which have been made about the Earth Tech study being biased. However, it is my observation that the primary concerns expressed by the public have pertained to the planning process not being inclusive enough, as well as with the proposed annexation and development of the Scanlon Farm. Earth Tech is willing to continue working with us if that is the direction we decide to go. Bring any comments or suggestions to the October 10 Technical Advisory Committee meeting. jccogadm/memos/forevergreen2extension.doc ~JCCOG ...,..... m e m 0 Date: September 27,2006 To: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: Anissa Williams, Traffic Engineering Planner ~ Re: Agenda Item 7(a): Review arterial street model inputs for 2030 to 2035 conversion. Agenda Item 7(b): Consider modification of MPO transportation planning boundary. The JCCOG long range multi-modal transportation plan is required to be a 25-year plan. Because our next plan update is scheduled for May 2007, it is necessary to increase the long- range plan element of our TransCad arterial street model from 2030 to 2035. This conversion is being coordinated between JCCOG and the Iowa Department of Transportation Office of Systems Planning. We would like the JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee to review the socioeconomic data used in the traffic model to see if there are any areas that look questionable in terms of number of dwelling units, retail employment, and non-retail employment. These are the model data inputs that are used to forecast traffic on the arterial street system in 2035. Please review this information and let us know if anything does not look quite right. In conjunction with the update of the long-range multi-modal transportation plan, the Federal Highway Administration is also requiring us to reevaluate our long-range transportation planning boundary. At the present time, the JCCOG transportation planning boundary is determined by the area in which JCCOG municipalities have committed to providing municipal utilities as part of their long-range growth. Typically, the boundary is determined by the limit at which gravity sanitary sewer can be provided. In reevaluating the boundary for the May 2007 long-range multi-modal transportation plan update, there are some changes that we propose. These changes are because of planned street extensions and annexations that go beyond the gravity sewer service line. The proposed changes are shown in red on the attached map. Pleas,e be prepared to make a recommendation on these two items at the October 10 TT AC meeting. The JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board will consider formal approval of these items at their October 25 meeting. jccogadm/memos/jd-williams-2035 conversion.doc ~ ==JCCOG - ~ ~memo r.... Date: September 28, 2006 To: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: JCCOG Staff 7f Re: Agenda Item #7(c): Review existing conditions data For the update of the JCCOG Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan (hereafter 'Plan'), we have been preparing maps and other information summarizing the 'existing conditions' that will form the basis of our long range transportation planning. These conditions include population forecasts, various adopted plans that influence transportation decisions, transit routes, sensitive environmental areas, and for the first time we have attempted a consolidated future land use plan of the entire metropolitan area. We are interested in any substantive errors that you notice, as well as your reaction to the format and presentation of the information. After we complete forming the existing conditions information, the next step in the development of the Plan will be to develop 'future conditions' scenarios, forecasts of transportation capacity and connectivity issues, and recommendations for investment in the transportation system. Map 1 Arterial Street Plan: The Arterial Street Plan is a new format of the existing adopted JCCOG Arterial Street Plan. Using the aerial photo as the background allows the location of the arterial streets to be shown much more accurately. As with the existing arterial street plan, the locations of the proposed arterial streets are not meant to show exact alignments, but do reflect the approximate locations of future arterial street corridors. Map 2 Trails Plan: This map is a new format of the existing JCCOG Trails Plan. The trails included in this plan are only those that are considered to be part of the metropolitan trail system. Shorter, internal park trails or neighborhood trails that do not connect to the larger network are generally not included on the JCCOG Trails Plan. Map 3 School Locations: This map shows the location of elementary, junior high and high schools in the JCCOG transportation planning boundary. Three new elementary schools are planned, including one in west Iowa City, one in North Liberty and one in North Liberty's growth area. According to the Iowa City Community School District, enrollment trends continue to demonstrate growth in the north and west segments of the metropolitan area. T:\JCCOG\John\long range plan maps.doc School enrollment is an indicator of growth in young families, and has implications for traffic and pedestrian facility needs around schools. North and west side school enrollment is expected to continue to increase in the near future. No new east side schools are planned at this time. Map 4 Existing land Use: The Existing Land Use map reflects the actual land use of property within the metropolitan area, not necessarily how the property is zoned. Because of differences in how different cities classify properties and different formats of municipal land use maps, we used County Assessor data to classify existing land uses according to how the County classifies the land use for tax purposes (some multi-family areas are classified as commercial; we converted those to a multi-family classification for this map). To simplify the map and to overcome differences in zoning definitions between the cities, land uses were divided into five categories of 1) single-family residential; 2) multi-family residential; 3) commercial; 4) industrial; and 5) public. Map 5 Future land Use: The Future Land Use map is based on the adopted land use plans of each municipality. Similar to the Existing Land Use map, we simplified land uses into five basic categories. While this map is useful to be able to visualize future land use plans for each city broadly, the individual municipal land use plans have more detail and should be referred to before making any specific land use decisions. Map 6 Sensitive Environmental Features: The Sensitive Environmental Features Map for the JCCOG Long Range Transportation Plan includes the locations of wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes (over 18%), cemeteries, and underground storage tanks. All of the information came