Appendix A Appendix A Table of Contents
Public Participation Plan For Transportation Public Participation Planning In The Davenport-Moline-Rock Island Plan For Transportation Urbanized Area...... 1 Planning In The Regional Transportation Advisory Group (RTAG) – ADavenport-Moline-Rock Island Urban Area Interest...... 4 Urbanized Area Public Involvement Status Summary...... 6 In compliance with the provisions of the Moving 2014-12 MindMixer Survey Monkey Report...... 10 Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) 2045 LRTP Public Input 5-22-14...... 33 Policy Committee for the Davenport, Iowa-Illinois Davenport-Bettendorf Engineering Conference Urbanized Area has approved the following public Form...... 38 participation plan to engage interested parties and 2015-05-27 2045 LRTP BSRC Status Newsletter... 39 resource agencies in the transportation planning process. Transportation Presentation Scott Community College...... 41 The transportation planning process takes place 2015-09-22 LRTP BSRC Status Newsletter...... 43 at local, regional, tribal, state and federal levels. It is based on comprehensive, continuing and coor- Transit Summit Flyer...... 45 dinated activities that work together to identify, 2045 LRTP Public Input 12-2-15...... 46 prioritize and meet transportation needs at these 2045 LRTP Community Outreach December 2015 various levels. Public participation in this process Flyer...... 50 begins with finding what opportunities are available and expressing interest or concern. 2045 LRTP Multi-Cultural Outreach Public Input 12-10-15/12-12-15...... 51 Bi-State Regional Commission is the Metropoli- Public Input Meeting Flyer, 2-2-16...... 57 tan Planning Organization (MPO) designated to cooperatively facilitate public participation in the 2045 LRTP Service Report, February 2016 Public transportation planning process with Quad Cit- Input Meetings...... 58 ies Metropolitan Planning Area communities and 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan Input...... 61 counties, and state/federal Departments of Trans- portation, and among the various modes of trans- portation. The MPO is charged with carrying out ed at Bi-State Regional Commission offices and on metropolitan transportation planning that provides the Bi-State Regional Commission website (www. early and on-going opportunities for involvement, bistateonline.org), while minutes are web-posted timely information, reasonable access to informa- following approval by these committees. In addition, tion, adequate notification, diverse participation and proposed amendments to the annual Transportation periodic review and evaluation of the participation Improvement Program or Transportation Planning process. This public participation plan outlines the Work Program shall be sent to the same local media parameters for conducting these requirements. and RTAG, as well as local jurisdictions within the Davenport, Iowa-Illinois Urbanized Area, as part of Public Notification the Policy Committee agenda. Other transporta- All meeting announcements and agendas of the tion related advisory committees may be posted on Transportation Technical Committee and Policy this website to provide added transportation related Committee shall be sent to local news media and information, such as the Bi-State Regional Trails the Regional Transportation Advisory Group (RTAG) Committee and Bi-State Region Air Quality Task prior to the actual meeting date at forty-eight hours Force meetings. Notice of public hearings will be in advance. Agendas of these committees are post- published in local newspapers of general circulation
Page A-1 Appendix A and posted on the Bi-State Regional Commission Committee meetings on the annual Transportation website per the time period noted in “Public Hear- Planning Work Program (TPWP) activities, Trans- ings” of this plan. portation Improvement Program (TIP), Regional ITS Architecture Plan, Regional Transit Development Regional Transportation Advisory Committee Plan, Long Range Transportation Plan, and the Public The intent of the federal transportation legislation Involvement Plan, through the process outlined is to provide a special effort for an early and con- under “Public Notification” above. This process sat- tinuing public involvement process that seeks out isfies Program of Projects (POP) public participation and considers the transportation needs of a diverse requirements for Bettendorf Transit, Davenport Citi- public, including the traditionally underserved popu- Bus, River Bend Transit, and the Rock Island County lations (Executive Order 12898 – Federal Action to Metropolitan Mass Transit District (MetroLINK). Address Environmental Justice in Minority and Low- In the case of the Public Participation Plan, a mini- Income Populations, 1994) as well as providing an mum of a forty-five (45) day comment period shall opportunity for consultation with resource agencies be provided prior to action by the Transportation as defined in the current transportation act. The Policy Committee as required by the current trans- Regional Transportation Advisory Group (RTAG) portation act. The Long Range Transportation Plan will fulfill that role. Involvement in the RTAG is will require a minimum of a thirty (30) day comment open to any interested party, business, organization, period prior to action by Bi-State Regional Commis- or interested citizen within the Davenport, Iowa- sion. The prioritization process of both the Surface Illinois Urbanized Area wanting to be involved in the Transportation Program (STP) and the Transpor- transportation planning process. RTAG serves as tation Alternatives Program (TAP) will require a the diverse, multi-modal advisory committee to the minimum of a thirty (30) day comment/notification Transportation Technical Committee. Members will period to be provided prior to action by the Trans- receive all meeting notices, as noted in “Public No- portation Policy Committee. In matters involving tices” above, for the Technical and Policy Committee adoption or amendments to the Transportation meetings. In addition, members will receive noti- Planning Work Program, Transportation Improve- fication of proposed Transportation Improvement ment Program (TIP), Regional Transit Development Program (TIP) amendments, Surface Transportation Plan, and Regional ITS Architecture Plan, a minimum Program (STP) submittal notices, and proposed seven (7) day comment period shall be utilized prior changes to the Public Participation Plan, Regional to approval by the Transportation Policy Committee. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Architecture Additional notice may be provided through meet- Plan, Regional Transit Development Plan (TDP) or ings of the Transportation Technical Committee in the Long Range Transportation Plan. advance of action by the Policy Committee.
Annual TIP Project Request Notifications Publications Individual jurisdictions, members of RTAG, and the The MPO shall publish or otherwise make available media shall be informed as to when projects are be- for public review at a minimum the Long Range ing sought for inclusion in the annual Transportation Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Transportation Improvement Program through an announcement Improvement Program (TIP) in an electronically requesting Transportation Improvement Program accessible format and means (to the maximum annual element additions, modifications, or deletions extent practicable), such as the World Wide Web. for the proposed fiscal years, as part of an annual The LRTP and TIP publications developed by the document update cycle, typically thirty (30) days MPO will be placed on the Bi-State Regional Com- prior to a draft document review by the Technical mission website, www.bistateonline.org. Other Committee. transportation planning publications may be posted to allow for interested parties to review and access Public Comment/Notification additional MPO transportation planning information. The general public shall be afforded the opportunity Within these publications, the MPO shall employ to provide comments via the Technical and Policy visualization techniques to help clarify transporta-
A-2 Page Appendix A tion planning issues and/or activities. At a minimum, Area, including demographics and identification of visualization techniques shall be applied to the LRTP potential barriers (language, mobility, temporal or and TIP. Visualization techniques may include maps, other) that may prevent underserved persons from graphs, charts, tables, diagrams or other methods. effectively participating in the metropolitan trans- portation planning process. Public Hearings Prior to approval of the final Transportation Im- Accommodation provement Program (TIP), the Transportation Policy Persons requiring special material or presentation Committee shall hold a public hearing on all the formats will be asked within a public notice for projects being considered for approval in the TIP. advanced request of at least one week prior to a The Transportation Policy Committee shall also hold public hearing. Reasonable accommodations to pro- public hearings, as deemed necessary, for TIP amend- vide documents in an accessible format, as required ments and prior to the approval of the Long Range by the Americans with Disabilities Act and Execu- Transportation Plan by Bi-State Regional Commis- tive Order 13166 (Improving Access for Persons sion. At least fourteen (14) days prior notice will be with Limited English Proficiency, 2000), will be made given for all public hearings. No other documents when requested by the public. Persons request- noted will require a public hearing but shall afford ing assistance will be referred to the appropriate public comment opportunities, as noted under “Pub- Bi-State Regional Commission staff who will make lic Comment/Notification.” reasonable accommodations for translation services or other accommodations based on the request. Data Meetings will be held at convenient and accessible As part of non-discrimination requirements, Bi-State locations and times with emphasis to engage mi- Regional Commission will maintain information on nority, low-income and LEP populations. Receipt protected class (race, color, national origin, gender, of public input will be taken in a variety of formats age or disability) and Limited English Proficiency - written, oral or other means- where accommoda- (LEP) populations within the Metropolitan Planning tions are requested and reasonable. Approved Revisions/Amendments May 28, 2013
Page A-3 Appendix A
Regional Transportation Advisory Group (RTAG) – Urban Area Interest
March 2016
ADT ILLINOIS FHWA – MIDWEST RESOURCE CENTER ALLIANCE FOR MENTALLY ILL FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ALTER BARGE LINE FLENKER LAND ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANTS AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION GENERATIONS AREA AGENCY ON AGING AMENT ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES GREATER METROPOLITAN HOUSING AUTHORITY GREATER QUAD CITIES HISPANIC CHAMBER OF AMERICAN RED CROSS, QC CHAPTER COMMERCE BETHANY CHILDREN AND FAMILIES HAMPTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
BETTENDORF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE HANDICAPPED DEVELOPMENT CENTER
BETTENDORF CITY ADMINISTRATOR HANSON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETTENDORF COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT HOWARD R. GREEN CO. CONSULTING ENGINEERS BLACK HAWK COLLEGE IL DEPT OF COMMERCE & ECON OPPORTUNITY BLACK HAWK FREIGHT SERVICE INC IL DOT, DISTRICT #2 BUDDY BOY CAB ILLINOISIOWA INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER CARBON CLIFF-BARSTOW ELEMENTARY SCH DIST INTERSTATE RC&D CASA GUANAJUATO MEXICAN CULTURAL CENTER IOWA INTERSTATE RAILROAD CENTER FOR AGING SERVICES INC IOWA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COLONA GRADE SCHOOL DISTRICT IOWA EAST CENTRAL T R A I N COMMISSION ON VETERANS AFFAIRS IOWA MOTOR TRUCK ASSOCIATION IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA DAVENPORT COMMUNITY CARING CONFERENCE CHAPTER IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA MOLINE DAVENPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR CHAPTER DAVENPORT COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT JOHANNES BUS SERVICE INC DAVENPORT HOUSING AUTHORITY LAFARGE NORTH AMERICAN DEERE AND COMPANY LEAGUE OF ILLINOIS BICYCLISTS DM&E RAILROAD LUCKY CAB DOHRN TRANSFER LUTHERAN HOMES
EASTERN IOWA COMMUNITY COLLEGE LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES EASTERN IOWA JOB TRAINING MARTIN LUTHER KING COMMUNITY CENTER EAST MOLINE CITY ADMINISTRATOR MAX’S CAB COMPANY EAST MOLINE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT MCCLURE ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC
A-4 Page Appendix A
METROPOLITAN AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF ROCK FAMILY RESOURCES INC ISLAND COUNTY FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMIN (FHWA) – IOWA & ILLINOIS MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY MIDWAY OIL COMPANY ROCK ISLAND COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY MISSMAN STANLEY & ASSOCIATES ROCK ISLAND COUNTY SENIOR CENTER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ROCK ISLAND HOUSING AUTHORITY SERVICES MOLINE ACTIVITY CENTER ROCK ISLAND-MILAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOLINE CITY ADMINISTRATOR ROCK ISLAND RIVER TERMINAL MOLINE HOUSING AUTHORITY ROCK ISLAND TRICOUNTY CONSORTIUM MOLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT SCOTT COMMUNITY COLLEGE NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS) SCOTT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR NORTH SCOTT COMMUNITY SCHOOL DIST SCOTT COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DIST SCOTT COUNTY HISTORIC PRES SOCIETY INC PROJECT NOW SENIOR CENTER SHERRARD COMMUNITY SCHOOL DIST QUAD CITIES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SHIVE HATTERY INC QUAD CITIES CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU SILVIS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT QUAD CITIES FIRST SOCIAL ACTION DEPARTMENT QUAD CITY CONSERVATION ALLIANCE THE FLORECIENTE CENTER QUAD CITY TIMES UNITED NEIGHBORS QUAD CITY TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION CLUB UNITED TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL RIVER ACTION U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS RIVER BEND TRANSIT U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE RIVER GULF GRAIN VARIOUS CITIZEN REPRESENTATIVES RIVERDALE COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT VERA FRENCH HOUSING RIVERSTONE GROUP W G BLOCK & COMPANY ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL WESTERN ILLINOIS AGENCY ON AGING, INC. ROCK ISLAND CITY MANAGER WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY ROCK ISLAND COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXTENSION WORLD RELIEF SERVICE ROCK ISLAND COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Page A-5 Appendix A
Public Involvement Status Summary 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan “Moving Forward, Starting Today to 2045” Appendix A-Public Involvement stands to document efforts for outreach in the Long Range Transportation Plan update process. There is an expectation that Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) development will include opportunities for the public to be involved. MAP-21 federal planning regulations require outreach to tribal governments, federal land management agencies, wildlife and regulatory agencies, as well as other interested stakeholders. There have been efforts to reach out to neighborhoods with residents who may be considered traditionally underserved, such as low-income, minority, and limited English-speaking areas of the Quad Cities. The adopted Public Participation Plan for the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) – Bi-State Regional Commission – outlines the acceptable methods and notification requirements for such outreach. This LRTP public involvement outline meets these requirements by providing clear and transparent opportunities for citizen conversations in the development of the 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan – “Moving Forward, Starting Today to 2045.” Bi-State Regional Commission utilized its mailing lists and website to post materials, updates, and status newsletters at www.bistateonline.org. The following outline summarizes the opportunities for public involvement in the development of the LRTP: Household Travel Survey: Completed 1,793 household surveys to determine metro area travel patterns with 168 GPS units deployed from October 2013 to January 2014. Trip generation rates were developed from the surveys and used in the travel demand model for the 2010/2025/2045 modeling effort. Mailed 9,830 letters and contacted 6,798 households by phone and recruited 2,205 households. Results posted to: http://bistateonline.org/transportation/quad-cities-metro-planning/2013-quad-cities-household-travel-survey American Planning Association Audio-Conference - Transportation Modeling: Hosted technical training on aspects of travel demand modeling for planning and zoning commissioners, planners, and other building-zoning officials. Participants: 4. September 25, 2013 Travel Demand Modeling Workshop for Planning and Technical Staff: Set technical workshop on aspects of travel demand modeling as part of travel model enhancements consultant contract. September 9- 10, 2014 Transportation Consultation Meeting – Planner/Resource Agencies: Held meeting to discuss environmental inventories and land use issues as these relate to transportation planning and project development. Sent draft in December. Invited to January 2016 Technical Committee meeting. January 12, 2016. Participants: 1. Transportation Public Input Survey: Prepared and sent survey, using Survey Monkey, to Regional Transportation Advisory Group, Regional Transit Interest Group, metro area governments, and citizens at large to solicit input on transportation planning issues in the Quad Cities, Iowa-Illinois. October 20- November 7, 2014. Participants: 255. Results posted to: http://bistateonline.org/transportation/quad-cities- metro-planning/2012-11-13-20-19-45/quad-cities-metro-lrtp-long-range-transportation-plan and included in Appendix A. Freight Interests Survey: Updated and sent survey to freight transportation interests to identify transportation system strengths, weaknesses/threats, and opportunities from a goods movement perspective, as well as determine participation in USEPA Smartway Program for local air quality strategic planning efforts. Solicited 27 freight contacts via mailed survey and contacted 51 by phone. Participants: 7. Fall 2013-Winter 2014 Bi-State Region Freight Plan: Conducted one-on-one stakeholder interviews with public and private sector through consultant study to receive input on regional freight needs. – Spring 2015 Participants: 9. Conducted online survey of companies that have businesses in the region, particularly in the agriculture and manufacturing sectors that are the predominant industries in the region. - April 1- May14, 2015. Participants: 9. Plan document posted to: http://bistateonline.org
A-6 Page Appendix A
Transportation Public Open Houses*: Provided opportunity to discuss transportation network strengths, weaknesses/threats, and opportunities through presentation(s) on long range planning and solicitation of input on plan development. May 21 and 22, 2014, 4:00-6:30 p.m. Roosevelt Community Center, Davenport and Centre Station, Moline. Flyer notice mailed to Regional Transportation Advisory Group - Urban and Combined Interests, CEDS Committee, Media and Freight Interests. Flyer notice e-mailed to Quad Cities MPO Transportation Policy and Technical Committees, Bi-State Regional Trail Committee, Bi-State Region Air Quality Task Force, and Quad City Riverfront Council. Message of meetings sent to 1,100 e-mails associated with MindMixer invitation. Participants: 18. Results posted to: http://bistateonline.org/transportation/quad-cities-metro-planning/2012-11-13-20-19-45/quad-cities-metro- lrtp-long-range-transportation-plan and included in Appendix A. Online Transportation and Economic Development Forum: Provided opportunity to discuss transportation and economic development issues in online forum to solicit input and help shape what constitutes "Moving Forward, Starting Today." Used MindMixer public involvement tool. A total of 887 unique visitors and 6,6491 total page views were recorded as part of this engagement, with 1,131 invited participants and 101 registered participants recording comments. Messaged May 21st & 22nd Public Input meetings via MindMixer. April 7-May 31, 2014 Results posted to: http://bistateonline.org/transportation/quad-cities-metro-planning/2012-11-13-20-19-45/quad-cities-metro- lrtp-long-range-transportation-plan and included in Appendix A. Bi-Lingual Outreach with Iowa State Extension*: Provided opportunity to discuss initial results of the plan update to solicit input and help refine transportation improvements that serve minority and Limited English Proficiency citizens. Provided Spanish-English translation of material and at meetings. December 10, 2015 5:30-7:30 pm., LULAC Center, Davenport and December 12, 2015 Boys and Girls Club, Moline. Participants: 28. Example of outreach flyer included in this appendix. Stakeholder Input and Information Sessions: Provided opportunity to various Quad Cities groups or forums to provide input and/or receive status/presentation on plan development – e.g. Chambers of Commerce, service clubs or interest groups, etc. Ensure all interested parties, including environmental justice populations and those who may be considered traditionally underserved by the transportation system be offered opportunities for input. Fall 2015-February 2016 – Quad Cities Transit Summits: December 2, 2015, Bettendorf Library. Solicited input on the transit and non-motorized portions of the LRTP under development, and collected input on the Regional Transit Development Plan. Participants: 16. Example of outreach flyer included in this appendix. – Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Program Presentation*: June 23, 2014, Scott Community College. Solicited input on the transportation system from 9th/10th grade students. Participants: 10. – Davenport-Bettendorf Engineering Conference: December 11, 2014, Clarion Hotel, Davenport. Solicited input as part of presentation on LRTP update. Participants: 120. – Eldridge Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Update: November 18 and December 15, 2014; January 26, 2015. Solicited input from steering committee as it related to bicycle and pedestrian accommodations in Eldridge, Iowa. Participants: 10. – American Society Of Professional Estimators Local Chapter #71 in the Quad Cities: January 27, 2014. Presentation on LRTP update. Participants: 25. – East Moline-Silvis Rotary Club: September 24, 2015, East Moline. Presentation on LRTP update. Participants: ~40. – Quad Cities Chamber of Commerce: Meeting with staff, October 30, 2015. Participants: 2; Regional Opportunities Council, January 8, 2016. Participants: 65. – Other: Well Fargo Team Meeting 11/17/15 and on Mediacom NewsMakers (to air in January 2016). – Bi-State Regional Trail Committee: 7/30/15, 9/24/15
Page A-7 Appendix A
– Bi-State Region Air Quality Task Force: 12/12/14, 9/11/15 – Quad Cities Riverfront Council: 1/26/16 – Be Healthy QC Coalition: 1/12/16 On-going Presentations to Transportation Technical Committee, Transportation Policy Committee & Bi- State Regional Commission. – Transportation Policy Committee: 1/28/14, 5/27/14, 6/24/14, 10/28/14, 1/27/15, 3/24/15, 5/26/15, 6/23/15, 8/25/15, 9/22/15, 10/27/15, 12/1/15, 1/26/16, 2/23/16, 3/22/16 – Transportation Technical Committee: 1/14/14, 4/8/14, 5/13/14, 6/10/14, 10/14/14, 12/16/14, 1/13/15, 3/10/15, 4/14/15, 5/12/15, 6/9/15, 8/11/15, 9/8/15, 9/22/15 (status newsletter), 10/13/15, 11/10/15, 12/15/15; 1/12/16, 2/9/16, 3/8/16 – Bi-State Regional Commission: 4/23/14, 5/27/15 (newsletter), 9/23/15, 1/27/16, 2/24/16, 3/23/16 Bi-State Regional Commission website: Update and modify Quad Cities Metro Long Range Transportation Planning page on www.bistateonline.org website. Post newsworthy notices on the home page as needed. LRTP Pageviews: 12/18/15-2/16/16 – 213. Bi-State Regional Commission telephone: Bi-State Regional Commission staff serve inquiries via telephone from interested parties. Media & Outreach: Develop media releases for milestone activities, provide meeting notices, provide interviews and information, and submit public notices. – Household Travel Survey Launch: Media Release 9/6/13 and post to homepage of www.bistateonline.org. WVIK interview 4/9/14. Dispatch-Argus interview 4/11/14. WQAD Interview 4/17/14 – Online Public Engagement Website– bistateregion.mindmixer.com: Media Release 4/8/14 and post to homepage of www.bistateonline.org. – Moving Forward, Starting Today Public Input Meetings: Media Release 5/12/14. Interview with KWQC on Public Input Meetings and Passenger Rail 5/13/14. WQAD Interview 5/21/14 http://wqad.com/2014/05/21/public-meeting-offers-glimpse-into-the-future-for-quad-cities- transportation/. – Public Input Survey: Media Release 10/20/14. Interview with WVIK – December 1, 2015 Transportation Policy Committee: Meeting notice and December outreach opportunities. Interview with WHBF. – Multi-Cultural Outreach with Iowa State Extension: Meeting notice 12/2/15. Interview with QC Times 12/7/15. Reporters attended both meetings from QC Times. Notice in HolaIowa Newspaper and reporter at one meeting. – Public Informational Meetings: Media Release 2/5/16 with public hearing date. Memo with printed copy sent to 5 main libraries and city halls for public viewing 2/9/16. Memo with bi-lingual flyer with meeting dates/time/locations sent to RTAG-Urban and Combined Interests and RTIAG- Urban Interests 2/9/16. Bi-lingual flyer posted on community bulletin boards at various locations (30). Newsletter with meeting information sent to Policy & Technical Committees, Trails Committee, Quad City Riverfront Council, Community Awareness of Roadway Safety Group 2/2/16. Newsletter sent with BSRC “Commission in Review” e-mail & mailing 2/3/16. Public notice for publication to QC Times and Dispatch on/before 2/9/16. Posted meeting dates to www.bistateonline.org 2/5/16. WHBF interview 2/11/16, and WQAD interview 2/12/16.