from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources inventoried data. The steep slopes data came from Johnson County. No archeological site data was included on the environmental inventories maps since specific sites are protected. Map 7 Transit Map: The Transit Service Area map shows all of the existing bus routes and areas within % mile of those bus routes in the urbanized area. Two new routes have been added, including the Chatham Oaks express route in Iowa City and the North Liberty route out of Coralville. Map 8 Special Needs Housing: This map shows the location of senior/disability low income housing complexes, transitional housing, assisted living complexes, nursing homes, project based rental assistance complexes and permanent housing for persons with disabilities. Due to several variables (age, disability, limited income) that may limit ability to have or operate a motor vehicle, a person or household may be more dependent on public transit. Map 9 Collision locations: This map shows the top ten intersections and top 5 mid- block collision locations, 2001-2004. It should be noted that many of these locations, such as Highway 6 in Coralville, have had or are undergoing construction projects to mitigate safety concerns. Map 10 Minority Census Tracts: This map identifies the percentage of minority households by census tract. This type of map is typically required to be included in the JCCOG Transportation Improvement Program. We have the ability to create similar types of maps with census information if needed, including household income, household size, travel-time-to-work, etc. T:\JCCOG\John\long range plan maps.doc wJCCOG r,..... m e m 0 Date: October 2, 2006 To: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: Jeff Davidson ~II Re: Agenda Item No. 7(c): Update of JCCOG Long-Range Multi-Model Transportation Plan; review base information; Vision Statement The JCCOG Long-Range Multi-Modal Transportation Plan provides a transportation strategy for the Iowa City Urbanized Area which is comprehensive, coordinated, and continuing. It is necessary to state the overall transportation planning vision which provides a basis for the specific elements of the plan. The 2002 plan contains a section entitled The Transportation Vision for the Urbanized Area, which attempts to summarize the overall transportation vision for the community. The 2002 plan was the initial multi-modal long-range transportation plan produced by JCCOG under a single cover. Because there was still sensitivity at that time regarding each JCCOG entity being able to act independently in terms of providing transportation services, the transportation vision section of the 2002 plan contained individual vision statements for each JCCOG member entity. For the 2007 plan update we believe we should attempt to synthesize these individual elements into an overall transportation planning vision for the urbanized area. Accordingly, I have attempted to summarize the common elements of the transportation vision statements contained in the 2002 plan. The following bullets are statements which I believe can be supported by all JCCOG member entities and together constitute an overall transportation planning vision for our community. I have deliberately used bullets and not numbers because these are not in priority order. . Accommodate all modes of transportation when constructing new transportation facilities and reconstructing old transportation facilities, in order to accommodate all people in the community including children, seniors, and persons with disabilities. Ensure that the transportation system does not negatively impact low income and minority populations. . Resolve safety issues. . Enhance the livability of the community by managing congestion and enhancing neighborhoods. · Provide a complete basis for transportation decision-making by producing information that allows decision makers to make smart decisions which are fiscally prudent. . Maximize the use of federal and state revenue for transportation operations and infrastructure. · Coordinate transportation decision-making between all organizations in the urbanized area, while acknowledging each community's individualities. 2 · Accommodate residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional growth of the community. · Attempt to minimize adverse impact on the environment by the transportation system. · Transportation decision-making should be part of an open, inclusive public process. · Allow incremental transportation improvements to eventually result in creation of a complete transportation network. · Evaluate transportation innovations and incorporate them as appropriate. · We must see our transportation network in the Iowa City Urbanized Area as part of a larger whole: urbanized area-county-region-state-country-world. Please review the above bulleted items and be prepared to discuss whether or not they constitute a comprehensive transportation vision for our community. Specifically, I would like to know if anything needs to be added or removed. Remember, this is the broad vision; the rest of the plan will focus on specific issues. Jccogadm/agd/jd-update9-14-06. doc ~JCCOG ...r..... m e m 0 Date: September 29,2006 To: Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: Kent Ralston; Assistant Transportation Planner ~~ Re: 30- Year Population Projections The update of the JCCOG Long Range Multi-modal Transportation Plan will use population projections to help gauge the rate of growth in the urbanized area. 30-year population forecasts for the JCCOG urbanized area and the rest of Johnson County are attached. The projected number of households and future developed acreage forecasts for JCCOG municipalities are also attached. The method used to produce these forecasts is based on the assumption that past population growth rates can be used to predict future growth. At present, various data such as (in) and (out) migration figures are only available at the county level making it difficult to produce more robust population forecasts for JCCOG municipalities. For the attached forecasts, it was assumed that 15 years of historical population growth provides a timeline sufficient for such predictions. Population estimates were created using 1990 - 2005 U.S. Census Bureau data. All figures were generated by calculating the change in population between 1990 and 2005, and dividing by 15 (years) to establish an average yearly growth/decline in population for the geographic area in question. Population estimates were then established by projecting the average yearly population change for 30 years. To forecast the number of households by municipality, the estimated population for a given year was divided by the average number of persons per household (data from 2000 census). Forecasts for the number of future acres developed by municipality were calculated assuming an average development density of 10 multifamily dwellings