A-8 Page Appendix A
Unveiling The Plan – Public Informational Meetings*: Hold informational meetings on full draft plan update. Held Friday, February 12, 3:00-5:00 p.m., East Pointe Station, 1201 14th Avenue, East Moline, Illinois; Tuesday, February 16, 5:00-7:00 p.m., St. John’s Church, 4501 7th Avenue, Rock Island, Illinois, Wednesday, February 17, 3:00-5:00 p.m., Community Center, 2204 Grant Street, Bettendorf, Iowa; Saturday, February 20, 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 Noon, The River’s Edge, 700 West River Drive, Davenport, Iowa; and Thursday, February 25, 5:00 -7:00 p.m., Centre Station, 1200 River Drive, Moline, Illinois. Participants: 39 Public Hearing: Consideration of recommendation to Bi-State Regional Commission by the Quad Cities MPO Transportation Policy Committee March 22, 2016 noon. Participants: 21. Consideration of Adoption: Present plan update to Bi-State Regional Commission for consideration of adoption. The Bi-State Regional Commission adopted the plan on March 23, 2016. Participants: 24.
In accordance with Federal Law and policy, Bi-State Regional Commission is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, religion, sex, and familial status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.)
*Representation by underserved populations.
2/16/16
Page A-9 Appendix A
2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan Public Involvement Process- Online Public Engagement Summary
Public Participation Methods
The transportation planning process takes place at local, regional, state, and federal levels. It is based on comprehensive, continuing, and coordinated activities that work together to identify, prioritize, and meet transportation needs at these various levels. For a metropolitan area, the focus is within the planning boundary. Public participation as part of transportation planning begins with finding what opportunities and challenges are recognized and expressing interest or concern for finding solutions or improving the system. The Bi-State Regional Commission is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) designated to cooperatively facilitate public participation in the transportation planning process with communities in the Quad Cities Area. The MPO is charged with carrying out metropolitan transportation planning. MPO staff provide for early and on-going opportunities for involvement, timely information, reasonable access to information, adequate notification, diverse participation, and periodic review and evaluation of the participation process. Mechanisms for public participation include: public hearings and input sessions, transportation advisory committee meetings and online forums, and public discussions. A variety of methods were utilized to engage the public and stakeholders as part of the 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan update. This summary condenses the online public input based on the collection method. Online Public Participation
Online public participation involved discussions using the web-based online public engagement tool, known as “MindMixer,” and general surveying of the public using the online tool “SurveyMonkey.” More static notification of activities included the publication of meeting announcements on the B-State Regional Commission website (www.bistateonline.org). Public engagement through MindMixer occurred from April 7 to May 31, 2014. During this timeframe, citizens were encouraged to have collaborative conversations on the site and provide feedback on transportation and economic development issues. A total of 887 unique visitors and 6,491 total page views were recorded as part of this engagement. SurveyMonkey, a web based survey site, provided an online questionnaire tied to the 2045 time horizon. The survey was launched October 20, 2014 and was open through November 7, 2014. A media release and e-mail announcements were sent to Bi-State Regional Commission contacts, and requests were also sent through local governments, Quad Cities Chamber of Commerce, and other organizations. A total of 255 respondents participated in the survey. Online Web-Based Public Engagement Summary
Transportation Focus. The transportation-related topics on MindMixer were: “Future Transportation in our Greater Quad Cities,” “Getting From Here to There,” “Congested Areas of the Greater Quad Cities,” “Improvements to Our Transportation Network,” “Traffic Report & Participant Overview,” “Public Involvement,” “Top 5 Travel Issues,” “Transportation Opinions,” and “Transportation Survey.” The results from each transportation topic are ranked in order of popularity by users. Surveys with set responses are tallied with votes, while user generated responses have stars by their comments. For example, in Table 1, one user said their vision of transportation was “Complete Streets,” which received 17 stars from other users, somewhat akin to 17 citizens in a town hall raising their hand in support of that idea.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-10 Page Appendix A
Regional Economic Opportunities What is the Region’s greatest economic opportunity and why? Table 11: Survey Results Ideas Stars High-speed rail 11 Great schools are our best asset 9 Push to have fulfillment centers locate in this region 8 Advanced manufacturing 7 Restaurants 6 Extend passenger rail service into Iowa 3 More intersections with remote controlled traffic lights 3 Hydroelectric power production 3 Hydroelectric municipal energy production 3 The Mississippi River moves $12 billion in product annually 2 Probably the bricks and mortar of Rock Island Arsenal 0 Connect to the river more 0 Common core education 0 The national centrality that we occupy 0 Traffic: 90 Views, 19 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. The top rated economic opportunity is “high speed rail,” which is also a common theme that appears in other economic development and transportation surveys on MindMixer. Supporting Economic Vitality How would you use our transportation system to support economic vitality in the Greater Quad Cities? Table 12: Survey Results Ideas Stars Transit-oriented development 5 Direct transportation from smaller nearby cities 3 Stop building new roads and start enhancing public transport 0 Complete I-74 bridge replacement 0 Connect major industries to public transit 0 Add emergency kiosks "help” stations along bike paths and/or parks 0 Greatly enhanced public transportation systems 0 Conduct a study on walking malls in downtown Davenport 0 Traffic: 48 Views, 19 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. The top rated idea is “transit-oriented development,” followed closely by “direct transportation from smaller nearby cities.” Participants Outreach. Bi-State state utilized in-house e-mail contacts, media releases, and posting to their website to solicit participants in the MindMixer public forum. Participants signed in as users of the web-based forum, providing general background on themselves. Form users could also share links to MindMixer through other social media to increase the net of potential participants. The background information provided feedback on the composition of the participants and whether other tools were needed to engage different types of stakeholders. Based on the MindMixer GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-11 Appendix A
summary of participants, there was a good cross-section geographically. As with traditional public meetings at a physical location, the participation was middle-aged or older. Traffic Report and Participant Overview Figure 3: Internet Traffic Report from Online Public Engagement (MindMixer), April 7 – May 31, 2014
User data indicates a total of 887 unique visitors and 6,6491 total page views, with the average respondent being a 48- year old male. Traffic data includes a sample screenshot of visitor traffic for late May. Public Involvement What are your top 3 ways to provide input and be engaged in the public process? Table 13: Survey Results Ideas Votes Attend a committee meeting 4 Give input through a web-based public engagement site (e.g. MindMixer, Facebook, etc.) 4 Attend a workshop or summit 4 Read about it – website, newspapers, newsletters 4 Participate in a survey 4 Talk directly to planners about a special need or improvement 3 Hear about it – radio, television, video-cast 2 Send written comments by e-mail or postal mail 2 Receive a presentation to a group that I am involved in 1 Go to an open-house meeting 1 Traffic: 19 Views, 10 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. The poll results indicate that the public appreciates a variety of ways of being engaged in the public process, with no one method achieving more votes than the others. It should be noted there was one written comment describing MindMixer as “the most confusing survey I have ever taken.” Other feedback to Bi-State staff included wariness about
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-12 Page Appendix A
signing up as a user of MindMixer and not understanding that the user could comment on others responses or vote on them. Again, the key is being able to offer a mix of engagement options to reach the widest audience as possible in the timeframe needed to complete the plan. Overall, the transportation topics provided feedback for more sustainable travel, and the importance of more multi- modal choices. Congestion is seen as a key concern, particularly on the I-74 Bridge, as is the perceived lack of road maintenance on existing roads. The public input on economic development planning revealed the importance of the Mississippi River to both visitors as well as freight shipping, particularly due to the large metro areas in the proximity that serve as markets for our industry. Additionally, high-speed passenger rail to Des Moines and Chicago, and the logistics necessary for manufacturing and shipping were seen as key concern that should be noted in the 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan. 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan Citizen Input Survey
The 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan Citizen Input Survey was launched on SurveyMonkey.com from October 20, 2014 through November 7, 2014 in order to serve as another medium to garner citizen input on the plan. A total of 255 respondents participated in the questionnaire, which elicited feedback on transportation issues in the Quad Cities, including traffic congestion and road conditions, as well as all alternative transportation modes like fixed- route public transit, demand-response bus service, taxi, bicycle travel, and pedestrian travel. The results of the survey are depicted below and are organized by survey question. Transportation System Quality How do you rate the overall quality of transportation in the Quad Cities Area? Table 14: Survey Results Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Very High 3.2% 8 High 36.0% 91 Neither High nor Low 44.3% 112 Low 15.4% 39 Very Low 1.2% 3
The majority of respondents rate transportation in the area as either High or Neither High nor Low. Road System Operations In general, how well does the roadway system operate in the Quad Cities Area? Table 15: Survey Results Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Very Well 4.8% 12 Well 46.6% 117 Neither Well nor Poorly 29.9% 75 Poorly 15.5% 39 Very Poorly 2.8% 7 Don't Know 0.4% 1 Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. Almost half of the respondents believe that the roadway system operates well in the Quad Cities area. Transportation Services
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-13 Appendix A
How do you rate the quality of each of the following Quad Cities Area transportation services or issues? Table 16: Survey Results Neither Very Good Very Don’t Response Answer Options Good Bad Good nor Bad Know Count Bad Ease of travel by car 48 129 55 16 4 0 252 Ease of travel by bus (public 6 31 40 41 14 120 252 transit) Ease of travel by bicycle 14 78 54 46 25 35 252 Ease of travel by walking 15 103 51 45 19 17 250 Ease of travel by air 35 122 55 11 4 23 250 Ease of travel at Mississippi River 5 67 61 79 36 5 253 crossings Access to schools by walking or 12 73 53 35 18 59 250 biking Access to services (groceries, banking, shops) on foot, bike, or 16 69 58 61 18 30 252 bus Traffic control (i.e. street light timing, stop/yield signage, 11 98 77 52 14 1 253 automated pedestrian crossings) Street repair 4 42 75 85 46 0 252 Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014.
Figure 4: Survey Results
How do you rate the quality of each of the following Quad Cities Area transportation services or issues?
300
250 Very Good 200 Good Neither Good nor Bad 150 Bad 100 Very Bad 50 Don't Know
0 Bicycle Ease of Traffic Travel by Ease of Access to walking or… Ease of schools by schools street light… Control (i.e. Control Travel by Air Travel by Car
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-14 Page Appendix A
The majority of participants believe each transportation mode or transportation service is either Good, or Neither Good nor Bad. However, there are some issues where 20 – 30% of participants ranked the issues as Bad – namely “Ease of travel at Mississippi River crossings;” “Access to services (groceries, banking, shops) on foot, bike, or bus;” “Traffic control;” and “Street repair.” It should be noted that the most well ranked option was “Ease of travel by car,” which had the vast majority of respondents identify it as either Very Good or Good. It should be noted for context that the Centennial Bridge was closed fully to traffic from early August to mid-October 2014. Congested Areas of the Quad Cities Identify the top three areas of recurring congestion in the Quad Cities Area that affect you the most. Table 17: Survey Results Response Response Ranking by Answer Options Percent Count Response 1. I-74 (53rd Street to Mississippi River Bridge in Iowa) 51.4% 126 1 2. I-74 (Mississippi River Bridge to Airport Road/ U.S. 34.7% 85 5 Rte. 6 in Illinois) 3. 53rd St (Pine Street to Brady Street, West of U.S. 61. 7.8% 19 10 Iowa) 4. 53rd St (Brady Street to Devil's Glen Rd, East of U.S. 38.4% 94 4 61, Iowa) 5. Kimberly Road (Pine Street to Brady Street, West of 4.9% 12 12 U.S. 61, Iowa) 6. Kimberly Road (Brady Street to Utica Ridge Road, East 41.2% 101 3 of U.S. 61, Iowa) 7. Locust Street/Middle Road (Tanglewood Road to 23.7% 58 7 Fairmount Street) 8. Business 61 (65th Street to River Drive, Iowa) 6.9% 17 11 9. 18th Street (53rd Street to State Street, Iowa) 9.4% 23 8 10. Avenue of the Cities (Archer Drive to 16th Street, 24.5% 60 6 Illinois) 11. John Deere Road/IL5 (70th Street to 7th Street, 43.3% 106 2 Illinois) 12. 7th Street in East Moline (17th Avenue to 30th 4.9% 12 12 Avenue, Illinois) Other (please specify) 22 9 Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-15 Appendix A
Figure 5: Survey Question Map
Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. Respondents ranked the top three areas of recurring congestion as Area #1: I-74 (53rd Street to Mississippi River Bridge in Iowa), Area #11: John Deere Road (70th Street to 7th Street), and Area #6: Kimberly Road (Brady Street to Utica Ridge Road) . Travel Times How long is the average travel time for your weekday commute? Table 18: Survey Results Answer Options Response Response Percent Count 10 - 20 minutes 64.9% 159 20 - 30 minutes 24.1% 59 30 - 40 minutes 7.3% 18 40 - 50 minutes 1.6% 4 50 - 60 minutes 0.0% 0 60 minutes or longer 2.0% 5 Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-16 Page Appendix A
The majority of respondents have a weekday commute time that is between 10 and 20 minutes long. This is consistent with the work trip averages reported by the Census. Transportation System Usage In the past twelve months, how many times have you done each of the following things? Table 19: Survey Results More Once or 3 to 12 13 to 24 Response Answer Options Never than 24 Twice times Times Count Times Used the bus or fixed-route public transit (Metro, CitiBus, or Bettendorf 211 26 8 2 5 252 Transit) Used demand-response bus service 244 7 1 0 1 253 (RIM, River Bend Transit, or Metro) Carpooled 137 59 30 6 15 247 Crossed the Mississippi River by 3 5 24 38 182 252 Bridge (any mode) Used the Quad Cities International 66 88 83 4 6 247 Airport for air travel Taken a taxi within the Quad Cities 211 28 8 2 2 251 Taken Channel Cat water taxi 179 59 9 0 3 250 Used a Quad Cities Area bicycle trail 57 42 68 29 54 250 Used an on road bike lane 145 23 40 13 26 247 Used Internet to check bridge 128 58 36 18 11 251 restrictions/traffic (e.g. www.511ia.org) Used Bi-State Regional Commission website to find transportation 211 30 11 0 1 253 information at www.bistateonline.org Attended a transportation-related 160 49 35 4 4 252 meeting Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. Almost half of the respondents have “Carpooled,” “Used an on road bike lane,” “Used Internet to check bridge restrictions/traffic,” and “Attended a transportation related meeting” at least once. The vast majority have used a Quad Cities bike trail and used the Quad Cities International Airport for travel. Over 70% of respondents have never “Used the bus or fixed-route public transit (Metro, CitiBus, or Bettendorf Transit),” “Used demand-response bus service (RIM, River Bend Transit, or Metro),” “Taken a taxi within the Quad Cities,” “Taken Channel Cat water taxi,” or “Used Bi- State Regional Commission website to find transportation information at www.bistateonline.org.”