per acre, and 1.9 single family dwellings per acre based on a housing inventory conducted by the Iowa City Planning Department in 2005. Average density includes open space, storm water management areas, and roadways. Percentages of multi and single family dwellings out of total households were estimated using historic building permit data from each municipality. Caution should be used with straight line projections such as those attached. Straight line projections do not take into account factors such as the limiting nature of inadequate infrastructure on population growth, dwindling amounts of land available for future development within a municipality, poor outlook on job availability, or other growth related factors. Our hope is that these estimates will provide some broad-brush information regarding future population growth and number of acres developed if current trends continue. Several key issues related to the forecasts: . The City of University Heights population may not continue to decline as the data suggests given that land near Olive Court may be developed within the 30 year span of the attached forecasts. . Individual cities may not continue to grow as fast as the data suggests due to limited infrastructure capacity. 2 · The population forecasts cannot take into account pro or anti-growth politics which may affect a municipality's growth. · The average number of individuals per household by municipality is subject to change and may decrease the accuracy of acreage projections. · Changes in future density of development will affect acreage forecasts Please bring any questions or comments to the October 10 TTAC meeting. We are looking for concurrence from the TTAC that these figures are reasonable in order to proceed with our long range transportation planning process. J ccogadm/agenda/popproject.doc JCCOG Population, Housing and Acerage Forecasts 2005 - 2035 Iowa City 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 62,887 63,937 64,987 66,037 67,087 68,137 69,187 Households 28,200 28,671 29,142 29,613 30,084 30,555 31,026 MF Acres Needed 22 44 66 88 110 132 154 SF Acres Needed 130 260 390 520 650 780 910 Coralville 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 17,811 20,299 22,787 25,275 27,763 30,251 32,739 Households 8,059 9,185 10,311 11,437 12,562 13,688 14,814 MF Acres Needed 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 SF Acres Needed 355 710 1,065 1,420 1,775 2,130 2,485 North Liberty 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 8,808 10,769 12,730 14,691 16,652 18,613 20,574 Households 3,701 4,525 5,349 6,173 6,997 7,821 8,645 MF Acres Needed 33 66 99 132 165 198 231 SF Acres Needed 260 520 780 1,040 1,300 1,560 1,820 Tiffin 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 1,473 1,811 2,150 2,489 2,897 3,167 3,506 Households 664 816 968 1,121 1,305 1,427 1,579 MF Acres Needed 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 SF Acres Needed 48 96 144 192 240 288 336 University Heiahts 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 902 855 808 761 714 667 620 Rural Johnson County 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 25,186 26,379 27,571 28,763 29,886 31,147 32,339 Johnson County (total) 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Population 117,067 124,050 131,033 138,016 144,999 151,982 158,965 "Rural Johnson County is considered all communities outside the urbanized area and all unincorporated areas "University Heights has Iimitied land available for development and was not included in acerage forecasts "Rural and (total) Johnson County acreage forecasts are not calculated due to data insuffieciencies. Assumptions Example Calculation For 2005' MF Acres Needed * 48% of Iowa City Housing is Multi-Family * 40% of Coralville Housing is Multi-Family 28,671 Households 2010' * 40% of North Liberty Housing is Multi-Family -28,200 Households 2005' * 30% of Tiffin Housing is Mult-Family 471 * Iowa City = 2.23 Avg. HH Size 471* 0.48 = 226 * Coralville = 2.21 Avg. HH Size 226/10 = 22 * North Liberty = 2.38 Avg. HH Size * Tiffin = 2.22 Avg. HH Size 471 = change in number of HH from 2005' - 2010' * University Heights = 2.11 Avg. HH Size 0.48 = % of Iowa City MF households 226 = number of additional MF households "Multi-Family = 10 dwelling units per acre 10 = number of MF dwelling units per acre * Single Family = 1.9 dwelling units per acre 22 = MF acres needed J! ~ ~ ~ .s:: ~ .21 .! :2 0 .. ::J: c: :J. e I ::i E :Z 0 f= 0 . c 0 0 . u -, It ca f <( "'0 1.0 CD vLS'OZ ('t) N 0 .- N C Q'e ca .c om ... ::) C) 0 0 0 ..., CD 0 .c t69'vt N ..... 0 ... N .2 6Qtr<?; 11 J>9l. tn ca (.) e 0 u.. c 0 LO .- 0 ..... 0 ca N - ::s C- o D- o 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ci 0 0 0 0 to- co LO .q- M N - C'G CI) I- <C "'C CI) N .- C ca .c I- :J C) o o o .., CI) .c +' I- J2 lJ In ca to) CD I- o LL C o .- +' ca - ::J C. o Q. (/) 1: ~ ~ ~ 8 OJ "ijj .B :2 <.) J: c::: :::; l.'! j lE Z 0 U ::J i= <.) . 0 0 0 Ell U -, If \. .. .. I I I I I I I I I I I ~ ~ ~ 0 I ~~"~~~~_____"~___~~____~_~___~____J 17L9'02: 909'€ OZ9 ~69'17~ 6ev'Z sos's E:lv' ~ zoo o o o o t- o o o o <0 o o o o LO o o o o ...,. 1.O ('f) o C\I o C\I o C\I 1.O o o C\I ~JCCOG r,..... m e m 0 Date: September 27,2006 To: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: John Yapp, Assistant Transportation Planner "/ J f,...-- Kent Ralston, Assistant Transportation Planner Re: Agenda Item #8: Discuss JCCOG Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee discussion of bicycle accommodation in the Iowa City Central Business District At its last meeting in June, the JCCOG Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee (RTBC) discussed the perceived lack of specific bicycle facilities in downtown Iowa City, particularly in the Burlington Street corridor. This discussion was requested by Mark Wyatt, a resident of North Liberty and Director of the Iowa Bicycle Coalition. The draft minutes from the meeting are attached; they have not yet been approved by the RTBC. The proposed Burlington Street median project prompted this discussion. The Burlington Street median would add a curbed, landscaped median to Burlington Street through downtown Iowa City. Left turn lane bays would continue to exist at the intersections, but left turns at alleys would no longer be permitted. The landscaped median will improve the appearance of the corridor, and is expected to significantly reduce jay-walking in the Burlington Street corridor. No changes are proposed to the width of Burlington Street itself; only the median would be constructed. There have been occasional complaints from bicyclists about the inconvenience of traveling westbound by bicycle through downtown, because of the bicycle prohibition in the Pedestrian Mall, Washington Street being one-way eastbound, and bicycles being prohibited on downtown sidewalks, including the sidewalk on the north side of Burlington Street. Westbound bicycle