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-17 Appendix A
Potential Transportation Strategies How likely are these strategies to succeed in the Quad Cities? Table 20: Survey Results Highly Somewhat Highly Response Answer Options likely likely unlikely Not sure Count success success success Alternative or compressed work 35 112 61 41 249 hours Working from home 65 122 42 24 253 (telecommuting) Dedicated lanes on freeways for cars 19 91 129 13 250 with 2 or more people Car and Bike share programs 27 109 86 30 252 Express bus (rapid transit) in the 34 122 62 38 252 downtowns or certain corridors Park and ride bus or rail facilities 42 103 76 32 253 Carpools or vanpools 13 111 103 26 253 Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. Based on respondents’ input, working from home (telecommuting) is the most likely strategy to succeed in the Quad Cities, followed closely by alternative or compressed work hours, and express bus in downtowns or certain corridors.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-18 Page Appendix A
Improvements in Next Ten Years What three things would you like to see improved for transportation in the Quad Cities Area in the next ten years? Figure 6: Survey Responses
Desired Improvements for Transportation in the Quad Cities Area
87
138
99
49
57
93
78
Improved Bike and Pedestrian Network and Access
Transit Routes and Access
Amtrak, Taxi, Water Taxi, and Air Services
Intelligent Transportation Systems / Traffic Management Techniques
New Lane and Road Construction
Bridge Improvements and Bridge Construction
Road Maintenance and Coordination of Maintenance
Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-19 Appendix A
Participants offered a total of 601 written responses on how they would like to see transportation in the Quad Cities area improved. These responses are organized by category and depicted in the figure above. The most desired improvements were on either bike or pedestrian networks and access; followed by bridge and bridge construction; road construction; and improvements to train, taxi/ water taxi, and air travel services. Biggest Transportation Issues What do you think are the three biggest transportation issues in the Quad Cities Area today? Figure 7: Survey Responses Biggest Transportation Issues in the Quad Cities Area
71 103
46 129
44
39
125
Bike,Ped & Accessibility Issues Bridge Congestion & Infrastructure Issues
Road Congestion & Condition Safety, Parking & Awareness Issues
Bus Issues Amtrak, Taxi, Water Taxi, and Air Travel Issues
Planning, Design, and Coordination Issues
Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-20 Page Appendix A
Future Transportation in Our Greater Quad Cities What is your vision for transportation in the Greater Quad Cities area? What would you like to see more of? Less of? Table 1: Survey Results Ideas Stars Make it a complete "no brainer" to take transit 17 Complete streets 17 Another bridge and rail service 15 Besides high-speed rail, another bridge 14 Connect Duck Creek path to River Trail creating full loop 12 Bike lanes 12 A better I-74 Bridge 12 Better public transportation that is QC-wide & coordinated 11 Visitor friendly transportation 11 High-speed rail 11 Revert to two-way traffic in developed parts of the QCA 10 People friendly transportation 8 Passenger rail 8 Hydrogen-cell powered vehicles 7 Smaller buses – more energy-efficient buses 7 Walking malls served by public transportation 6 More walk/bike options 6 More dedicated bicycle lanes 6 Efficiently move people from place to place 6 Connection of local trails to two national trails systems 6 U.S 150 improvement 6 More options to cross the river 5 Iowa/Illinois transit 5 Light rail between QC downtowns and airport 5 Improve 53rd Street in Davenport 5 Improved transportation for the elderly 5 Less auto-oriented transportation 5 More biking and walking, less driving 3 More buses, fewer Iowa drivers 3 Light rail network 3 Direct transportation on main roads like 53rd Street 2 Don't design roads just for cars and trucks 0 More pedestrian "islands" on busy streets 0 Commuter buses 0 This is a long-term strategy implemented over a period of years 0 More bike friendly nature 0 Prioritized bicycle and pedestrian systems 0 Traffic: 482 Views, 52 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-21 Appendix A
Participants offered a total of 557 written responses on what they believed were the biggest transportation issues in the Quad Cities Area. Not surprisingly, the responses had similar themes to the previous question on desired transportation improvements. The most common responses on transportation issues were on bridge congestion and bridge infrastructure issues, followed by local road congestion and road conditions, and issues related to transportation planning, design, and coordination. Transportation Planning Opinions Please indicate your opinion based on the following statements. The Quad Cities Area should: Table 21: Survey Results Nether Strongly Agree Strongly Response Answer Options Agree Disagree Agree Nor Disagree Count Disagree Invest a greater amount of funds in maintaining the existing roadway 74 100 50 25 2 251 system rather than constructing new roads Encourage alternative modes of travel, such as public transit, bicycling, and 92 89 48 20 3 252 walking Continue to construct off-street bicycle 116 82 28 19 6 251 trails within the Quad Cities Area Pursue street and sidewalk construction, filling in gaps in existing 101 108 34 6 1 250 areas of the Quad Cities Add/Complete sidewalks along streets 118 95 32 4 3 252 Provide designated on-street bicycle 76 85 57 20 12 250 lanes (signed, striped, etc.) More way-finding signs to better find 53 90 79 23 5 250 local attractions Add detection systems at intersections to stop red light running and improve 51 67 56 44 34 252 intersection safety Detect alternative transportation 58 87 84 15 6 250 modes Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. The answer options with the highest number of “Strongly Agree” tallies are: Add/Complete sidewalks along streets, Continue to construct off-street bicycle trails within the Quad Cities Area, Pursue street and sidewalk construction, and Filling in gaps in existing areas of the Quad Cities. The least popular opinion is to add detection systems at intersections to stop red light running and improve intersection safety.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-22 Page Appendix A
Land Use Importance to Economy How would you rank the following land uses to the Quad Cities economy from most important (#1) to least important (#7)? Figure 8: Survey Results
How would you rank the following land uses to the Quad Cities economy from most important (#1) to least important (#7)?
Residential Home Development Conservation/Natural Areas Parks and Recreation Institutions - Public and Private Industry and Manufacturing Commercial Development Agriculture
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. Respondents believe that commercial development and industry/manufacturing are the most important land uses for the economy, while conservation/natural areas, public and private institutions, residential home development, and agriculture are the least important land uses to the Quad Cities economy. Transportation Gaps Which methods of travel are currently NOT available for your trips from home to work? Table 22: Survey Results Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Sidewalks 60.5% 118 Bike Lanes 84.6% 165 Bus routes 46.7% 91 Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. Respondents identify bike lanes as the most unavailable transportation mode out the above answer options.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-23 Appendix A
Commuting without Cars and Access Please rank the improvements from most helpful (#1) to least helpful (#5) that would convince you to commute without a car: Figure 9: Survey Results
Please rank the improvements from most helpful (#1) to least helpful (#5) that would convince you to commute without a car: Completing gaps in sidewalk network Better access to public transportation Reduce vehicle speed on residential streets More bike lanes and bike paths Better street lighting
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Survey respondents rank “More bike lanes and bike paths” as the most helpful way to convince them to commute without a car, followed by “Completing gaps in sidewalk networks,” and “Better access to public transportation.”
Please rank how strongly you agree with the following statements: Figure 10: Survey Responses Strongly Don't Strongly Response Answer Options Agree Disagree agree know disagree Count There is a diverse stock of housing 34 108 30 60 17 248 options near my place of work It is easy for people to get around regardless of abilities in the Quad 11 68 77 70 25 251 Cities Without the use of a personal vehicle, I still have easy access to work and 13 51 28 99 60 251 recreational activities I use technology to improve my commute in the Quad Cities (i.e. Iowa traveler information 19 63 36 100 33 249 http://www.511ia.org/, Smart Phone Traffic Apps, GPS navigation etc.)
Most respondents do not agree that it is easy for people to get around regardless of abilities in the Quad Cities, and also do not agree that they would have easy access to work and reactional activities without the use of a personal vehicle.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-24 Page Appendix A
Other Comments Figure 11: Survey Responses Other Comments
8 2 11
6 7
7 13 Bike and Pedestrian Ammenities and Access Transit Issues Planning and Design Issues Other Transport Modes: Train, E-Vehicles, Flight Services, Etc. New Road Construction Outreach and Education Comments Survey Suggestions
Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. The survey asked respondents if they had any other comments, and also to identify their home city. A total of 59 respondents gave other comments, which mostly reflected the text responses of earlier questions, namely, the importance of long-range planning and urban design, the importance of alternative transportation modes, and the problems with congestion on bridge crossings. Almost all of the respondents identified their home city as being in the Quad Cities, with the majority of respondents residing in Bettendorf and Davenport.
Figure 12: Survey Responses City of Residence
Village of Rapids City 1 5 Rock Island 26 18 Milan 3 1 Le Claire 6 2 Eldridge 4 7 Dixon Iowa 1 1 Davenport 49 3 Carbon Cliff 1 1 Bettendorf 49
Source: Bi-State Regional Commission online survey October 20- November 7, 2014. Overall, the survey on SurveyMonkey produced similar feedback to the online, web-based public engagement tool, MindMixer. Participants stressed the importance of more multi-modal choices and sustainable travel and long-range planning. Congestion is seen as a key concern, particularly at bridge crossings, as is the perceived lack of road maintenance on existing roads. Many responses on this survey also highlighted the need for planning and coordination between municipalities when maintaining and constructing roads and bridges in the Quad Cities. These opinions may have been spurred in part by the temporary closing of the Centennial Bridge for maintenance, which was still underway a few weeks prior to the survey launch.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-25 Appendix A
The top five popular ideas (in terms of “stars” given) all emphasize a future transportation system that has more multimodal opportunities for travel (transit, complete streets, high-speed rail, bike trails and paths, etc.). Another common theme is a call for “another bridge” and “more options to cross the river,” which is fitting as the I-74 Bridge is scheduled to expand into 8 lanes in the short-term planning horizon (2015-2025).
Getting From Here to There What transportation options do you think the Greater Quad Cities needs more of? Table 2: Survey Results Poll Results Votes Public Transit Bus Routes 2 New Roads 2 Passenger Rail 1 Bicycle Paths/Trails 1 Sidewalks 1 Other (please use the comment feature to share your thoughts): 1 Water Taxis 0 Traffic: 17 Views, 8 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. The top poll results for more transportation options are public transit bus routes and new roads, both with 2 votes; followed by passenger rail, bike paths, sidewalks, and other (unspecified) all with 1 vote.
Congested Areas of the Greater Quad Cities In your daily travels in the Greater Quad Cities, what roads do you find are the most congested? Pinpoint these spots. A reliable transportation is important. Develop strategies to reduce congestion. Figure 1: Congestion Pinpoint Map
Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. ESRI Map 2014.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-26 Page Appendix A
Table 3: Survey Results Ideas Stars Better signal timing 19 I-74 Bridge is very congested during the morning and evening rush hours 18 John Deere Road is a very congested corridor 14 Get the new I-74 Bridge under construction ASAP 13 Eliminate one ways on Harrison and on Brady Streets 8 Allow rights on red 8 New bridge and approaches 6 On ramps at base of I-74 Bridge in IA & IL 6 Elmore Avenue & Kimberly Road 5 East 10th Avenue, Milan 5 Stop light timing coordination on Kimberly Road and 53rd Street 3 Spruce Hills Drive & Utica Ridge Road 2 7th Avenue 1 Provide a tunnel under the Mississippi River 0 6 lanes 0 6-lane 0 Jersey Connector 0 Train regulations 0 Increase 10s 0 Eliminate Stop Signs 0 Connect 18th to Credit Island 0 Move 92 to 4th & 5th 0 Barge Free Bridge 0 Multi-use 0 Additional bridge 0 Reduce congestion with mass transit 0 Connect East 46th Street in Davenport between Tremont and Eastern 0 Add another East-West corridor Rock Island to East Moline 0 Widen Kimberly Road 0 Traffic: 148 Views, 30 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. The congestion map has many “pins” placed by users on I-74, and along the Arsenal Bridge crossing. The ideas on how to reduce congestion also focus on improving bridge crossings, as well as some ITS strategies such as “Better signal timing” (17 stars) and “stop light timing coordination on Kimberly and 53rd” (3 stars).
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-27 Appendix A
Improvements to our Transportation Network Where would you like to see transportation system improvements in the Greater Quad Cities? Pinpoint the locations. Figure 2: Improvement Pinpoint Map
Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. ESRI Map 2014. Describe and locate your top improvements. Table 4: Survey Results Ideas Stars Greater access to river trail 40 East Moline/Bettendorf River Crossing 35 North/South multimodal connectivity 25 Rapid transit MusDav 23 Free trolley between downtown Rock Island and Moline 22 46th Street/Crow Creek Road I-74 Overpass 19 Use of more roundabouts 17 East10th Avenue, Milan Road improvement 17 Materials transportation port 16 Elmore Avenue traffic lights 15 Better traffic patterns in shopping developments 13 Better east-west traffic flow through towns 10 Ferry boat between Davenport and Rock Island 10 District bars to Moline bars 9 Accessible sidewalks along 11th Street, Rock Island 9 Tanglefoot to Elmore 7 Connect Duck Creek bike path to River Trail creating loop 6 Paved shoulders 5 Kimberly Rd redesigned 5 Expand to 4-lanes 4 GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-28 Page Appendix A
Ideas Stars Another exit off 280 4 Improve pedestrian access to the river trail at 6th Street 3 Coordinate bridge opening timing better with RIA 3 Complete streets 3 Better intersections 2 Connector 0 Develop NE-SW Expressway 0 Replace parking lots 0 Establish Avenue of the Cities through this area 0 Late night buses from campuses to downtowns 0 Event bus 0 Finish the sidewalk 0 Create more bike trail connections 0 Rock River bike trail connection 0 Remove poles from new sidewalks 0 Too many access drives 0 Additional lane 0 A faster way from John Deere Expressway to 280 0 Intersection expansion 0 Mississippi River Tunnel entrance 0 Traffic: 368 Views, 55 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. Most respondents placed system improvements near bridge crossings and along the river trail, as well as near the Kimberly Road-Elmore Avenue intersection. Popular strategies for improvement also highlight the need for more access across rivers, better signal timing, and more multi-modal options. Top 5 Travel Issues What do you think are the top 5 long-term travel issues facing the Quad Cities? Table 5: Survey Results Ideas Votes Inadequate street repair and maintenance of the existing roads 48 Lack of sidewalks to provide access from neighborhoods to key locations 38 Lack of bicycle-friendly communities 34 Limited funding to improve or expand our transportation system 32 Traffic congestion – delays due to crashes, events, construction, or weather 24 Traffic safety related to distracted or impaired drivers 23 Limited hours of public transit (bus) service 21 Air pollution caused by vehicles 18 Seniors no longer being able to drive themselves 8 Lack of major roads to new development areas 7 Traffic: 91 Views, 60 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. The most concerning issues for the public are inadequate street repair with 48 votes, followed by lack of sidewalks with 38 votes, and lack of bicycle-friendly communities with 34 votes.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-29 Appendix A
Transportation Opinions Indicate your opinion based on the statements. The purpose of the 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan is to identify system strengths and weaknesses, to identify opportunities and threats to the system, and to develop strategies to improve and/or enhance the system with its multi-modal parts (air, road, rail, water, bike, and pedestrian travel). Your opinion on these issues will help shape plans for the next 10 to 20 years.