travel through downtown is concentrated on Iowa Avenue, the alleys, or on Burlington Street, which is not specifically designed to be "bicycle-friendly" due to the high traffic volume and standard 12-foot travel lanes. A new arterial street would follow our modern arterial street design of a wide outside lane (15 feet to provide extra room for on-street bicyclists), and a wide sidewalk on at least one side of the street. Older streets like Burlington Street and Gilbert Street in downtown Iowa City do not have this design, and have right-of-way constraints, making it difficult to contemplate widening a travel lane or a sidewalk. Through discussion, the RTBC acknowledged that bicycle travel through downtown Iowa City is not without friction; the central business district is designed to keep all traffic moving slowly for safety and to maintain a pedestrian atmosphere. Though no specific recommendations were made, the RTBC wanted a summary of their discussion forwarded to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board. Improving a street corridor to make it more inviting to bicyclists will always be an issue when older street corridors are proposed for reconstruction. If the TTAC has any comments to add, we will summarize these for the Board as well. Attachment jccogad m/agd/burl ington-median. doc MINUTES JCCOG REGIONAL TRAILS AND BICYCLING COMMITTEE TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2006 IOWA CITY CITY HALL LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM DRAFT MEMBERS PRESENT: Terry Trueblood, Greg Kovaciny, Mike Lehman, Terry Dahms MEMBERS ABSENT: Erling Anderson, Karin Oils, Sherri Proud, Michelle Ribble, Shelly Simpson OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Wyatt, Del Holland STAFF PRESENT: John Yapp, Kent Ralston, Nikhil Sikka CALL TO ORDER Yapp called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Yapp introduced Kent Ralston as the new Assistant Transportation Planner with JCCOG. Ralston filled the position that had been vacant since September 2005. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 7.2006 MEETING The minutes from the February 7,2006 meeting were approved without any amendments. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Yapp asked for public input on items not on the agenda. Dahms asked if JCCOG is taking any counts on Iowa River Corridor Trail. Yapp stated that the Iowa DOT is taking counts at four different spots on trail system- one in City Park, one on the Iowa River Corridor Trail near Dairy Queen, one on the North Ridge Trail, and one on the North Liberty Trail near Zeller Street. Yapp stated that one of the disappointing features of these counters is that they only detect bikes and do not detect pedestrians. He further stated that the counters would be there throughout the summer. Holland noted that there is a problem with the location of a counter in City Park. He stated the counter may not be counting all the use because it is on one leg of a loop and should be moved. Yapp said he would forward this idea to DOT. Lehman asked how these counts are breaking things down per day or at different times during a day. Yapp said the data from the DOT counters would be available in the Fall. Kovaciny asked when the City would redo the paving on Summit St between College and Burlington St. He stated that the City did not do a good job last fall and the road is rough for bicycle traffic. Yapp replied that he would talk to City Engineer regarding this matter. Kovaciny also noted one of the pedestrian issues related to Iowa Arts Festival when streets were closed off for pedestrians is that potholes were present on the streets that were closed off including Washington St and Iowa Ave. Kovaciny proposed that entire roadway should be scanned for any repairs at least a week before the festival and it should be made a regular task prior to closing of the streets. Yapp said he would follow up. Holland noted that the gate on Sycamore Trail near the soccer park remains closed most of the time and one can not get through the road to the south. Yapp stated that the park maintenance department locks the gate in the evening due to some vandalism issues but should remain open in the morning. Holland noted that it was locked the entire previous week except during soccer games. Trueblood mentioned that when soccer park was built, they had to enter in an agreement with the county that the road would be neither an access nor an egress for any kind 2 of vehicles which may include bikes. Trueblood stated he would follow up on the matter, as the Soccer Park is an Iowa City park. AGENDA ITEM #3: DISCUSS AND CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION ON A COMPLETE STREET POLICY: Yapp noted that at the last meeting the committee had demonstrated support for a 'Complete Streets Policy' and had asked for draft language. Yapp stated that Iowa DOT has a bike accommodation policy where bike and pedestrian facilities are included 'if it can be shown that there are bikes and pedestrians that would use the roadway'. Yapp further explained that the Complete Streets Policy is a little stronger by stating bike and pedestrian facilities must always be included unless it can be proven that there are no bikes and pedestrians or they are prohibited by law. Yapp stated that the draft policy is based on other policies that have been implemented around the country although there are not any present in Iowa currently. The draft policy states that "all new roadway projects, or major reconstruction projects funded in whole or part by JCCOG shall accommodate travel by pedestrians and bikes except where: 1. Bicyclists and pedestrians are prohibited by law 2. The cost would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use (20% of overall project cost) 3. Alternative, nearby bicycle and pedestrian accommodations already exist Yapp asked for any discussion on specific language of the draft policy. He also reminded the committee that any recommendations would be forwarded to the JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee and finally to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board. Kovaciny asked whether the policy would give anymore force to the grant applications and funding other than through JCCOG. Yapp replied that if JCCOG had a Complete Streets Policy and can demonstrate to Iowa DOT that the project complies with it, there may be more recognition at the state level but he could not speak for Iowa DOT. Wyatt asked whether exception number three of the policy was taken from Sherry Proud's recommendation or if it was Iowa DOT's language. Ralston replied that it is based on other similar policies. Dahms stated that he is bothered by the proposed Complete Streets Policy. He noted that from the perspective of Iowa DOT, it sounds like it could have some advantages. But JCCOG had been doing complete streets with their arterial street design for ten