Table 6: Survey Results Neither Strongly Strongly Agre Disagre Poll Results Agree or Disagre Agree e e Disagree e Invest a greater amount of funds in maintaining the 16 9 5 1 1 existing road system than for new roads Encourage alternatives to cars/trucks, such as riding the 17 8 4 3 0 bus/public transit, bicycling, or walking Continue to construct off-street bicycle trails within 20 9 2 1 0 the Greater Quad Cities Pursue interstate passenger rail service from Quad Cities to other metro areas, such as Chicago or Des 21 8 1 0 2 Moines Pursue new street construction and fill in gaps in 5 11 10 6 0 existing areas for better connectivity Add sidewalks along streets where they are absent, fill 23 6 2 1 0 in the gaps Provide designated on-street bicycle lanes (striped 13 7 7 3 2 and/or signed) Expand directional wayfinding signage to improve 9 13 7 2 1 navigation to local attractions by residents and visitors Add electronic detection systems at intersections to 7 10 10 4 1 stop red light running and improve intersection safety Encourage strategies that reduce single occupant 8 11 8 3 2 vehicles and reduce cars on the road Traffic: 53 Views, 32 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. The top 3 statements with the highest amount of “strongly agree” opinions are all associated with improving multimodal choices, such as adding sidewalks, adding interstate passenger rail, and constructing off street bicycle trails.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-30 Page Appendix A
Transportation Survey How would you rate the overall quality of travel in the Greater Quad Cities? Table 7: Survey Results Averag Poll Results Good Fair Poor e How well does the road system operate in the Greater Quad Cities Area? 11 26 10 3 How do you rate the ease of travel by bus (public transit)? 9 16 16 9 How do you rate the ease of travel by bicycle in the Quad Cities? 6 9 22 13 Please rate the ease of travel for walking 8 8 18 16 Traffic: 70 Views, 50 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. Which of the following transportation strategies would help improve travel in the Quad Cities? You can choose more than one. Table 8: Survey Results Poll Results Votes More frequent public bus routes 25 Express bus (rapid transit) in our downtowns or certain corridors 25 Park and ride bus or rail facilities 20 Door-to-door shuttle services for seniors or persons of disability 18 Add more roundabouts instead of traffic signals 17 Working from home (Telecommuting) 14 More taxis services 9 Dedicated lanes on highways for cars with 2 or more people 8 Alternative or compressed work hours 8 Carpools or vanpools 6 Traffic: 70 Views, 50 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. Quality ratings for the road system are predominately “average” with 26 votes, whereas ratings of the bus, bicycle, and walking systems are predominately “fair” with 16 votes, 22 votes, and 18 votes respectively. Regarding improvement strategies, the most popular statements with 25 votes each were more public bus routes and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) to certain sites. Economic Development Focus. The economic development topics that were posed on MindMixer are: “Regional Economic Assets,” “Economic Goals,” and “Regional Economic Opportunities.” Many surveys on economic development were posed for input to the Bi-State Region Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) 2014 Progress Report update. However, the 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan addresses economic vitality within its goals, and questions have some relation to the concerns of the plan. Those related to the linkage between economic development and transportation planning are highlighted. Locally, this was important given the manufacturing industries in the Quad Cities and the reliance on the Mississippi River for barge travel as well as other intermodal facilities in the metro area.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
Page A-31 Appendix A
Regional Economic Assets: What is the region’s greatest economic asset and why? What one asset would you add to the economy if you could? Table 9: Survey Results Ideas Stars The region's greatest economic asset is its location 12 Mississippi River Navigation Project 11 Rock Island Arsenal; Manufacturing and shipping; Add high- 11 speed rail Residents 10 Manufacturing capacity 9 The technical skill set in the manufacturing labor pool 9 Rock Island Arsenal – QC's largest employer and innovative 8 center Student populations 8 Mississippi and Rock Rivers 7 The residents 6 Form a new Quad Cities economic development association 2 Traffic: 85 Views, 20 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. The Mississippi River is highly valued as an economic asset to the region. The author of the top comment elaborates in the comment section, “The Mississippi River provides access to freight routes as well as being less than 6 hours away from cities like Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Omaha, Kansas City and Des Moines makes it a great place for shipping. The river also provides tourism opportunities.” The second rated comment with 11 stars also attributes the Mississippi River as the greatest economic asset of the region, as does another idea with 7 stars that champions both the “Mississippi and Rock Rivers.” Economic Goals: Which regional economic goal should local governments prioritize? Table 10: Survey Results Goal Votes Encourage projects that incorporate sustainable methods practices and activities that positively affect the 12 region's economy Pursue redevelopment of blighted, vacant, and environmentally-challenged sites to make best use of 11 existing infrastructure Work together as a region to attract, retain, and create businesses 9 Foster public-private and intergovernmental partnerships to address economic development needs 6 Maintain and provide infrastructure, including technology that supports business growth and expansion 5 Promote quality of life opportunities 4 Remain mindful of the negative economic effects caused by economic downturns and natural or man- 2 made disasters Support continued government and private sector operations at the Rock Island Arsenal 1 Reinforce and expand mechanisms that build human capital 0 Traffic: 99 Views, 52 Participants Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Web-Based Public Engagement, April 7 – May 31, 2014. Public input ranked “sustainable projects” as the top economic goal with 12 votes. Site redevelopment and business retention and attraction are the next two priorities, with 11 votes and 9 votes respectively. GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2014-12-Mind Mixer Survey Monkey Report.docx
A-32 Page Appendix A
SERVICE REPORT
COUNTY/COMMUNITY: Quad Cities MPO
DATE: May 21 and 22, 2014
FILED BY: Mr. Bryan Schmid
MEETING: Long Range Transportation Plan Public Input Meetings
PRESENT: County/Community Bi-State Others Copies to: Refer to attached sign-in sheet Refer to sign-in sheet Refer to sign-in sheet File Two public kick-off meetings were held to augment the planning process of the 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan. The meetings began at 4:30 p.m. and ended at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday and Thursday, May 21 and 22, 2014. Wednesday’s meeting was held at Centre Station in Moline and Thursday’s meeting was held at Roosevelt Community Center in west Davenport. Both locations were accessible by public transit. The purpose of these meetings was to solicit input from residents of the Quad Cities on the strengths, needs and shortcomings of the transportation system in the region in an open house style format, in relation to the road system, public transportation, inter- and intra-regional mobility, and alternative modes of transportation. Visitors were initially greeted by Ms. Becky Passman and asked to sign in and fill out a voluntary Community Outreach Self-Evaluation form to be used for purposes of reporting on Environmental Justice. The two meetings were held in the same format. There were a series of four stations where participants could give their input in various ways. The first station centered around a Quad Cities regional map. People were asked to place numbered sticky dots on the map and write down their comments on a notepad or dictate to Ms. Lindsay Whitson what their comments were. Below are comments given at this station.
Roadway Improvements Improve pavement Improve pavement on Jersey Ridge north of I-80 Widen Kimberly Road in Davenport Change F51 to hard surface (Eldridge to 240th Avenue/Z30) Repave 3rd and 4th Streets in Davenport Bridge connecting Devil’s Glen Road with Kennedy Drive east of Duck Creek. Could be a skyway Flooding issue of bridge over Rock River and I-80 – What happened to straightening I-80? Raise overpass at I-80 and Barstow Road Turn one-ways into two-ways
Page A-33 Appendix A
Bicycle Facility Improvements Blackhawk Trail Extension Trail connection from Eldridge to Duck Creek Trail Problems with Mississippi River Trail and Credit Island flooding Trail development on both side of I-74 before completion of new bridge would help with connectivity and mobility options exponentially Davenport/Bettendorf/Moline priority Any jurisdiction within MPO area should be connected by trail Trail connection from Bettendorf to LeClaire along I-80 – Will connect to Mississippi River Trail, loop to Pleasant Valley and the Quad Cities Finish bike/pedestrian bridge by Sunset Park in Rock Island – Will provide a regular connection – Bridge for the Rock Bike/Ped Bridge needed Greater QC Trail Loop More trail signage for Illinois route Access to River Trail from Augustana Kiwanis Bike Trail flooding west of Green Valley Park 23rd Avenue (Moline) and 22nd Avenue (Rock Island) could be an excellent bike route if there was a pedestrian bridge (Additional typed recommendations attached)
Other Improvements Continue and expand MetroLINK’s Route 84 Express Universal symbols to attract international students onto the system, improve user-friendliness (St. Ambrose University) Transit routes around St. Ambrose University could alleviate congestion for events Bike racks on RIM buses Difficult for ambulances to enter Port Byron from IL-84
The second station offered a background of the current 2040 Long Range Plan. There were poster boards with charts and maps from the plan in addition to boards with the plan’s goals. Participants were offered a notepad to write any comments they wished in regards to the 2040 Plan, or to dictate to Mr. Bryan Schmid any comments they had. The third station consisted of a series of nine “placemats” with a different heading on each. Mr. Brandon Melton asked participants to write down any ideas or comments they had on the different topics. The nine areas where input was solicited were taken from popular feedback from the Mind Mixer online public input forum. The nine placemat themes were: River Crossing Needs – Bridges and Ferry Boats Improve Traffic Flow – Reduce Congestion Trails and Bicycling – Bike Ways/Lanes/and Paths
BS/sv Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Public Input 5-22-14.docx Page 2 of 3
A-34 Page Appendix A
Getting Around on Foot – Needs and Gaps for Sidewalks Mobility Options – How can we be more connected? What would make our roads safer? How can transportation help our economy? Other future transportation and travel needs? How can we be more sustainable? Getting Around on Transit The following input was given on the placemats: Plan for transportation needs of non-automobile modes Roads do not feel safe for bicyclists and pedestrians; Increase buffer between streets and sidewalks or bike lanes Stronger enforcement of speed limits everywhere, but especially on Centennial Bridge Implement Complete Streets to improve the pedestrian and bicycle experience (x2) Better integrate Amtrak and Burlington Trailways/Greyhound bus services Focus on transit-oriented development for future development projects Implement Safe Routes to School Institute mandatory snow removal laws Increase the number of access points to river trails Implement frequent and free-fare bus service to compete with automobiles Permanently establish the Route 84 Express service to Cordova Bus service to the proposed new St. Ambrose University stadium Directly address the transportation dimension of the Food Dessert problem – increase access to grocery stores Implement passenger rail service to Iowa City and Des Moines Longer service hours on Davenport’s CitiBus Extend Mississippi River Trail on the Illinois side to Milan and Andalusia Study a possible Mississippi River bridge from Devils Glen Road to 55th Street Moline to connect to 3rd Street East Moline At the final station, Ms. Gena McCullough gave periodic presentations on the public input and planning processes and the feedback already gathered from the online public input forum, Mind Mixer. She described the goals and performance objectives of the 2040 Plan and invited participants to provide further input especially on popular topics seen in Mind Mixer.
BS/sv Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Public Input 5-22-14.docx Page 3 of 3
Page A-35 Appendix A
A-36 Page Appendix A
Page A-37 Appendix A
Moving Forward Starting Today to 2045
2045 Quad Cities Area Long Range Transportation Planning for Economic Vitality
(Davenport, December 11, 2014) — Transportation System Davenport-Bettendorf Engineering Conference Performance Objectives Rank the following transportation system Public Involvement performance objectives from most important Local officials are working with Bi-State (1) to least important (7). Is there a need for Regional Commission staff to prepare a full added objectives? Add and rank the new update of the 2045 Quad Cities Long Range objective if needed. Transportation Plan (LRTP) by early 2016. This Rank update will include transportation and economic goals, and collection of existing and _____Support Economic Vitality proposed transportation system and other _____Increase Safety infrastructure/ development strategies. _____Increase Security Additional public input is planned prior to the adoption of the plans in 2016. To examine the _____Increase Accessibility and Mobility existing 2040 long range transportation plan Options and economic development strategy, go to the _____Protect and Enhance the Environment link at http://www.bistateonline.org. As part of the plan update process, conference attendees _____Enhance Connectivity and Integration are asked to provide input for the 2045 LRTP. between Modes If you have further input, please let us know. If _____Promote Efficient System Management you would like a presentation for your and Operation organization, contact us. _____Emphasize System Preservation Quad Cities Transportation Issues _____Other: ______List 3 – 5 travel issues that the Quad Cities should address in the next 30 years: What would you like to see more 1. ______of? Less of? Use the back of this page to share what you’d 2. ______like to see improved, developed, created or 3. ______enhanced for our Quad Cities transportation
4. ______system.
5. ______Thanks for your input! For more information on our planning efforts, contact Bi-State Regional Commission at (309) 793-6300.
Serving local governments in Muscatine and Scott Counties, Iowa; Henry, Mercer and Rock Island Counties, Illinois
A-38 Page Appendix A
Moving Forward Starting Today to 2045
2045 Quad Cities Area Long Range Transportation Planning for Economic Vitality
(Rock Island, May 27, 2015) — Every 5 years, Quad Cities Planning Goals the Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Vibrant Residential Development – Design Plan is updated. Changes in the transportation quality-based housing for people-friendly, system are reflected. Travel needs, traffic healthful, satisfying living safety, physical conditions, mobility options, and Prosperous Commercial and Industrial congestion are evaluated. Development – Attract talent and innovation Will we be more mobile? Take shorter trips to and generate economic vitality through neighborhood shops and offices? Board a improvements and new commercial and passenger train to Chicago, hop a bus rapid industrial activities transit route, or ride a bike to work? What Sustainable Transportation – Develop a will it cost to maintain over 2,000 miles of transportation system to provide for roadway in our metropolitan area or expand sustainable movement of people and goods capacity? Healthful, Thriving Community Spaces – The Metropolitan Planning Organization Connect people to cultural attractions, (MPO) Transportation Technical and recreational facilities, and open space to fulfill Policy Committees is working with Bi-State needs for community wellness staff to prepare a draft update by early 2016. Stable Government and Public Facilities As the plan develops, drafts will be posted at and Installations – Advance governmental http://www.bistateonline.org/. and public facilities/installations and programs/ services and products for the present and Regional Vision future needs of the nation, Bi-State Region, and A regional vision for the greater Quad Cities metropolitan Quad Cities community Area was developed in 2013 through the Regional Opportunities Council (the ROC), a Informed Urban Design – Create attractive, group of 100 business and community leaders convenient, neighborhood-level living and who represent the largest contributors to the working conditions that minimize effects and Quad Cities Chamber's economic and provide quality of life benefits for Quad Cities community development programs. residents The Regional Vision is: Transportation Performance The Quad Cities Region is recognized Objectives The plan furthers the planning goals with globally in 2030 for growing and transportation performance objectives. At the attracting talent and businesses, is highest level these include: energized by a culturally rich Support Economic Vitality community, inspires innovation and Increase Safety embraces lifelong learning. Increase Security
Page A-39 Appendix A
Increase Accessibility and Mobility Options Protect and Enhance the Environment Desired Transportation Enhance Connectivity and Integration Improvements for the Among Modes Quad Cities Area Promote Efficient System Management and Operation Emphasize System Preservation 87 These objectives will lead to actual measures of 138 our transportation system performance. Examples include reducing fatal crashes, 99 improving roadway state of repair by mileage, or increasing bus ridership or trails usage. 49
57 93 78 Improved Bike and Pedestrian Network and Access Transit Routes and Access
Amtrak, Taxi, Water Taxi, and Air Services What Does the Public Want? In 2013-2014, data and information have been Intelligent Transportation Systems / Traffic collected on travel patterns and behavior of Management Techniques 1,700 households. One hundred twenty-nine New Lane and Road Construction active web-participants engaged in an online public meeting forum and 255 provided input in Bridge Improvements and Bridge Construction an online survey. Two public meetings were Road Maintenance and Coordination of also held to gather input on “What does the Maintenance public want for its transportation system?” Source: Bi-State Regional Commission, Online Survey October 2014 Improve river crossings. Complete I-74 reconstruction. Develop new Bettendorf- East Moline Mississippi River crossing. Public input results to date can be found at: Improve bike and pedestrian networks http://bistateonline.org/transportation/quad- and access – “Complete Streets” cities-metro-planning/2012-11-13-20-19- Make transit bus service a “no-brainer” 45/quad-cities-metro-lrtp-long-range- Complete passenger rail to Chicago transportation-plan. A second round of public Maintain our roads input sessions will occur once a draft plan is Look at transportation innovations – fuel developed. Meetings are anticipated in early alternatives, technology, shifting modes, 2016 throughout the metro area. and traffic operations
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2015-05-27 2045 LRTP BSRC Status Newsletter.docx
A-40 Page Appendix A
SERVICE REPORT
COUNTY/COMMUNITY: Davenport, Iowa
DATE: June 23, 2014
FILED BY: Lindsay Whitson, Planner
MEETING: STEM Presentation on Transportation Planning Scott County Community College 500 Belmont Road, Bettendorf, Iowa 52722
PRESENT: County/Community Bi-State Copies to: Caryn Kelly Brandon Melton File Sergio Mendoza Lindsay Whitson STEM Class Ms. Kelly, with Scott County Community College, introduced Mr. Melton and Ms. Whitson to the class. The class contained approximately 10 students, with the majority of the students being of African- American descent. One student was Caucasian and one appeared to be Latino. Students were primarily ninth and tenth graders in high school. Staff from Bi-State Regional Commission was invited to present information on a career in transportation planning to high school students participating in a course affiliated with the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) program. Mr. Melton and Ms. Whitson began by providing a PowerPoint and presentation to the class. Topics included a broad overview of what transportation planning entails, public input methods, regional planning efforts, and examples of transportation planning. Students inquired about the types of classes that a transportation planner must complete. Following the presentation, Mr. Melton and Ms. Whitson asked the class to participate in an activity that would serve as public input for the 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan. Due to the younger demographic that the class represented, the majority of them claim to travel by transit, bike, and foot. The class was asked to split into two different stations. One was a mapping exercise, and the other was a placemat activity. Responses for both activities are listed below. The discussion ended with a question and answer segment. The first station centered around a Quad Cities regional map. People were asked to place numbered sticky dots on the map and write down their comments on a notepad or dictate to Ms. Whitson what their comments were. Responses are provided below.
Page A-41 Appendix A
Mapping Exercise Responses 6. Five points in Davenport is a very confusing intersection, especially for pedestrians. It is confusing for pedestrians to know when to safely cross. It was suggested that larger and more visible signage be made available. The signage may also assist in decreasing the number of accidents.
7. Esplanade Avenue in Davenport is very narrow.
8. Vander Veer Park needs to be renovated to be ADA accessible.
9. Downtown Rock Island needs to encourage infill development and renovations to existing building and lots. This will help to develop a cleaner appearance while offering more activities and retail in Rock Island.
10. East side of Davenport needs renovations to the buildings and streets in the area.
12. Improve road conditions on the northwest side of Davenport.
13. Division and Kimberly Roads need improvements made to the potholes. Also, traffic lights are not cohesive with one another in regards to timing.
14. Widen 11th Street in Rock Island by adding more lanes. Fix up some of the buildings alongside the road and improve the appearances of the housing and sidewalk to portray a more welcoming ambiance.
15. The stoplight by the north YMCA in Davenport takes far too long to change to green. Its timing is not synced with the surrounding stoplights.
16. Light on the hill when coming out of Assumption High School seems to be in an unnecessary spot and creates more traffic.
*Note: Stickers one through five are missing
The second station consisted of a series of five “placemats” with a different heading on each. Mr. Melton asked participants to write down any ideas or comments they had on the different topics. The five areas where input was solicited were taken from popular feedback from the Mind Mixer online public input forum. The five placemat themes were: Improve Traffic Flow – Reduce Congestion Trails and Bicycling – Bike Ways/Lanes/and Paths Getting Around on Foot – Needs and Gaps for Sidewalks What would make our roads safer? Getting Around on Transit
Place Mat Exercise Responses
The conditions of Brady Street and Harrison Street need improvements Sidewalks are uneven on Locust Street, Kimberly Road, and Brady Street The potholes in the roads and sidewalks need improving Sidewalks need to be made safer/wider to walk on during traffic Streetlights that have the crosswalk lights need to actually work and be visible for the pedestrians Do not have construction blocking sidewalks for days without any workers Improve the conditions of Harrington Park Encourage more biking in the community by adding more bike lanes Increase public awareness efforts of transit routes Encourage the use of carpooling Develop a light rail system from Chicago to Iowa City Increase the number of roundabouts in the area would help to increase safety efforts on the roads Increase hours of transit services and provide more vehicles due to overcrowding More ADA-accessible public transit buses
LW\sg P:\USERS\WORD\Transportation-850\Long Range Trans Plan\Service Reports\Transportation Presentation_Scott Communty College Service Report.docx
A-42 Page Appendix A
Moving Forward Starting Today to 2045
2045 Quad Cities Area Long Range Transportation Planning for Economic Vitality
(Rock Island, September 22, 2015) — What are Dream or Next Reality? the NEXT BIG $10+ MILLION ROAD & The famous architect, Daniel Burnham, said RAIL PROJECTS for the Quad Cities? Is “Make no little plans.” In planning today for there support to make our metro our economic vitality, we need to be able to transportation system better? The I-74 move products and make deliveries. Mississippi River reconstruction has been the The Quad Cities has been described as a area’s #1 priority, and I-74 reconstruction logistics center – we move goods and services phases are currently underway. We’ll begin to and have the transportation network (roads, see piers in the river in the next few years. rail, river, and air) to do it. As a metro area, What’s next? we are MOVING FORWARD and trying to The current Long determine THE NEXT BIG PROJECTS. Range Plan Are these some of the next BIG projects? anticipates that we’ll New Mississippi River Crossing – Connect be spending nearly East Moline and Bettendorf to reduce a 9-mile $3 billion dollars gap in our system. over the next 30 years on capacity Rail Bridge Reconstruction or building projects and reconstructions. What Replacement – Crescent Bridge (BNSF) and funding and support is needed to maintain over Government Bridge (IAIS) are aging and create 2,000 miles of roadway in our metropolitan rail crossing bottlenecks for moving freight. area or expand capacity into 2045? New rail bridge or replace an old one? I-80 Mississippi River Bridge & 6-Laning Project Prioritization Roundtable Interstate – Add capacity? This heaviest The Quad Cities Transportation Policy freight corridor in the Quad Cities carries Committee will hold a roundtable discussion 34,100 vehicles/day and has the second highest with Policy and Technical Staff at their bridge traffic in the QCA. September 22, 2015 meeting at noon in the 6th floor conference room at the Scott County New or Improved Interchanges – In Administration Building in Davenport to initially LeClaire, west of I-80? Reconstruct I-80 at discuss projects for consideration. Middle Road, Bettendorf. Relocate I-280 at US6/Kimberly Road south to create east-west connection to Kimberly Road, Davenport. Transportation Policy Committee New north leg at I-74 and I-80, Davenport. Reconstruct I-80/U.S. 61, Davenport. Add one September 22, 2015 12:00- 1:30 pm at Rock Island Co./East Moline I-88/248th Street.
Scott County Administration Center New East Rock River Crossing – Connect Room 605 John Deere Road corridor to U.S. 6 and Henry 600 West Fourth Street County to provide access to the southeastern Quad Cities. Davenport, Iowa
Page A-43 Appendix A
Dream or Next Reality? (continued) What Does the Public Want? Based on consolidated input from nearly 400 River Locks 14 & 15 Improvements – people on “What does the public want for its Expansion of the Panama Canal will increase transportation system?” The results indicate: river traffic and pressure to move goods cleanly and cheaply by barge. Area’s largest Improve river crossings. Complete I-74 commodities today are grains and gravel. Key reconstruction. Develop new Bettendorf- items for feeding the masses and building our East Moline Mississippi River crossing. country. Improve bike and pedestrian networks and access – “Complete Streets” Commuter and Passenger Make transit bus service a “no-brainer” – Finish Passenger Rail Rail Complete passenger rail to Chicago corridor from QCA to Maintain our roads Chicago. Consider light rail Look at transportation innovations – fuel along IL92 corridor. alternatives, technology, shifting modes, If these are the next big road and rail projects, and traffic operations how do they move forward? Do they need a Public input results to date can be found at: feasibility study? Do they need engineering and http://bistateonline.org/transportation/quad- environmental analysis? Are they ready to go cities-metro-planning/. A second round of and need funding to complete? With priorities public input sessions will occur in early 2016 identified, the Long Range Transportation Plan once a draft plan is developed. will outline the next steps based on the roundtable discussions. The Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Transportation Technical and Big road and rail projects are not the only Policy Committees are working with Bi- projects. The plan also will be looking at trails State staff to prepare a draft update of the and transit for moving people. The Quad Cities 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan spends 80-90% on system maintenance for by early 2016. Initial trail and transit roads and transit operations. With the stakeholder meetings have been held to get reduction in funds and slower economy, feedback on future improvements. Additional keeping up the roads, buses, and trails will be public meetings are under development. As the an increasing challenge as we balance these plan develops, drafts will be posted at BIG ROAD and RAIL Projects with other http://www.bistateonline.org/. Let us know if new projects. you would like to be included on our stakeholder list of meeting announcements. Contact us at (309) 793-6300.
GM\sg P:\USERS\BISTATE\TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS\Long Range Plan\2045 LRTP\Chapters\Appendicies\Appendix A-Public Involvement\2015-09-22 2045 LRTP BSRC Status Newsletter wp.docx
A-44 Page Appendix A
Moving Forward Starting Today to 2045
2045 Quad Cities Area Long Range Transportation Planning for Economic Vitality
What? Quad Cities Area Quad Cities Transit Summit
Area Transit Where? Bettendorf Public Library Kelinson Room Summit 2950 Learning Campus Drive
Bettendorf, IA 52722 Bi-State Regional Commission will be hosting a Transit Summit to receive public input from When? Wednesday, December 2, 2015 individuals in the Quad Cities Area, both urban from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. and rural, to discuss current and future travel choices and their effects on the region’s Why? The purpose of the summit is to transportation services. Input will be receive comments from considered as part of the 2045 Quad Cities Long individuals to identify current Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), under and future travel choices and development, and the Bi-State Region Transit their effect on the region’s Development Plan (TDP), updated annually. The transportation services. The LRTP identifies future travel demand and freight results will allow planners to needs within the Quad Cities Metropolitan better understand how and why Urbanized Area (MPA). Public input will focus people travel in the region. on passenger transportation needs and issues. The plan presents future projects that are Who? The general public and financially attainable and outlines general individuals residing and/or revenues that may be available to complete working in Muscatine and Scott projects. The TDP is a coordinated effort by Counties, Iowa and Henry, the Bi-State Region to provide information and Mercer, Rock Island, and guidance on short-term transportation mobility Whiteside Counties, Illinois. options and choices within a six-county area, including Muscatine and Scott Counties, Iowa and Henry, Mercer, Rock Island, and Whiteside Counties, Illinois.
For more information on these planning efforts, contact Bi-State Regional Commission at (309) 793-6300. Serving local governments in Muscatine and Scott Counties, Iowa; Henry, Mercer and Rock Island Counties, Illinois
GM\LW\sg P:\USERS\WORD\Transportation-850\Transit\Transit Summit Flyer_2045 Newsletter Template.docx
Page A-45 Appendix A
SERVICE REPORT
COUNTY/COMMUNITY: Quad Cities MPA, Region 9, Region 2
DATE: December 2, 2015
FILED BY: Ms. Lindsay Whitson
MEETING: Long Range Transportation Plan and Transit Development Plan Transit Summit Meeting Notes
PRESENT: County/Community Bi-State Others Copies to: Refer to attached sign-in sheet Becky Passman Refer to sign-in sheet File Bryan Schmid Lindsay Whitson
A transit summit meeting was held to collect public input from individuals in the Quad Cities Area, both urban and rural, to discuss current and future travel choices and their effects on the region’s transportation services. The meeting began at 4:00 p.m. and ended at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 2, 2015. The meeting was held at the Bettendorf Public Library in the Kelinson Room. The location was accessible by public transportation. The purpose of the summit was to solicit input from residents of the Quad Cities on the strengths, needs, and shortcomings of the transportation system in the region. Input would be considered for part of the 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Transportation Plan, and the Bi-State Region Transit Development Plan (TDP). Areas of focus included current and proposed transit routes, alternative modes of transportation, coordination efforts, and river crossing needs to name a few. The summit was held in an open house style format, with a brief presentation of both plans and their objectives provided by Lindsay Whitson at the beginning. Visitors were initially greeted by Bi-State staff and were asked to sign-in. There were two stations where participants could give their input in various ways. The first station was centered around five different maps. The six maps included, current and proposed fixed-transit routes, trails, sidewalks, and a map of the entire Bi-State Region. There were also two large poster boards containing a list of the proposed 2045 LRTP’s goals and objectives. Attendees were asked to place sticky notes on the maps and write down their comments on a notepad or dictate to Ms. Becky Passman or Mr. Bryan Schmid. Below are comments given at this station.
A-46 Page Appendix A
Mapping Exercise Route changes will take time for the consumers to get used to Public transit systems needs extended hours of service Bettendorf’s use of the Loop buses often times causes some confusion for the consumers Roadway Riverside Improvements Development Park Route is not efficient Improveo It pavementis approximately one hour from Centre Station Fixed-transitImprove pavement routes on running Jersey on Ridge time north is good of I-80 BikeWiden racks Kimberly provided Road on inbuses Davenport are great BusChange drivers F51 are to hardvery surfacehelpful (Eldridge to 240th Avenue/Z30) RepaveThere needs 3rd and to be4th aStreets better intiming Davenport for transf ers between Bettendorf Transit and MetroLINK BridgeBus shelters connecting near Riverside Devil’s Glen Deve Roadlopment with Park Kennedy should Drive be installed east of Duck Creek. Could be a skywayGPS should be included on smartphone applications to identify the exact location of the Floodingbuses issue of bridge over Rock River and I-80 – What happened to straightening I-80? RaiseIce bike overpass commuter at I-80 groups and Barstow Road TurnIn support one-ways of transit into two-wayspriory corridors and shelters through the Floreciente neighborhood
The second station consisted of a series of eight “placemats” with a different heading on each. Ms. Whitson asked participants to write down any ideas or comments they had on the different topics. The eight area topics where input was solicited were taken from popular feedback from the Mind Mixer online public input forum and from the TDP. The eight placemat themes were: River Crossing Needs – Bridges and Ferry Boats Trails and Bicycling – Bike Ways/Lanes/and Paths Getting Around on Foot – Needs and Gaps for Sidewalks Mobility Options – How can we be more connected? Other future transportation and travel needs? How can we be more sustainable? Getting Around on Transit – What is working and what needs improvement? Geographic Coverage – Coordination Efforts from Urban to Rural Areas Transit-Friendly Infrastructure – What should be a priority? The following input was given on the placemats: Develop dispatch centers with the ability to contact all rural services at one location within the district Push for more reasonable urban speed limits Sidewalks in the Floreciente community are deteriorating and need replacement and/or repair Operation hours of buses on both sides of the river should run later at night – Not every individual works traditional work hours The audio system on MetroLINK could be improved – Visually impaired riders would not have to depend on the driver to identify where their stop is o Buses without audio systems should consider getting one Work on transit route times – One individual stated that they are able to bicycle from 23rd
LW/sv Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Public Input 12-2-15.docx Page 2 of 3
Page A-47 Appendix A
Street and I-74 in Bettendorf to 2 miles north of Alcoa fifteen minutes faster than using public transit Sylvan Island needs to be accessible and the foot bridge to the island needs to be repaired Sidewalks are needed on Utica Ridge, north of 53rd Street – There are many walkers and joggers but no sidewalks Great to see progress on the new I-74 Bridge Boat traffic is great but limited to its season Expand public transportation system’s operation hours to include Saturday and Sunday night services Make roads pedestrian friendly, then trails will not be necessary Put in more sidewalks on the Davenport, Iowa side – Particularly Eastern and Jersey Ridge Great progress on the bike paths throughout the Quad Cities – Keep expanding available trails Provide more options to cross the river on a bike The development of more shelters at transit stops are needed Permeable surface parking lots and street expansions Encourage natural roofing Rail service is overdue Enforce pedestrian rights Encourage full lane rights for cyclists Shovel sidewalks so consumers, including visually impaired, are able to reach bus stops Extend the fixed-route system routes further and further out from the inner city to increase accessibility for more consumers Davenport CitiBus hub on Welcome Way is dangerous – Consider reevaluating where the connecting hubs in Davenport could be placed MetroLINK terminals need to consider eliminating cement structures to allow visually impaired to navigate easier Sidewalks need to be developed to be friendly for all users, including those who are visually impaired – An example would be to include ridges that allow the user to identify a difference between the sidewalk and a driveway, and the sidewalk and a street For future transit public input meetings, consider posting flyers for the meetings on buses and post on city websites – The goal is to get more riders to come and provide input Five points in Davenport should consider installing an audible signal on at least one corner The transit summit ended around 6:00 p.m.
LW/sv Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Public Input 12-2-15.docx Page 3 of 3
A-48 Page Appendix A
Page A-49 Appendix A
Moving Forward – Mirando hacia el Futuro Starting Today to 2045 Desde hoy hasta el año 2045
2045 Quad Cities Area Long Range Transportation Planning for Economic Vitality Planificación del Sistema de Transporte a largo plazo para una Economía Vital – 2045 Quad Cities Area
(Rock Island, December 1, 2015) — You are (Rock Island, Diciembre 1, 2015) — Está invitado a invited to attend one of two public meetings. asistir a una de las dos reuniones públicas que Tell us what you think about getting around in ofrecemos. Comparta con nosotros qué piensa the Quad Cities – by car, bus, bike, or walking. acerca del desplazamiento en el área de Quad Cities – usando coche, autobús, bicicleta, o caminando. Public Input Meetings Reuniones de Participación Pública Thursday, December 10 Jueves, diciembre 10 5:30-7:30 p.m. 5:30-7:30 p.m. LULAC Center Lugar: LULAC Center 4224 Ricker Hill Road, Davenport, Iowa 4224 Ricker Hill Road, Davenport, Iowa OR O Saturday, December 12 Sábado, diciembre 12 11:00 a.m.-12:30 p.m. 11:00 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Boys and Girls Club Lugar: Boys and Girls Club 1122 5th Avenue, Moline, Illinois 1122 5th Avenue, Moline, Illinois Bi-State staff is working with the El personal de Bi-State está trabajando con la Metropolitan Planning Organization Organización de Planificación Metropolitana (MPO) Transportation Technical and (MPO) Transportation Technical and Policy Policy Committees to prepare a draft Committees para preparar una propuesta update by early 2016. The Quad Cities Long preliminar para principios de 2016. El Plan de Range Transportation Plan is updated every 5 Transporte a Largo Plazo de los Quad Cities es years to guide future investment in roads, actualizado cada 5 años para tener una guía que nos bridges, buses, sidewalks, trails, and more. ayudará a planear las inversiones futuras en caminos, puentes, autobuses, aceras, senderos y What would make area travel better? Are mucho más en asuntos de movilidad. sidewalks needed? Do you use the bike trails and bus system? Tell us what would make ¿Que podríamos hacer para mejorar el desplazamiento en esta región? ¿Se necesitan getting to and from work or your activities aceras? ¿Utiliza los senderos para bicicletas y easier, safer, and more efficient. sistema de autobuses? Díganos qué podríamos mejorar para que el traslado a su trabajo o cuando hace otras actividades sea más fácil, seguro, y eficaz. Estas reuniones tendrán un intérprete/traductor presente para ayudarle a compartir sus ideas. Serving local governments in Muscatine and Scott Counties, Iowa;
Henry, Mercer and Rock Island Counties, Illinois GM\sg P:\USERS\WORD\Transportation-850\Long Range Trans Plan\2045\2045 LRTP Multi-Cultural Outreach December 2015 Flyer Final.docx
A-50 Page Appendix A
SERVICE REPORT
COUNTY/COMMUNITY: Quad Cities MPO
DATE: December 10 and 12, 2015
FILED BY: Ms. Lindsay Whitson
MEETING: Long Range Transportation Plan Multi-Cultural Outreach Meetings
PRESENT: County/Community Bi-State Others Copies to: Refer to attached sign-in sheet Refer to sign-in sheet Refer to sign-in sheet File
Two multi-cultural outreach meetings were held to augment the planning process of the 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan. The first meeting began at 5:30 p.m. and ended at 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, December 10, 2015. The second meeting was held on Saturday, December 12 from 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Thursday’s meeting was held at the LULAC Center in Davenport and Saturday’s meeting was held at the Boys and Girls Club in Moline. Both locations were accessible by public transit. The purpose of these meetings was to solicit input from residents of the Quad Cities on the strengths, needs and shortcomings of the transportation system in the region in an open house style format, in relation to the road system, public transportation, inter- and intra-regional mobility, and alternative modes of transportation. Both meetings were held in neighborhoods that were filled with a high population of low-income and Hispanic speaking residents. As a result, Bi-State contracted with Iowa State Extension to provide an interpreter for both input meetings. Visitors were initially greeted and asked to sign in and fill out a voluntary Community Outreach Self-Evaluation form to be used for purposes of reporting on Environmental Justice. The two meetings were held in the same format. There were a series of three stations where participants could give their input in various ways. First, Ms. McCullough provided a presentation outlining the purpose and major components of the plan. An interpreter was used to deliver the presentation in Spanish. Following the presentation, in a nominal approach, attendees were asked to answer the following questions; “What are 3 to 5 major transportation and/or your travel issues in the Quad Cities?” and “What would you like to see more of? less of? for transportation in the Quad Cites?” Bi-State staff noted each comment on a large notepad stationed at the front of the room. Below are comments given at this station.