years. Yapp agreed that "Complete Streets" is the current buzz term, and JCCOG has always encouraged bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Dahms stated that it needs to be emphasized in the language of the policy that this recommendation is not new and JCCOG had already been doing complete streets. Wyatt added that the policy would also give JCCOG a leadership advantage to be able to introduce the idea to other entities. Yapp asked for recommendation to approve the language of the draft policy. Trueblood moved; Dahms seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Yapp stated that he would summarize the discussion for the Technical Advisory Committee and the board. AGENDA ITEM #4: DISCUSS THE UPDATE OF THE JCCOG LONG-RANGE MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN. Yapp stated that JCCOG is in early stages of updating the Multi-Modal Transportation Plan. He noted that JCCOG used to have separate plans for each mode of transportation - including a transit plan, arterial street plan, and trail plans. Four years ago all those plans were complied into one document which became the Multi-Modal Long Range Transportation Plan. He said that JCCOG would be rewriting the plan and would like input from the committee to make the plan more useful to the communities that use it. He further explained that the plan is primarily 3 used by municipalities as they discuss which infrastructure project to move ahead with and how to incorporate other pedestrian and bike related issues. Yapp noted that over the next nine months he would like to get some more input. He also stated that the committee could set up a separate workshop or meeting just to focus on this element. Yapp explained that we use the trail plan element of the plan while going through grant funding application or to decide what projects to support in order to be consistent with the Long Range Plan. Kovaciny asked if the plan is used by the municipalities much. He also asked whether or not they always do the things as recommended in Long Range Plan. Yapp replied he thinks municipalities are doing most of the things as recommended and mentioned that when this plan first got adopted it was probably used more. One reason to periodically update the plan is to make sure it has current information and is fresh in the minds of staff and elected officials. Yapp stated that each of the committee members might like to contact their own group to gain input. He also reminded the committee that this plan is a 20-25 year long range plan. Trueblood noted that each committee member can review the plan individually and see if there are lots of suggested technical changes and that would determine whether or not the committee needs a separate meeting for this item. Dahms added that the plan should be consistent with what the school districts are planning. Yapp agreed. Dahms noted he did not see a justification for a separate meeting and the item can be included on next agenda. Yapp noted that JCCOG will be identifying the major growth areas in Iowa City, North Liberty, Tiffin, and Coralville urbanized areas and focus attention on the transportation infrastructure needs of these rapidly growing areas. Wyatt asked whether the plan would focus on the fringe areas only or include infill areas. Yapp replied it would be both, but he thought most investment in transportation infrastructure would take place in developing and redeveloping areas. Dahms stated that there are some conflicts and discrepancies between what JCCOG does with their arterial street plan versus what the county does. He said that he is not satisfied with the Johnson County Trails Plan, especially since it includes paved shoulder as trails. AGENDA ITEM #5: UPDATE ON LINN COUNTY-JOHNSON COUNTY CONNECTING TRAIL MEETING. Yapp stated that there is a Johnson County Trails Plan that has been developing for over a year and than there is a separate but related effort started by Linn County and the Linn County Trails Association to promote a trail connecting Linn County to Johnson County, more specifically the Cedar Rapids area to Iowa City and North Liberty areas. Yapp stated that there was a meeting between the elected officials of both the counties and that Senator Bolkcom had promoted a trail along HWY 965 between North Liberty and Cedar Rapids. Lehman stated that the County is looking at re-surfacing part of HWY 965. Lehman noted that there is enough right of way to put a separate trail on this route. He stated that Senator Bolkcom noted we might get designated funds from the state but neither the Linn County nor the Johnson County have an idea what the costs are. Dahms stated that there is quite a bit of momentum by Linn County to come down along the Hoover Nature Trail and $50,000 was transferred from Johnson County to Linn County so they could push that trail down to Ely. He noted that he had been working with Linn County Trail Association and with Johnson County since March and as far as he knew they had a complete alignment that would start from the McBride Trail and would go through Ely. Lehman stated that maintenance of the trail was an issue and another issue they had was snowmobilers. He said the snowmobile groups have a route along HWY 965 that they maintain themselves and they would not want to lose it. Yapp noted that if anyone in the committee has interest on this issue, this item would be on the leadership group meeting between Johnson County and Linn County on August 24. He also 4 noted that the group would be establishing a sub-committee of elected officials in July and the issue would be further discussed over next several months. AGENDA ITEM #6: UPDATE ON IOWA DRIVERS EDUCATION CURRICULUM AND BICYCLE SAFTY LEGISLATION. Yapp noted that some groups including Ron Bandy had been advocating to include bicycle safety education as part of the driver's education curriculum. Yapp stated legislation did adopt the language which would add bicycle safety education to the driver's education curriculum. Yapp stated the Iowa Bicycle coalition is working with Iowa DOT and others to draft the new curriculum. AGENDA ITEM #7: DISCUSS BICYCLE FRIENDLY STREET DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DOWNTOWN. Yapp noted that Mark Wyatt wanted to discuss the fact that Burlington Street, an existing downtown arterial street, is not very bike friendly. Yapp stated that sidewalks are not wide enough for bicycling and technically on the north side of Burlington bicycles are not allowed to be on the sidewalk. He noted that there are other similar streets around the older parts of Iowa City and Coralville including Gilbert Street, Riverside Drive, and First Avenue that do not have wide curb lanes or wide sidewalks, since they were designed at the time when the "complete streets" were not being considered. Wyatt stated that he conducted an hour long observation survey on Burlington Street and noted that there were 