Page A-51 Appendix A
December 10 Meeting I-74 Bridge Amtrak from Chicago to Quad Cities to Des Moines Promote using bus as a choice not a chore; improve transit image Davenport snow plowing of streets – start earlier to accommodate workforce East Rock River Bridge with I-280 exchange Sidewalks – fill in the gaps (on both sides of the road is the goal) Mark crosswalks with road paint 53rd Street – No more streets designed like this More North/South bike trail connections Develop a 3rd lane on I-80 Transit systems need to take more into consideration such as those without cars Lighting for bus stops and keeping areas clear of snow provides better accessibility Ability to communicate materials for those who do not speak English Improvements to routes to school (Safe Routes to School) Difficulties with CitiBus’ new route system that is proposed
December 12 Meeting New bridge from East Moline to Bettendorf over the East Mississippi River I-88 Extension as the new bridge Fill gaps in sidewalks Develop a bike and pedestrian bridge Wider sidewalks or buffer between streets School zone speed limits; fix dangerous streets and intersections near schools Complete streets and road diets – roads are designed for much higher speeds Need more school buses for high schoolers Later hours for school buses and public transportation buses to run Worried about new bus routes in Davenport Nice facility for Amtrak; safe place to park More marked, safe pedestrian crossings especially near bus routes Floriciente – getting kids to school via sidewalk or bus The second station consisted of a series of nine “placemats” with a different heading on each. Participants were asked participants to write down any ideas or comments they had on the different topics. The nine areas where input was solicited were taken from popular feedback from the Mind Mixer online public input forum. There was an English and Spanish version of each placemat provided. The nine placemat themes were: River Crossing Needs – Bridges and Ferry Boats Improve Traffic Flow – Reduce Congestion Trails and Bicycling – Bike Ways/Lanes/and Paths Getting Around on Foot – Needs and Gaps for Sidewalks
LW/cc Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Public Input 12-10-15&12-12-15.docx Page 2 of 4 A-52 Page Appendix A
Mobility Options – How can we be more connected? What would make our roads safer? How can transportation help our economy? Other future transportation and travel needs? How can we be more sustainable? Getting Around on Transit The following input was given on the placemats: Repair Crescent Bridge Provide a “free ride” day for all consumers so they can experience how to use the service Faster snow removal Look into Avenue of the Cities – East Moline roadway and intersections Interactive applications for phone about mobility options (bilingual) Close the gaps in sidewalks – Elmore Avenue, Eastern Avenue, and Jersey Ridge Should have incorporated sidewalk when 46th Street “experiment” was installed (between Eastern Avenue and Jersey Ridge) Additional North/South connections between Duck Creek Trail and Riverfront Trail (e.g. Eastern Avenue, etc.) Develop reaches of trails –where pedestrian path is separate from bicycle path Designate “no passing” reaches on trails, especially at tight bends/turns in trail Add “dangerous turn” sign where bike trail goes down towards Rockingham Road (LULAC area) – very hazardous 90 degree turn and downhill Add North/South trails going north from Kimberly Road (e.g. Jersey Ridge, Eastern Avenue, or along rail corridor that runs parallel to Eastern Avenue) Add lights on bike trails Add 3rd lane to I-80 Develop a pedestrian bridge across the Mississippi River The final station was centered around five different maps. The five maps included current and proposed fixed-transit routes, current and proposed trails, and sidewalks. There were also two large poster boards containing a list of the proposed 2045 LRTP’s goals and objectives. Attendees were asked to place stick notes on the maps and write down their comments or dictate to Bi-State staff. Below are comments given at this station.
LW/cc Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Public Input 12-10-15&12-12-15.docx Page 3 of 4 Page A-53 Appendix A
Mapping Exercise Include information in Spanish to reach immigrant populations Drivers should have to participate in a driver sensitivity training Include information in Spanish for drivers to hand out Better coordination of Davenport CitiBus and MetroLINK – Scheduling for transfers Review mass transit routes and schedules to assure they serve major employers locations and work schedules Reconnect Sylvan Island to “mainland” with pedestrian/bike bridges Continue efforts to promote complete streets throughout the Quad Cities Area Promote traffic calming in appropriate areas Bike paths/routes should be established, marked, promoted, and maintained Implement QC Bike Plan City of Rock Island should maintain its existing bike system and expand it over time Policy issue – new is good, but maintenance of existing facilities is higher priority Review and debate how transportation systems/improvements/maintenance are funded and improve this (national level debate) Difficulty in riding the bus “Choice” riders most likely choose other means More information regarding CitiBus bridge line and transferring between systems Little consistency with flag down service 7th Ave in Rock Island problematic for transit service Pedestrian amenities especially near transit Lack of sidewalks in the neighborhoods 11th Street Rock Island redesign – road diet? More pedestrian crossing on Avenue of the Cities Problems with Jersey Ridge Road bike lanes – switch to sharrows? More signed routes for bikes I-74 Bridge construction and how the construction will affect the future of the Quad City Marathon events Concerns on access to the bike/pedestrian section of the new I-74 Bridge for emergency vehicles Current gaps in the trail network in East Moline and Davenport – more consolidation efforts of projects in the Quad City Area in order to compete better for grant funding Intersections on 23rd Avenue in Moline and East Moline are dangerous – there should be no frontage road access in order to increase traffic safety on the corridor East Mississippi River Bridge between East Moline and Bettendorf – a bike/pedestrian trail crossing the river would also improve the trails network in the region
LW/cc Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Public Input 12-10-15&12-12-15.docx Page 4 of 4
A-54 Page Appendix A
Page A-55 Appendix A
A-56 Page Appendix A
Moving Forward Starting Today to 2045
2045 Quad Cities Area Long Range Transportation Planning for Economic Vitality
(Rock Island, February 2, 2016) — Planning for Meetings for Public Input our future needs and managing our Bi-State Regional Commission is conducting five transportation assets will position the greater open house public input meetings. Citizens and Quad Cities for economic success. Every five businesses are invited to attend to provide years, the Quad Cities Long Range feedback on the draft 2045 Quad Cities Long Transportation Plan (LRTP) is re-evaluated. The Range Transportation Plan. Bi-State staff will be update process considers changes in our available at each site to take comments and transportation system and economy, looking 30 discuss issues contained in the plan. years into the future. Local officials, along with Bi-State staff, have Date/Time Location prepared a draft plan, which is now ready for public review. The plan includes transportation East Pointe Station Friday, February 12 goals and existing and proposed transportation 1201 14th Avenue 3:00-5:00 p.m. system improvements. Public input is scheduled East Moline, Illinois prior to the adoption of the plan by Bi-State Regional Commission in March 2016. To St. John’s Church examine the draft 2045 Quad Cities Long Range Tuesday, February 16 4501 7th Avenue Transportation Plan, go to the link at 5:00-7:00 p.m. http://bistateonline.org/transportation/ Rock Island, Illinois quad-cities-metro-planning/2012-11-13-20-19- 45/quad-cities-metro-lrtp-long-range- Bettendorf Community transportation-plan. Wednesday, February 17 Center 3:00-5:00 p.m. 2204 Grant Street Printed copies will be made available at the five Bettendorf, Iowa main public libraries and city halls in Bettendorf, The River’s Edge Davenport, East Moline, Moline, and Rock Island Saturday, February 20 and the Bi-State Regional Commission office by 700 West River Drive 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. February 12, 2016. A public hearing is set for Davenport, Iowa March 22, 2016 at 12:00 p.m. as part of the Quad Cities MPO Transportation Policy Committee. Centre Station Thursday, February 25 Comments will be accepted on the draft plan 1200 River Drive 5:00-7:00 p.m. through March 22, 2016. Persons requiring Moline, Illinois special material or presentation format should contact Brandon Melton at (309) 793-6302, ext. 122 on or before February 12, 2016. For Note: The meeting rooms are accessible for persons general questions, contact Bi-State Regional with disabilities. If you require special accommodations Commission at (309) 793-6300. for these meetings, please notify Bryan Schmid, (309) 793-6302, Ext. 123 or [email protected].
Serving local governments in Muscatine and Scott Counties, Iowa; Henry, Mercer and Rock Island Counties, Illinois
GM\sg P:\USERS\WORD\Transportation-850\Long Range Trans Plan\2045\2016-02-02-2045-LRTP-Public-Input-Meetings-Newsletter.docx
Page A-57 Appendix A
SERVICE REPORT
COUNTY/COMMUNITY: Quad Cities MPO
DATES: February 12, 16, 17, 20 and 25, 2016
FILED BY: Gena McCullough/Christian Montbriand
MEETING: Long Range Transportation Plan Public Informational Meetings
PRESENT: County/Community Bi-State Others Copies to: Refer to attached sign-in sheets Gena McCullough WQAD (2/12/16) File Taylor Beswick Becky Passman, IAQC Brandon Melton Transit Coordinator Brian Schmid Lindsay Whitson Christian Montbriand
Five public informational meetings were held to solicit input on the draft 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan. The meetings were as follows: Number of Date/Time Location Participants Friday, February 12 East Pointe Station, 1201 14th 8 3:00-5:00 PM Avenue, East Moline, Illinois Tuesday, February 16 St. John’s Church, 4501 7th 4 5:00-7:00 PM Avenue, Rock Island, Illinois Bettendorf Community Center, Wednesday, February 17 2204 Grant Street, Bettendorf, 6 3:00-5:00 PM Iowa Saturday, February 20 The River’s Edge, 700 West River 13 10:00 AM-12:00 Noon Drive, Davenport, Iowa Thursday, February 25 Centre Station, 1200 River Drive, 6 5:00-7:00 PM Moline, Illinois
All locations were accessible by public transit. A media release was sent 2/5/16. A public notice was published in the Dispatch-Argus and Quad City Times newspapers on or before 2/9/16. Bilingual flyers were posted at 30 locations such as ethnic markets, groceries, restaurants, etc. and sent to the Regional Transportation Advisory Group and Regional Transit Advisory and Interest Group with a
A-58 Page Appendix A request for posting. The draft plan was posted to the Bi-State website and paper copies were provided to the five main libraries and city halls in Bettendorf, Davenport, East Moline, Moline, and Rock Island. Copies were also made available at the Bi-State Regional Commission offices. The purpose of these meetings was to solicit input from residents of the Quad Cities on draft plan in an open house style format. Visitors were initially asked to sign in and fill out a voluntary Community Outreach Self-Evaluation form to be used for purposes of reporting on Environmental Justice. This was voluntary so not all participants signed in or filled out the form. The five meetings were held in the same format. There were stations where participants could give their input in various ways. The first station centered around maps and information from the draft plan. Another station had a slide presentation available and viewed at a computer monitor. Draft copies of the LRTP were available for viewing in another location. An input form was available for comments and/or staff took comments on notepads. Results of the Community Outreach Self-Evaluation Form Non- Income Date Responses Gender Hispanic White <$35,000 3M February 12 4 0 0 2 1F
February 16 0 0 0 0 0
February 17 2 2M 0 0 0
February 20 2 2M 0 0 0
February 25 0 0 0 0 0
The following responses were received from the five meetings on the public input forms: Comments on Existing Transportation Issues – Public Transportation is excellent. John Deere Expressway is crowded but plans are to improve this road – Bettendorf transit: no sign. Davenport: very limited hours on weekends and only until seven on weekdays. Metro: Good, but still need later evening hours and weekend hours. More demand response vehicles. – Would like to see repairs and improvements to 78th Avenue from Centennial Expressway into Milan. Road conditions are crap and shoulders even worse with poor drainage. Widen to three lanes with center turn lane and bike lanes for each direction. No safe way to cycle to baseball, mini golf, camping, and other things along road. – More public transit options, better for the environment and allows more people to travel from point A to point B
Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Input – Feb 12-16-17-20-25 2016.docx Page 2 of 3
Page A-59 Appendix A
– General condition of local street arterials and on-off ramps to interstates are in tough condition – Street lighting needs improvements – Lane pavement markings should be more reflective – Highway 67 needs resurfaced, the new shoulders are nice – We need the MRT completed – More accessible information on the I-74 bridge. Narrated video explaining construction staging and new alignment. Existing site is not easy to digest. – In general, we have a well thought out overall plan for both vehicles and pedestrian/bicycle traffic – Convenient places to park and walk around downtown Davenport and Bettendorf – Expand hours for Iowa Transit. Sunday service/focus on main routes – Why have you ignored passenger rail traffic issues – Under the thumb of freight rail barons are you? Illinois will have it – get on board Iowa.
Comments on Future Transportation Issues or Other Recommendations – For people working at malls, stores, etc. there will need to be better bus routes. People working at these places are usually minimum wage or they are teenagers. Not all people love cars! Many live in rural areas. – 18th Street: North of 53rd Avenue stops, map shows 18th going to Forest Grove Avenue. Non- existent roadway. – Tanglefoot: ends at Middle Road, shows going to US 67 – non-existent in this segment – New I-74 bridge to completion – Davenport Centennial Bridge intersection improvements – Need more push on passenger rail service – Mass Rapid Transit – Improve transit service throughout the region. Buses every 15 minutes, connection between East Davenport and Davenport Downtown. – Look into partnerships with Uber and like services – Improve connections across river (transit) – I’m concerned about state highway 92 through Rock Island. Access from the river trail to greater Rock Island is compromised by the heavy traffic on the highways/1st avenue. We need significant traffic calming.
Trans\LRTP\Service Reports\2045 LRTP Input – Feb 12-16-17-20-25 2016.docx Page 3 of 3
A-60 Page Appendix A
2045 Long Range Transportation Plan Input
Summary and Response Record
Date Last Name Jurisdiction, Summary Comment and Response [Blue Type] Received Organization or Place of Residence 3-6-14 Volz Contemporary Received submission of a paper “Getting Here to There” on multiple issues – multi-modal system, traffic and traffic Club management/speed control, stop sign warrants, access management, pollution, , etc. (Sent to Technical Committee for reference in the planning process.) 6-24-14 Tunnicliff Hilltop Looking at potential architectural archway across Business US 61 in Davenport in the Hilltop area. 10-28-14 Hutter Citizen Suggested a cable car across the Mississippi River. 12-11-14 Davenport- Participants Determined top 5 issues related to transportation in Quad Cities: Addition of comprehensive and accessible bike lanes/ Bettendorf trails and park systems; Maintenance dollars for existing systems and infrastructure; Passenger Rail; Congestion; and River Engineering crossing capacity. Ranked transportation performance objectives with top 3 being: Support Economic Vitality; Increase Conference Accessibility and Mobility Options; and Connectivity. 8-17-15 White IADOT Comments on Chapter 1 Draft- • The chapter contains a good amount of data and nice charts/graphics to help explain it. However, discussion relating the demographic and economic data to transportation planning implications should be added. Also, mapping more of the data may help that discussion by identifying specific areas of the MPA that may have particular planning issues (such as older populations, high limited English proficiency (LEP) populations, etc.). [Will review the text to make a translation from data and its relation to the transportation system as a whole. LEP Analysis scheduled for the ap- pendices and summary in Chapter 2.] • Formatting comment – the differences between headings and subheadings (multiple colors but no size/font differen- tial) makes the structure of the chapter confusing. [Will review template formatting.] • Page 1 – Additional clarification between MPA region and the MPA itself would be helpful. [Will address in revised text.] • Page 3 – If the minority and Hispanic maps to be inserted do not already include an LEP map, that would be a good item to add. [LEP maps to be included in Appendices.] • Page 4 – Please add the data source for current MPA employment. [Source: Infogroup ReferenceUSA Gov, 2010 and individual employers.] • Page 6 – Were any of these same statistics throughout the chapter and particularly on this page (such as mode to work and travel time to work) available from your household travel survey, rather than Census/ACS data? [Some statistics were provided in the HHTS and noted in text. This will be addressed in the roadway chapter related to the model.] • Page 6 – More detail on how the 2045 population and employment projections were derived would be helpful. The methodology could be added as an appendix if you don’t want to go into too much detail here, but it would be nice to have available somewhere. Also, maps showing base year and horizon year population and employment density by census block or by TAZ would be helpful. [Will address briefly. Detail to be included in Model Documentation Addendum.] • Pages 7-8 – Additional environmental resource to consider could include floodplains (if not already covered by wetlands), parks, cemeteries, and leaking underground storage tanks. Is there a relationship between environmental resources and project selection? If so, that should be noted here or when project selection is discussed in other chapters. Resource agency consultation should also be addressed somewhere. [Chapter 2 will look at environmental impacts in more detail.] • Page 8 – Local efforts to improve air quality are mentioned – could examples specifically related to transportation be included? [Chapter 2 will look at environmental impacts in more detail.] • Page 8 – The first sentence of the fourth paragraph under Issues Today is confusing. [Reword.] • Pages 9-11 – The relationship between the performance goals and objectives is a bit unclear. The goals seem to go beyond a transportation plan – are they derived from the regional vision developed through the ROC? How will the goals and/or objectives be tied into project selection? How will progress on the objectives be measured? Are there any plans for including performance measures in the document, and if so what would their tie be to the goals and objectives? Some of these questions may be answered in other draft chapters – just some things to think about. [To be examined to determine where this is appropriate in the document.] 8-17-15 White IADOT Comments on Chapter 4 Draft- • Page 1 – It is noted that statistics will be provided for the percentages of residents and businesses located within a quarter mile of transit – it would be great to have maps of these as well. [Bi-State will add the quarter-mile buffer map] • Page 1 – Add sources for assertions where possible. For example, local factors contributing to ridership growth are mentioned. How were these factors identified? [These factors were discussed at the quarterly transit managers meeting in March 2015. This has been noted to the text.] • Pages 2-6 – Maps of each system’s routes would be helpful. These could also be overlaid with demographic charac- teristics, such as low-income, minority, and LEP populations, as well as households without vehicles, to help discuss service coverage and any gaps. [Socio-economic and demographic maps are included in the appendix to the Long Range Transportation Plan] • Page 3 – In the last sentence of the first paragraph, please clarify what service is being referred to. Also, ‘commen- tary’ should be ‘complimentary’. Please spell out ADA if this is the first time it is used. [The changes have been made.] • Page 3 – When discussing the replacement schedule for heavy duty buses, please clarify that it is 12 years/350,000 miles. [The change has been made.]