40 bikes total, of which 19 were using sidewalk, 17 were using the street and 6 were on the opposite sidewalk. He mentioned that there is also a lack of alternative routes going east to west in downtown Iowa City. Wyatt noted that 2% of the injury accidents in the CBD happen because of bikes on sidewalk. Yapp reminded the committee that in the 1990s before reconstruction of infrastructure of downtown took place the committee recommended the best way to integrate bicyclists in downtown Iowa City was to slow down traffic and provide a lot of bicycle parking; bicycles lanes were not seen as a solution, especially in conjunction with on- street parking. Wyatt asked if the proposed median would slow down traffic or just prevent left turns. Wyatt stated that he assumes that it would make traffic flow faster. Yapp replied that the median prevents left turn at the alleys and the hard curb and landscaping on the median should cause motorists to go more slowly. Dahms asked how wide the new median would be Yapp replied that it would be the same width as the existing one. Wyatt asked if bike lanes could be added as part of the project. Yapp said there is not enough width for bike lanes - a median would be added, but the street is not being reconstructed. Trueblood said it is a state highway, and the DOT will need to be involved in any design changes. Dahms asked how the plan would be funded. Trueblood replied that it would be an expensive project but funding sources are not yet finalized, and he did not think any JCCOG funding was dedicated to it yet. Dahms asked how many blocks the project would cover. Trueblood replied from Gilbert Street down to the river. Dahms asked if they were looking at south Riverside Drive also. Trueblood replied that streetscape work on South Riverside Drive is currently unfunded in the Iowa City Capital Improvements Program. Yapp suggested the discussion should not focus only on Burlington Street but on the overall traffic pattern in the downtown area for bicycles. Wyatt said that Burlington Street should be the first priority. Yapp asked if the committee would like to have more information on this item or request implementation of a project studying this issue. Dahms asked if there are similar issues in 5 Coralville, or if this is just an Iowa City issue. Yapp replied that First Avenue in Coralville has very narrow travel lanes and some missing sidewalks segments, but that Coralville is pursuing a project to reconstruct First Avenue. Lehman asked if they needed a resolution stating that every street project should have a checklist for some of these accommodations. Yapp replied that the Complete Streets Policy discussed earlier in the meeting is an effort to require bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. Dahms said he thought the Complete Streets Policy would take care of requiring bicycle and pedestrian facilities when streets are being reconstructed - there is not much we can do with existing streets. Yapp suggested that as an action step, he summarize this discussion to the JCCOG Board. The committee agreed. OTHER BUSINESS Yapp showed a new digital ink embedded trail way-finding sign to the committee. Yapp noted that JCCOG is coordinating the installation of these signs on all the trails but it would be up to the individual parks departments to install these signs and pay for it. Kovaciny asked the approximate coast of each sign. Yapp replied it is about $80 per sign whereas the metal ones cost around $40-$50. Kovaciny suggested making the text and image on the sign slightly bigger. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m. Rtbc6-20-06.doc Date: September 29, 2006 ~JCCOG r,..... m e m 0 To: From: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee Kent Ralston, Assistant Transportation Planner, ~ John Yapp, Assistant Transportation Planner 7~r ....-- Re: Agenda item #9; Complete Streets Policy At the June 20, 2006 meeting of the JCCOG Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee, it was recommended that a Complete Streets policy be adopted by JCCOG. Complete Streets is a concept being advocated by national bicycle and pedestrian organizations. The policy requires that any newly constructed or reconstructed roadway include facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians. A street is not 'complete' unless it provides safe travel for all users. With the current Iowa DOT bicycle accommodations policy, although bicycle and pedestrian accommodations are always considered, bicycle and pedestrian facilities are required to be included in a street design only if there is proof that a certain level of bicycle activity exists. With the Complete Streets policy, bicycle and pedestrian accommodations are always included unless a specific exception is made (listed below). Both JCCOG staff and the RTBC recognize that street construction projects in our community have included pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Adding a Complete Streets policy would formalize this practice. Much of the RTBC discussion revolved around the fact that our communities have a good track record of constructing pedestrian and bicycle facilities and questioned whether adopting such a policy is necessary (draft RTBC minutes are included in this packet). The Complete Streets Policy would not require a specific design standard as there are many ways to design bicycle and pedestrian facilities into a road project. If this policy is adopted, it will be included in the JCCOG Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan and in JCCOG funding applications. The City of Cascade Iowa is the only Iowa City to date that has adopted a Complete Streets Policy (attached). The policy statement as proposed for JCCOG is streamlined compared to the language adopted by Cascade, and would apply only to JCCOG funded projects. All new roadway projects, or major reconstruction projects (not including maintenance), funded in whole or part by JCCOG under this policy shall accommodate travel by pedestrians and bicyclists, except where: 1. Bicyclists and pedestrians are prohibited by law (such as interstate highways). 