Page A-61 Appendix A
• Page 7 – In the discussion of Amtrak feasibility studies, please clarify if the passenger projections are annual numbers. [Clarification made.] • Page 9 – It would be nice to see base year costs for each vehicle type included in the table. Also, it appears from the note that expenditures are being forecasted using compounded growth. FHWA’s guidance has been to use straight- line growth for both revenue and expenditure forecasts. [Base year costs were based off information from the 2016- 2019 TIP – will note in the text; Will work to address the growth projections] • Page 10 – As noted in the chapter, the projections for transit ridership in 2045 seem ambitious. Could more justifica- tion for these projections be provided? Also, what would those projections equate to in terms of a mode shift to transit? [Will discuss this further with transportation engineer] • Page 10 – It is unclear whether the COA resulted in a comprehensive service allocation policy, or just recommended developing one. If it was the former, please elaborate on what that policy included. [Will clarify once the COA has been released. • Page 11 – Are BRT or HOV lanes being actively included as possibilities in planning activities? For example, expansion of the I-74 bridge, which is mentioned as a transit priority corridor. [HOV lanes are not being actively included as possibilities in planning activities. The urban area transit managers discussed a possible BRT route along the most heavily used transit routes on the CitiBus and Metro systems, namely the U.S. 61 (Brady & Harrison Streets) and the Illinois Route 92 corridors, as a viable possibility for improving transit in the region. As a BRT system would address numerous points noted through our public input process, notably the fragmented nature of transit in the Quad Cities and improved transit in general through shorter headways and other BRT amenities, a discussion of such a BRT route was included in the chapter text.] • Overall comment – the chapter seems to lack discussion of current transit planning issues – can more be integrated from the PTP? Also, how are the efforts discussed in the chapter helping to address the goals/objectives noted in chapter 1? Additional information on implementation would be helpful, particularly if there are particular projects or efforts (such as intermodal facilities, BRT, etc.) that can be discussed. [Will include discussion of current transit plan- ning issues, and will incorporate goals/objectives stated in chapter 1.] 8-17-15 Hohensee MetroLINK • P. 1 – Should this area reference any of the redevelopment of the urban core areas from former industrial/commercial uses? We are seeing such development increase densities and provide potential areas for new ridership. [Sentence added.] • P. 1 - Route modifications to reflect ridership patterns and recent developments are currently being proposed or have been recently implemented. [Sentence added.] • P. 1-2: Effective Fall 2015, the five [Bettendorf] routes will extend from three main transfer points along Middle Road. [Update to transit routing made.] • P. 2 - There are a number of transfer points, but the three main connections are along Middle Road. [Sentence added regarding numerous transfer points.] • P. 2 - Should this section reference the partnership between Bettendorf and MetroLINK that began in Fall 2013? Also, Bettendorf has since implemented a CAD/AVL system, Google Trip Planner, and mobile app. [Section added.] • P. 4-5 – Grammatical changes. [Changes made.] • P. 5 - MetroLINK is currently constructing a signature transfer hub at South Park Mall. The project, which will incorporate four (4) bus bays with canopies, real-time signage, and passenger seating, will be completed in late 2015. [Sentence added.] • P. 5 - MetroLINK is currently in the bidding process of a new Moline Ferryboat Terminal. The Terminal will replace MetroLINK’s existing leased dock at Celebration Belle. The project will enhance ADA access, provide real-time signage, and will be the home port for MetroLINK’s three (3) Channel Cat vessels. Completion is scheduled for late Spring 2016. [Sentences added.] • P. 5 - Is there a way to reference technology upgrades since the last LRTP update? We have continued utilizing the CAD/AVL system and Google Trip Planner, but have developed ways to transmit real-time route information to the rider. These include a mobile app, real-time LED signage at shelters and transfer stations, etc. We’re also planning to replace our fare collection system to integrate contactless smartcard technology during this period. [New paragraph added.] • P. 5 – “…and the City of Davenport provides operating funds.” [Sentence updated.] • P. 7 – Should the new Greyhound Connect service along I-88 be referenced? [Section added.] • P. 8 - Should this section reference that the new multi-modal facility will be connected to MetroLINK’s Centre Station to offer intermodal access? [This information is located under Passenger Transportation Tomorrow under the section “Other Transit Needs”.] • P. 10 – “However, due to the expiration of Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) funding and low ridership, the route was discontinued in August 2015.” [Grammar and word choice changes made.] 8-21-15 Grimes Bettendorf Trails Today section #8 on Bettendorf trails. It states that the Crow Creek trail is planned to go to Forest Grove Road in the future, and I would say that we have modified our plans to only take it to Field Sike Drive in the future. (Change has been made.) The routes mentioned as existing are sidewalks, not bicycle facilities/shared use paths. Should consider adding a future bike facility from Wisconsin to Y-48 (although it isn’t proposed as a bike lane as he says, but rather paved shoulders). 8-23-15 Oestreich Public; Trails It implies at many times that trails are the epitome of bicycling facilities. For instance in the “Local Impacts” section it reads: Committee “A good multipurpose trail and pedestrian network…” I have problems with the term “trail” representing bicycling. I would suggest changing it here and in other places in the report to “bicycle” (Changes have been made to reflect the wider bicycle network, and not just the trail network. 8-24-15 Miller QC Bicycle • Page 7 – MRT not complete downstream of Rock Island’s Sunset Park (Will adjust text accordingly) Safety • Page 8 – Moline’s Bikeway Plan is a plan, not a report. A map was included in the plan • Jeff Anderson stated “The Bikeways Map within the Plan was adopted by City Council as an amendment to our Of- ficial Comprehensive Plan. The Plan as a whole serves as a policy document.”(Will adjust text accordingly) • Page 9 – Rock River/Kiwanis Trail – Is most of this now paved? (Will adjust according to Dean Mathias’ input, who has first-hand knowledge of the route) • Page 9 – NACTO’s second edition came out in 2012 (First edition came out in 2010, which is why I cite that year, and sought to define the various facilities that are noted below)
A-62 Page Appendix A
• Page 10 – These “types of cyclists” are gaining more popularity: • Strong & Fearless • Enthused & Confident • Interested but Concerned • No Way No How • (Will double-check with the AASHTO Guide, which is cited, and will adjust text accordingly. Will add text to indicate the Types of Cyclists listed above.) • Page 10 – Rural highway bikeways are now doing 6-foot shoulders, not 4-foot w/ 4-inch edge stripe. (Chapter 12B, Page 2 of the Iowa DOT SUDAS design guide states “Paved shoulder should have a minimum width of 4 feet wide with a preferred width of 5 feet.”) • Page 11 – Add new section on I-74 Bridge connection linking both sides of the MRT • (Noted on pages 11 and 13) • Page 11 – Aren’t there bike lanes and sharrows by the water plant in Moline by I-74 Bridge? • (No bike lane. One or two sets of sharrows) • Page 11 – Facilities in Davenport will be added soon: • Marquette St. from Duck Creek to 46th St • Jersey Ridge Rd from Kimberly to Jersey Meadows Dr (north of 53rd St) • 3rd & 4th Streets from Marquette to Telegraph • Tremont from 46th to Veterans Memorial Pkwy • Sharrows & bike lanes on 46th from Marquette to Tremont • (Will these facilities be on the ground as of March 1?) 8-20-15 Perry Citizen Good review and overview/intentory of alternative transportation/bicycling in MPA area related to non-motorized chapter. 8-20-15 Taylor Quad Cities No further comments. Seems comprehensive and complete related to the non-motorized draft chapter. Convention & Visitors Bureau 8-21-15 Grimes Bettendorf Plan details look very good related to non-motorized chapter. Minor correction in Trails Today section #8 on Bettendorf Trails. Statement on Crow Creek Trail – have modified city plans to only take it to Field Sike Drive. 8-24-15 Oestreich Citizen Draft report related to non-motorized chapter is admirable, comprehensive, thorough and full of important data. Caveat- It implies at many times trails are the epitome of bicycling facilities. Noted concern with trails representing bicycling. Suggested would change to “bicycle”. 8-24-15 Hohensee MetroLINK • P. 1 – Should this area reference any of the redevelopment of the urban core areas from former industrial/commercial uses? We are seeing such development increase densities and provide potential areas for new ridership. • Bettendorf Transit • P. 1 - Route modifications to reflect ridership patterns and recent developments are currently being proposed or have been recently implemented. • P. 1-2: Effective Fall 2015, the five [Bettendorf] routes will extend from three main transfer points along Middle Road. • P. 2 - There are a number of transfer points, but the three main connections are along Middle Road. • P. 2 - Should this section reference the partnership between Bettendorf and MetroLINK that began in Fall 2013? Also, Bettendorf has since implemented a CAD/AVL system, Google Trip Planner, and mobile app. • Rock Island County Metropolitan Mass Transit District (MetroLINK/Metro) • P. 4-5 – Grammatical changes • P. 5 - MetroLINK is currently constructing a signature transfer hub at SouthPark Mall. The project, which will incorpo- rate four (4) bus bays with canopies, real-time signage, and passenger seating, will be completed in late 2015. • P. 5 - MetroLINK is currently in the bidding process of a new Moline Ferryboat Terminal. The Terminal will replace MetroLINK’s existing leased dock at Celebration Belle. The project will enhance ADA access, provide real-time signage, and will be the home port for MetroLINK’s three (3) Channel Cat vessels. Completion is scheduled for late Spring 2016. • P. 5 - Is there a way to reference technology upgrades since the last LRTP update? We have continued utilizing the CAD/AVL system and Google Trip Planner, but have developed ways to transmit real-time route information to the rider. These include a mobile app, real-time LED signage at shelters and transfer stations, etc. We’re also planning to replace our fare collection system to integrate contactless smartcard technology during this period. • The Loop • P. 5 – “…and the City of Davenport provides operating funds.” • Intercity Bus • P. 7 – Should the new Greyhound Connect service along I-88 be referenced? • Passenger Rail • P. 8 - Should this section reference that the new multi-modal facility will be connected to MetroLINK’s Centre Station to offer intermodal access? • Other Transit Needs • (Addressed as part of chapter development.) 12-18-15 Hellige Davenport Comments on Chapter 3 – Driving Roads Draft • On Map 3.2, many streets are not in the correct color, corresponding to the 2014 DOT AADT’s. For instance, Kim- berly Rd is above 30,000 from Main St to I-74. (This has been corrected.) • On Map 3.4, Northwest Blvd is concrete from Cedar St ( just east of Pine St) to 73rd St, all of the remainder is asphalt north of the Northpark Mall entrance. (This has been corrected.) • Comments on Chapter 5 – Multipurpose Trails and Pedestrian Network Draft • On Map 5.1, there is an existing shared use path on 53rd Street from Brady St to Devils Glen, with the exceptions of between Tremont and the intersection of 52nd St with 53rd and from the Bettendorf city limit to Amesbury Dr. There is a shared use path on Welcome Way from Kimberly to 46th Street, and on Kimberly Rd from Main to Welcome Way. The map should show a future bike lane along Locust St from Wisconsin to Y-48 and along Y-48 from West Lake entrance to Locust. (The routes in question appear to be five-to-six foot wide sidewalks and not ten-foot, separated multipurpose trail facilities that are suitable for bicycle traffic. These routes were left off of the final map. The future bike facility along Locust from Wisconsin to Y-48 has been added.)
Page A-63 Appendix A
• On Map 5.3, Northwest Blvd over I-80 should not be shown as not applicable to ped traffic. At some point, we do want sidewalk and bike access across I-80. Division St has sidewalks on both sides from Kimberly to Northwest Blvd. Veterans Memorial Parkway has sidewalks on both sides from Eastern to Jersey Ridge. 46th Street is shown crossing I-74. There is sidewalk on one side of Kimberly Rd from Duck Creek to the Kimberly Road/Spruce Hills/Elmore intersection. (These routes have been adjusted on the map.) • Comment on Chapter 7 – Projects and Price Tags Draft • On Map 7.2, we need to discuss the combination of old and new Kimberly Road interchanges and the I-280 inter- change. Map 7.2 became Map 7.3 in the final draft plan. The text was revised to clarify the closure of the I-280 interchange at the current location U.S.6/Kimberly Road and shifting to the south on a realigned Kimberly Road. 12-17-15 Dayman Citizen Concern expressed related to Criswell Road (Valley Drive and 183rd Street) for safety improvements needed. Noted limited access to Old Hunter’s Woods subdivision, increasing volume of traffic on oil-and-chip road surface, steep grade and increasing use by bicyclists and pedestrians. (Shared information with technical officials in Bettendorf and Scott County as part of the road improvements decision-making.) 1-6-16 White Iowa DOT Comments on Chapter 7 – Projects and Price Tags Draft • Is adequate history provided for sources of funding that are utilized in revenue projections? A 10-year history of all funding programs is provided in Table 7.1. It appears that Figure 7.2 then shows an average amount programmed per year for some of these sources (and that this is what is carried forward for revenue projections), but it is not clear what sources from Table 7.1 are included in Figure 7.2. It also doesn’t make sense intuitively. Table 7.1 shows a total over ten years of $85,383,852 in local funding. Figure 7.2 shows an yearly average for that 10-year timeframe being $23,731,783. The link (or lack of one) between Table 7.1 and Figure 7.2 should be clarified, so it is clear to the reader what revenue sources are being utilized in the fiscal constraint methodology. (Table 7.1 shows a summary of all funding sources for TIP projects over the last 10 years while 7.2 shows average funding by category (Expansion, Maintenance, Enhancement, Transit Capital, Transit O&M) of local projects only. These categories are determined on a project by project basis in the justification field of the TIP. Clarification was made in the text.) • Are history and projections of operations and maintenance costs included? This has been provided through self- reported numbers from the jurisdictions. (Most agencies utilize the O/M data they include in the TIP, and extrapolate that information for projections.) It appears based on the text and Table 7.2 that a large portion of TIP funding goes to, and is projected to go to, maintenance projects. What is not clear from the text/table is the differentiation be- tween maintenance projects (such as an STP resurfacing job) and operating/maintaining the system as a whole, which is what the O/M data in the TIP is meant to get at. (If STP projects are considered maintenance projects rather than expansion projects, it is captured by sorting by justification. This is the method by which the base year funding levels were estimated. This relationship was better explained in the text.) • Are revenue projections in line with history? If not, is justification provided? The text states that they are, but since a year by year history is only provided for STP, this cannot be determined. Further detail of other funding history and/ or an expansion on the justification for revenue projections is needed. (STP funding history was analyzed because it is the most consistent federal funding source. This information is used as a surrogate to help justify revenue projections. Because other programs are not consistent over the past 10 years, it was thought better to aggregate the funding sources based on justification instead for the revenue projection. Additionally peer MPOs were reviewed for their rates and historical GDP rates were considered as well. The methodology was explained further in the text.) • Are project costs inflated to a proper year of expenditure? This should be discussed in the Projected Future Transpor- tation Expenses section of page 155. Based on the Gena’s email, the local sponsors provided the inflated costs. While a consistent inflation rate would be preferable, the text should at least discuss what inflation rates were used by project sponsors. The text should also specify years of expenditure for each time band. I would expect these to be roughly 2020.5 and 2035.5 based on the time bands of 2016-2025 and 2026-2045. (YOE was calculated to the middle of each time band and has been noted in the text.) • This is also an issue of confusion on Table 7.3, as it is not clear if a project noted in the FY16-19 TIP column is com- pletely funded in the TIP or not, or whether the project costs in the table are total project costs or what remains to be authorized. (Total project costs are used. This has been noted in the text.) • A full listing of current TIP projects should be provided in the plan. (A complete listing of projects from the current TIP were included in an appendix.) • Most agencies separate out their current TIP from the next time band of projects. This is helpful since projects are at different levels (programmed vs. near-term priorities), and also helps with having clean YOEs (actual programming year for TIP projects, mid-year of time band for next group of projects. (This has been the methodology used for at least the past 2 plan updates. The merits of this methodology were reviewed but it was decided that the current methodol- ogy will be used for this update. This may be considered as part of the next plan update.) • Are revenue projections and project costs projected using straight-line growth? If not, is compound growth justi- fied? Is there consistency (either straight-line or compound) between the two? I’m not sure enough justification is provided for increasing the inflation rate from 2% to 4% in the latter timeframe – the plan only says “The growth rate for the outer years is consistent with historical trends, using locally programmed Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds.” This is where additional funding history to establish trends for other programs or additional justification is important. Also, using a compound revenue growth rate is concerning. FHWA has generally been against this, as it inflates the revenue forecast. I did a quick comparison of straight-line growth on the road_lrp_sans_state tab of the revenue worksheet. Using the same 2% and 4% growth rate breaks and starting from the same initial amount, the straight-line growth rate total from 2016-2045 is $24.67 million less than the compounded growth rate projection. Straight-line growth is preferred. If compound growth is being used for revenue forecasts, it should also be used for expenditure forecasts. It is not clear if this was done in projecting O/M expenditures or by project sponsors in projecting costs. (A 2% rate was set in the short term based on uncertainty of transportation funding and general economic climate. The increase from 2% to 4% is based on the assumption that the economy will recover and more funding may become available. In addition to analyzing STP trends, growth rates of peer MPOs were reviewed as well as GDP rates over the past 5 years. A compounded rate was used for revenue forecasting which is in line with past plan updates, but existing methodology will be reviewed for future updates. After polling local governments, most projects used a compounded rate to calculate YOE costs. Those which used linear growth have been adjusted to show compound growth estimates.)