2. The cost would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use (at least 20% of overall project cost) 3. Alternative, nearby bicycle and pedestrian accommodations already exist 4. All exceptions to the 'Complete Streets policy' must be granted only by the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board at the time said projects are considered for funding, or during project development. Please consider a recommendation to the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board regarding the Complete Streets policy. We will be available at your October 10 meeting for any questions or comments. Jccogadm/agenda/complete streets.doc CITY OF CASCADE POLICY STATEMENT COMPLETE STREETS: fNTEGRATfNG BICYCLfNG AND WALKfNG fNTO TRANSPORTATION fNFRASTRUCTURE POLICY STATEMENT: 1. Bicycle and pedestrian ways shall be established in new construction and reconstruction projects with in the city limits of Cascade unless one or more of the following conditions are met: *bicyclist and pedestrians are prohibited by law from using the roadway. In this instance a greater effort may be necessary to accommodate bicyclist and pedestrians elsewhere within the right of way or within a near by parallel corridor. *the cost of establishing bikeways or walkways would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use. Excessively disproportionate is defined as exceeding twenty percent of the cost of the overall transportation project. *where sparsity of population or other factors indicate an absence of need. This is defined as streets developed as a cul-de-sac with four or fewer dwellings or if the street has severe topographic or natural resource restraints. Also an indication of absence of need will be on streets where the speed limit is no more than twenty-five miles per hour and/or the average daily vehicle counts are less than 250 vehicles per day. 2. Sidewalks, shared use paths, street crossings (including over and under crossings), pedestrian signals, signs, street furniture and facilities, as well as all connecting pathways shall be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so that all pedestrians, including people with disabilities, can travel safely and independently. 3. The design and development of the transportation infrastructure shall improve conditions for bicycling and walki.ng through the following steps. *planning projects for the long-term. Transportation facilities are long-term investments that remain in place for many years. The design and construction of new facilities that meet the criteria in item 1. above should anticipate likely future demand for bicycling and walking facilities and not preclude the provision of future developments. For example a bridge that is likely to remain in place for 50 years, might be built with sufficient width for safe bicycle and pedestrian use in anticipation that facilities will be available at either end of the bridge even if that is not currently the case. *addressing the need for bicyclist and pedestrians to cross corridors as well as travel along them. Even where bicyclist and pedestrians may not commonly use a particular corridor that is being improved or constructed, they will likely need to be able to cross that corridor safely and conveniently. Therefore the design of intersections shall accommodate bicyclist and pedestrians in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. *getting exceptions approved by the city administrator. Exceptions for non-inclusion of ~JCCOG ...r..... m e m 0 Date: September 26, 2006 To: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: Jeff Davidson ~ Re: Agenda Item #10: Update on passenger rail study The passenger rail study that we have been working on with the City of Cedar Rapids is coming to completion. The project coordinators and I are currently reviewing the third draft of the final report and hope to have it completed sometime in October. It looks like we will have some things which can be implemented immediately, as well as a long range plan for things that will be possible in the future but not immediately. The report breaks down three essential service components: 1. Special event excursion service 2. Regularly scheduled transit service 3. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) As might be expected, the special event excursion service is what can be implemented in the immediate future. There is equipment available which can be leased for a moderate expense, and the railroads have preliminarily given authorization for the existing trackage to be used for such events, although trackage rights fees would have to be negotiated. The location of the existing rail lines is ideal for such excursions and special event services, and the willingness of the railroads to cooperate with us enables such possibilities to be explored. Regularly scheduled transit service is something which may be an option in the future if it is determined that it is a priority to spend funds for this purpose. There is the possibility that regularly scheduled passenger rail service could be established between North Liberty and downtown Iowa City. The other possibility which is called out in the report is between the Eastern Iowa Airport and downtown Iowa City. This would require a significant investment in trackage and equipment. There will need to be subsequent discussion of whether or not such services are a priority before the corridor delegation goes to Washington D.C. to request Congressionally Designated Funding. Another passenger rail service alternative put forth in the report is the notion of Transit Oriented Development, or TOD. There are two ideal locations for TOD in Coralville and Iowa City; the River Landing area of Coralville and the area along the east side of the Iowa River between Benton Street and U.S. Highway 6 in Iowa City. Both are long-term strategies but are very realistic in terms of their feasibility. There is also a good TOD site south of downtown Cedar Rapids which is highlighted in the report. I would emphasize that the report is still in draft form and there is nothing publicly to be released at this time. We hope to have the report finalized in October and conduct a public meeting to present the report through the Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce 15-in-5 initiative. We will then organize discussions this fall to determine what the priorities are for Congressionally Designated Funding in the corridor, in anticipation of the delegation going to Washington in late winter/early spring. Bring any questions to the October 10 meeting. jccogad m/agd/psg r -rai Istud y. d oc ~JCCOG ...,....... m e m 0 Date: September 27,2006 To: From: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee Brad Neuman~sistant Transportation Planner Linda Seversor#tiuman Services Coordinator Re: Agenda item #11: Update on coordinated human services transportation plan JCCOG is currently working on the Coordinated Public TransiUHuman Services Transportation Plan. This plan will be part of the larger Passenger Transportation Development Plan that is required for all of Iowa's MPOs and RPAs. These transportation plans are required for JCCOG to receive funding from three new federal programs. The first is a program called Special Needs (5310). This program provides funds directly to all urbanized areas including JCCOG. This program provides additional funding for transportation systems designed for people with special needs. Since in FY07 the coordinated plans are not complete, the 5310 funding allocated to Iowa City Transit and Coralville Transit has been designated for their SEATS contracts. Cambus is putting their funds toward the purchase of a new bus that is designed for persons with disabilities. The second program is the Jobs Access/Reverse Commute (JARC/5316) program. JARC provides funding for transportation programs that get people to and from work locations. Each individual transit system must apply for funding from this program. The third program is the New Freedom (5317) program. This program provides funds to each MPO with applications reviewed by the Iowa Department of Transportation. New Freedom provides funds for programs that go beyond minimums established through ADA or for programs that expand service to persons with disabilities. Iowa City Transit has applied for funds to go toward their new Chatham Oaks express route. Each of the programs listed above will require an adopted Passenger Transportation Development Plan for FY08 funding. In developing this plan, JCCOG has set up focus group meetings with specific stakeholders in order to identify gaps in the current transportation systems. Some of these groups include current transit riders, employers, human service agencies, employment services, and public transit providers. These meetings began in July. JCCOG is also gathering information regarding the geographic distribution of employment centers and employment related activities, the location of welfare recipients and low income residents, and the distribution of people and employment centers which are currently served by public transportation. JCCOG also participated in the Mobility Action Plan (MAP) workshop held in North Liberty on May 3, 2006. JCCOG is also participating in the follow-up meetings and is part of the regional transit planning task force. In the coming months, JCCOG will be assimilating all of the information gathered in the stakeholder meetings and will begin to identify the transportation gaps and develop priorities for possible program development through the three funding sources listed above. The plan deadline is April of 2007. Please bring any questions or comments you might have regarding the preparation of the Passenger Transportation Development Plan to the TTAC meeting on October 10. cc: Jeff Davidson jccogadm/agd/coord tran plan update. doc Date: September 26, 2006 ~JCCOG ...'ii.... m e m 0 To: JCCOG Transportation Technical Advisory Committee From: Jeff Davidson Re: Agenda Item #12: Update on recent activities of the Transportation Planning Division Following is a list of recent activities of the JCCOG Transportation Planning Division. Bring any questions or comments to the October 10 meeting. Street and Highway 1. Melrose Avenue traffic study for University Heights. 2. Assist Iowa City with design of McCollister Boulevard. 3. 1-80 aesthetic enhancements committee. 4. Proposed amendment to add Forevergreen Road to the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan. 5. Assist with design of Lower West Branch Road. 6. Research needed improvements to Clinton StreeUBurlington Street intersection. 7. Proposed improvements to Iowa Hwy. 1 in vicinity of Ruppert Rd./Hawk Ridge Rd. 8. Gilbert Street/U.S. Highway 6 intersection improvements. 9. Updates to urbanized area arterial street model. 10. Construction project website. 11. Burlington Street median. 12. Assist with Grand Avenue roundabout. 13. Alignment study for extension of Sycamore St. to U.S. Hwy. 218 interchange 89. 14. Consider Complete Streets policy. 15. Assist North Liberty with Highway 965 task force. 16. 120th Street Study between 1-380 and Curtis Bridge Road in Shueyville. 17. Investigate contract penalties for paving contractors. 18. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) planning for 1-80 six-lane project. 19. Traffic study for Court Street between Summit and Muscatine. 20. Assist with developing access control guidelines for Iowa City subdivision code. 21. Evaluate Grand North Plaza traffic study for North Liberty. 22. Dubuque Street/Park Road intersection study. Transit 1. New Freedoms program grant application for Iowa City Transit. 2. Develop alternatives for distributing Small Transit Intensive Communities funding. 3. Sensitivity analysis for Iowa City Transit on State Transit Assistance formula. 4. Close out Coralville and CAMBUS triennial reviews. 5. State and federal transit grant administration. 6. National Transit Database reporting. 7. SEATS certification appeals. 8. Coralville Transit utilization report north of 1-80. 9. Assist with leased space in Court Street Transportation Center. 10. Joint human services transportation /JARC planning process. 11. One-year status report for Court Street Transportation Center. 2 Pedestrian/Bicycle 1. Implement regional trail signs. 2. Finalize Johnson County Trails Plan. 3. Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee activities. 4. Bike racks for various locations in downtown Iowa City. 5. Trail counts. 6. Investigate possible projects for Safe Routes to School program. 7. Linn County-Johnson County trail connection subcommittee. 8. Update Iowa City sidewalk deficiency map. 9. Assist with development of Court Hill Trail project in Iowa City. 10. Assist the University with pedestrian circulation issues around the new Art Building. Traffic Engineering Planning 1. Crash analysis for intersection of Burlington StreetlMuscatine Avenue. 2. Collect traffic data for Swisher. 3. U.S. 6/6th Avenue traffic signal warrant study review for Coralville. 4. Evaluate Bradford Drive/First Avenue traffic signal. 5. Street marker sign format research. 6. High crash location report for the urbanized area. 7. Investigate appropriate pedestrian signage for Cleary Walkway. 8. Administer Iowa City traffic calming program. 9. Traffic count and data collection program. 10. Quarterly crash location summary for Iowa City Police Department. 11. Assist with Iowa City traffic signal interconnect project. 12. Assist with installation of traffic signals on Highway 1 South. 13. Iowa City permanent pavement marking program. 14. Street marker assemblies for new Iowa City subdivisions. 15. Research access control issues. 16. Research pavement marking issues. 17. Research traffic control sign issues. 18. Trouble-shoot traffic signal issues. 19. Hwy 965/Golfview Dr./Fairview Dr. signal warrant study for North Liberty. Multimodal/Other 1. Passenger rail service study with Cedar Rapids. 2. Assist Johnson County with update of Land Use Plan. 3. JCCOG Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan update. 4. Assist Iowa City with Central Planning District study. 5. Assist with preparation of State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). 6. .Subdivision and site plan review. 7. Update public comment mailing list. 8. Assist Iowa City with capital projects programming. 9. Research downtown parking requirements for Iowa City. 10. ICAAP application for Iowa Interstate Railroad/First Avenue grade-separation project in Iowa City. 11. Begin preparation of FY08 JCCOG Transportation Planning Division budget. jccogadm/agd/recent-activities TPD .doc