A-64 Page Appendix A
• Are revenue sources attributed appropriately to projects? This is not clear. More explanation of the sources forecast in Figure 7.2 and how Table 7.2 breaks down among federal, state, and local sources (in terms of dollars and pro- grams) is needed. It would also be helpful if Table 7.3 made a link to anticipated revenue sources. It is not clear how costs in this table are being accounted for. An example of the link I’m trying to make is that $X STP dollars are antici- pated in a certain timeframe, and X projects are included in the fiscally constrained plan and anticipated to utilize this funding. This also links to the need to better understand what revenue sources are being used in Table 7.2, as we want to ensure that the revenues being projected mesh with the projects in the fiscally constrained plan. A simple example is that it wouldn’t be proper to show a projection of bridge revenue as helping fund the plan if no bridge projects were identified. Is the federal/local split on future STP/TAP projects appropriate given the area’s current or historical federal/local split? (A justification field is determined on a project by project basis. This is used to determine what was spent one what project type and do not go into specific funding sources as many of those are not consistent. This has been true, especially in the most recent transportation acts where funding programs have been merged or in some cases certain projects have become ineligible for federal transportation funding.) • Are MPO projects fiscally constrained? Along with the uncertainty of answering this question based on what is cur- rently presented, the summary portion of Table 7.2 currently shows that they are not. Justification for having a nega- tive balance in the near term and positive balance in the long term should be provided, otherwise it appears projects are being front loaded. While there is a negative balance in the short term, the plan is constrained overall. We have received guidance in the past that there is about a 10% tolerance in over programming. The plan is over programmed in the short term of about $5.9 M and the 10% tolerance would be about $7.8 M.) 1-7-16 Kammler East Moline Comments on Chapter 3 – Driving Roads Draft • On Map 3.3 showing Truck Traffic, it would appear that East Moline is the only city that submitted a list/map of local truck routes. While it’s accurate, it looks weird as compared to the other cities showing nothing. Not sure what the answer is here, but I guess my thought would be to either have more cities showing accurate representations of local truck routes on the map, or leave this layer off the map for now. (Local truck routes were excluded from the map.) • Map 3.5 showing QC Road Surface Conditions is still showing several East Moline arterials as being in poor condition, when in reality, they’ve been resurfaced in the past 2-3 years. Kennedy Drive (17th Ave – Ave-of-Cities) should be shown as “good condition” paved in 2012. 30th Avenue (7th St – Archer Dr), Archer Dr (18th Av – Ave-of-Cities), 10th Street (12th Av – 17th Av), and 21st Avenue (10th St – Archer Dr), should all be shown in excellent condition as they are all newly resurfaced within the past 1-2 years. (This has been corrected.) Comments on Appendices • On pages A-14 and A-15, 7th Street in East Moline from 17th Av to 30th Av is listed as #12 in the areas of most traffic congestion around the QCA. When looking at the map and the other areas, the 7th Street segment seems quite strange and out-of-place. I realize that this is a survey of “perceptions”, but I don’t ever think I’ve seen congestion on 7th Street in East Moline except downtown during a parade or the Firecracker Run. This doesn’t seem to fit in with the others. 1-11-16 White Iowa DOT Executive Summary: • Page 3 – Under Plan Progress, there is a sentence that reads “The plan addresses the multi-modal transportation net- work – roads, public transit, trails, and sidewalks, along with facilities that support moving goods by freight transporta- tion via rail, water, and air.” It’s also worth recognizing that rail, water, and air move passengers as well. Reworded to be more modal inclusion. • Page 3 – I like the way you’ve framed transportation issues, and provided specific examples. • Page 5 – An interactive website is mentioned with regard to trails – can this be hyperlinked in the document or as a footnote? It would be great if documents/websites mentioned throughout the plan included a web address or hyperlink. The QC Trails website was added since it has been launched. Revise website reference in final publication document for hyperlinking. [REQUIRES FINAL DOCUMENT FOLLOW-UP]. 1-11-16 White Iowa DOT Chapter 1: • General comment – the maps and figures throughout the chapter are very clean and easy to understand. • Page 9 – It’s mentioned that the area’s population has almost rebounded to its 1980 level. It might be worth briefly mentioning the farm crisis and why there was such a decline in the 1980s.Noted in text. • Page 11 – On Map 1.2, it’s difficult to differentiate the blue gradations for different categories – perhaps utilize a different color scale? The color scale on the next page, Map 1.3, is easier to distinguish. Reviewing maps for clarity. [REQUIRES FINAL DOCUMENT FOLLOW-UP]. • Page 15 – The peer TMA comparison is interesting. It may make the page busier, but could something be added to help quickly comprehend Bi-State’s place relative to the others in each category? Perhaps highlighting the high and low for each category in different colors and having Bi-State’s line in bold? That would enable the reader to quickly grasp how Bi-State compares to the range of peer areas. Highlighted the highest value by category. • Page 17 – On Figure 1.14, please clarify in the title or source if this is household income. Done. • Page 21 – Map 1.5 is a nice representation of commuting patterns. Is there any way to make the line thickness of the arrows somewhat proportional to the flow? It would help with quickly identifying the major patterns. Discussed and this would be difficult given how the map was created. • Page 23 – The meaning of this sentence is unclear: “Interestingly, bridge-crossing households made 11.24 trips per household than the overall trip rates.” Reworded this paragraph to clarify. • Page 23 – It is noted that additional detail on the population and employment projections will be included in the TDM documentation. It would be nice to include a bit more discussion here, particularly why employment is projected to grow at a faster rate than population. Different sources were used for the projections. A summary was provided in Appendix B on the projection methodologies. • Page 33 – The last sentence of the paragraph at the top of the second column cuts off. (As noted in the Regional Vision, emphasis on recognizing our culturally rich history). Corrected.
Page A-65 Appendix A
1-11-16 White Iowa DOT Chapter 2: • Page 39 – Nice paragraph on the importance of sustainability under Figure 2.1. However, presence should be present. Made change. • Page 40 – The paragraph on Environmental Assessments should end with Environmental Impact Statement, not Envi- ronmental Impact Assessment. Made change. • Page 52 – It is stated in the first paragraph that only safety performance measures have been established – this should be updated to also include pavement and bridge performance measures. (The draft rule is available at http://www. regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FHWA-2013-0053-0001.) Overall, the document does a nice job of discussing measures and indicators. However, it would be nice if there was a more definitive plan for collecting and reporting on data. Even if targets aren’t being set, the MPO could identify preferred trend directions. It would also be nice for Table 2.4 to note which measures/indicators are specifically required by MAP-21/FAST. Noted that pavement and bridge performance measures have been established and included preferred trend directions for each indicator. 1-11-16 White Iowa DOT Comments on Chapter 3 – Driving Roads Draft • Page 56 – While there are a couple different categories between the IA and IL classifications, it would be nice if the categories that are shown on both charts were the same color – it would help compare percentages across figures. (This was corrected) • Page 59 – There’s a lot of emphasis on bridge crossings in the document, particularly around this section. A map specifically highlighting the Mississippi River and Rock River bridges would be helpful for reference. (Bridge locations have been added as a stand-alone figure) • Page 61 – Is Map 3.2 an example of where there’s a lack of data from IL, or is it just not showing up properly? Visually, it’s very odd to be missing traffic counts on major highways on one side of the river. If that data’s not available, it might be worth noting on the map so there’s no confusion. (The data has been added.) • Page 65 – Under the IPMP section, it is stated that “The pavement condition data is available to local governments for interstates to collectors.” This should be updated to state that the pavement condition data is collected for all paved roadways. Also, this data should be available to be added to Map 3.5 (www.ctre.iastate.edu/ipmp/). (This information has been updated accordingly.) • Page 79 – The discussion about Iowa’s CHSP should be updated to reflect the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP - http://www.iowadot.gov/traffic/shsp/default.html). (This information has been updated accordingly.) • Page 79 – In the bulleted list, it is hard to distinguish the categories (4 E’s) from the example agencies below them. (This list was formatted to better differentiate the 4 E’s) • Page 81 – Project identification/selection is touched on here, but should be elaborated upon further. A summary of how projects were reviewed and ultimately selected for the plan should be included. (This information has been included.) 1-11-16 White Iowa DOT Comments on Chapter 4 Draft – • Page 94: This map (and those of the other systems) showing average weekday boardings is great. Where did that data came from and how was it collected? Also, is alighting data available or not? (The data came from the individual systems. CitiBus drivers record boardings manually as passengers get on the bus. MetroLINK and Bettendorf Transit automatically collect boarding and alighting data digitally through automated passenger counters at each door. The boarding data, as opposed to alighting, is more easily comparable given the differences in collection methods. This has been updated in the chapter.) • Page 106: Transit priority corridors are discussed – how or by whom were these identified? Is this a creation for the LRTP or was it determined as part of a transit planning or other community planning effort? It’d be great to have a little more discussion of them and the level of buy-in the communities have towards them. (This has been updated) 1-11-16 White Iowa DOT Chapter 5 • Page 110: Figure 5.1 provides some national context for bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities. Can similar information be provided specifically for the TMA? (There is not enough credible data to draw temporal conclusions in only the TMA or UZA.) • Page 112: In the paragraph about complete streets, could note that the Iowa DOT is working on a bicycle/pedestrian plan which may incorporate complete street-related elements. (Added.) • Page 113: AASHTO has moved away from the Type A/B/C rider stratification. Milly provided the attached PDF, which is a few pages of AASHTO’s most recent Guide to Bicycle Facilities, which discusses trip purpose and user skill and comfort level instead. (Changed.) • Page 113: In the sentence listing possible users of multi-use trails, equestrian and snowmobile are both noted. Wouldn’t these two types of users would be prohibited from most trails? (Correct. However, one large exception in our area is the Hennepin Canal State Parkway Trail, which does allow equestrian use and why these modes were included initially. Nevertheless, equestrians and snowmobiles have been removed from the list.) • Page 115: On Map 5.1, active and passive greenways are identified. Please define what these mean either on the map or in nearby text. (Addition made.) • Page 121: The discussion and map in the sidewalk section is very well done, and much more than most MPOs have in their LRTPs. One thing that would be nice to add is what current policies are in the cities with regard to new subdivi- sions – are they required to have sidewalks? (Addition made.) • Page 127: It’s not clear if the non-motorized facilities listed in Table 5.1 are fiscally constrained or not. An explana- tion of the relationship between this table and Table 7.5 in the fiscal constraint section should be added. It’s also not clear how these trails relate to Map 5.1, which includes “proposed” facilities, while the table is labeled as “planned or potential”. If they are the same, consistency in their description would be helpful. (Language amended.)
A-66 Page Appendix A
1-11-16 White Iowa DOT Chapter 6 • Page 137: On Table 6.2, clarify within the title that these are the top ten busiest rail crossings (so someone skimming doesn’t think there are only ten public crossings in the area). Revised. • Page 137: A projected decrease in inbound rail freight is noted. Does the freight study provide an explanation for why there is such a shift to trucks projected? Is it related to the type of product being carried, efficiencies in general? It’d be good to include discussion of this if it is known. Explained in text. • Page 140: Under National Freight Network, could add a short description of the changes related to the primary freight network in the FAST Act. The 41,518-mile primary freight network, which is currently described in chapter 6, is now referred to as the “primary highway freight system” and is one of four components of the new National Highway Freight Network. See Fast Act Sec 1116, paragraph (c). Also in the FAST Act, the Secretary of Transportation will be establishing a National Multimodal Freight Network described in Sec 8001, paragraphs (b)(2). This could be included as well, as some of the Quad Cities infrastructure will be included. Noted in text. • Page 141: Map 6.2 – map title is overlapping a highway shield.Checked GIS layering. • Page 144: Second paragraph, the M-35 Marine Highway Corridor runs from St. Paul, MN to Grafton, IL at the begin- ning of the Illinois River (not quite as far south as St. Louis). Corrected. • It would be good to touch on pipelines in this chapter. The PHMSA provides data and maps online – see https://www. npms.phmsa.dot.gov/. Cross-referenced pipelines as part of our multi-jurisidictional hazard mitigation plans. 1-11-16 White Iowa DOT Appendix • Pages 267-278: The gradations are difficult to distinguish on several of these maps, particularly the blue ones. Consid- er other color scales or perhaps removing local roads to improve readability. Looking at options for final publication. 2-1-16 Bechtel FTA Chapter 1 Draft • Page 3: Add Perf Measures to the issues when you do the addendum A Performance Measures Addendum will follow the plan update once Federal guidance is provided. • 5: Suggest adding BRT corridors for “Projects Requiring Additional Study” Addressed in text and referenced. Also noted in Chapter 7. • 9: The MPA population is nearly to its former highest level in 1980 which was [fill in]. Done. • 14: (Davenport urbanized area ranks third by percentage of workers with no vehicle available…) who was second and first? Might be nice to add chart on “no vehicles” – which leads to these folks needing other modes of travel – bike, walk, bus. Described as noted in text. • 19: [Public Transit pie chart) Not here but the 1.06% public transit leads to public transit PMs an ridership increases. Maybe to 2% by 2020; 3% by 2025 or whatever. Your call and transit providers. Noted as an opportunity in developing performance measures. Referenced in general in the text. • 21: [% trips use transit buses (0.88%)] Thought this was 1.06 (on page 19). Clarified that this is two different data sources, Census and household survey. • 21: Can leave to transit PMs for bus trips to work, shopping, errands Noted. • Map 1.8: On this map, possible to overlay transit route map? This map is already “busy” with road layer[second half is clipped from scanning] Overlays are shown in Appendix C. • 36: Suggest add: Study, promote BRT, Express Bus and Park and Ride Enhancements to transit provider services. (Technical Committee agreed to add this to the subobjectives 3/8/16 Policy Committee approved 3/22/16 to add this to the plan.) • 37: spell out “3c” (Done.) 2-1-16 Bechtel FTA Chapter 2 Draft: • 39: Best Practice! That you have a sustainability and livability chapter. • 41: Somewhere in this AQ Section – give yourself credit that all these efforts have cumulatively kept QC in attainment status. Added a comment about the Quad Cities MPA continually remaining in attainment status. • 45: Need to insert number of miles of trails. Deleted this reference. Data was difficult to obtain because the data layers we have for individual trail segments overlap with each other. • 49: And FTA. Added a FTA reference. • 49: Add FTA’s transit safety and transit asset management PMs. Content was added. • 50: “Table 2.3” – Red to Black. Updated. • 51: Have measures, data sources and preferred trend directions – good lead in for MAP-21 performance measures and targets (trends). Measures and data sources were added where allowed. Preferred trend directions were incor- porated into the document. • 52: Percent of Obesity for Adults and Children. Added percent signs to each. • 53 [table 2.4]: Need “Data Source” filled in. Took this column out because it is already available and completed in Table 2.3. 2-1-16 Bechtel FTA • Comments on Chapter 3 – Driving Roads Draft • On page 65 in the discussion regarding the Crossing Plan, how are short term mid-term and long term defined? How many years timeframe for each? (Clarification of the timeline was noted in the text.) • Map 3.3 needs to be updated. (This has been updated.) • Map 3.4 should include definitions for Federal Truck Routes and State Truck routes in Iowa and Class I and Class II Truck Routes in Illinois. (There is no simple definition for IL truck route classes, they are based on specific dimensions and weight limits. This link will be provided on the map: http://www.idot.illinois.gov/Assets/uploads/files/IDOT-Forms/ OPER/OPER%20753.pdf. Federal vs State truck routes in Iowa are determined by which jurisdiction the road falls under.)
Page A-67 Appendix A
2-1-16 Bechtel FTA Comments on Chapter 4 – Today’s Passenger Transportation Draft • Page 133: This % can lead to targets PMs; 60% for 2020 for example (This will be kept in mind for the next plan and considered as part of the Performance Measures Addendum as Federal guidance is developed..) • Page 133: Need to add River bend Transit to Urban Transit Narrative. (River Bend Transit, like the fixed-route systems, is included as a subheading under Urban Transit. Passenger data for RBT was not included in the fixed-route total because some trips do not take place in the urban area.) • Page 133: Proposed Network Map 4.2 – What year?- As with roads 2016-2045 To modify map. • Page 139: Trends since 2005 can be used to formulate targets for future years. Targets can be quantitative or percent- age. (Will be used in future plans.) • Table 4.1: Transit Summary is out of place. Should be before Bettendorf Transit Summary (Revised). • Map 4.4: Larger circle boarding’s are hard to determine actual boarding location. Maybe have centroid for these? – Checking with mapping staff. Map 4.5: 216 is an odd integer for scaling for boardings Checking with mapping staff. • 148: Just like for each of the systems, would be nice to have map of “The Loop!” (The Loop route is shown in Map 4.1, but we did not receive boarding data for the Loop.) • 149: Would be good to show map of Intercity carrier hubs and Intercity routes through the QC Metro. (The loca- tions of the intercity bus terminals are discussed in the TDP and coincide with fixed-route transfer stations, namely the Ground Transportation Center in Davenport and Centre Station in Moline.) 150: Need to add narrative and map of the rail station project (old sears building) that rec’d (wrecked?) $10 million of TIGER II funding. (The station is shown on Map 4.2 as the “Proposed Passenger Rail Station.” Short discussion has been added regarding the new station.) • 155: “Other Transit Needs” title should be changed to “Additional Passenger Transportation Tomorrow Needs” (Change has been made to “Additional Future Passenger Transportation Needs.”) • 156: Map 4.5 listed under “Transit Priority Corridors” is actually MetroLINK’s boardings map. Need to have transit priority corridors map inserted. (Changed to indicate Map 4.2) • 157: was looking for discussion re: the channel cat ferry service. Nice to have this narrative plus mapping CC routes and ridership. (Discussion of Channel Cat service and ridership is located under MetroLINK’s profile. Locations of ) 2-1-16 Bechtel FTA • Chapter 5 – Multipurpose Trails and Pedestrian Network • Page 159: Title does not include on street bike lanes. Suggest renaming to: “ Bicycle and pedestrian transportation” (The title of the chapter has been changed to reflect this.) • 159: [On road traffic fatality rates among bicyclists and pedestrians] are these rates trending up like national? (There is not enough credible data to draw temporal conclusions in only the UZA.) • 159: [overall comment] need to include bikes on buses and bike racks/lockers at transit centers (Added section under “Multipurpose Trails and Bicycle Network.”) • 161: [recreational cyclists spending generates direct and indirect impacts of 364.8 million to state of iowa] is this figure $364.8 million annual? (Yes, it is annually. Clarified in the chapter text.) • Map 5.1: Suggest title change: “Bicycle Facilities” Map includes on-street but title says trails and greenways • Map 5.1: Hard to determine pink and yellow demarcations, don’t see blue Map 5.2: Have bike lanes but titles trail counts. Any counts for bike lanes? (Our trail counters are not able to accurately count users of bike lanes. Our counters are passive infrared counters that pick up the heat signatures of objects moving in front of the beam. In the case of on-road bicycle lanes, this would most likely include vehicles driving passed the sensor. 2-1-16 Bechtel FTA Chapter 6 – Moving Freight and the Economy • Page 181: using the “lens of system of performance” could lead to performance measures and targets in your future addendum and PMS after the planning rates come out. • 185: any future airport freight expansions plans for QC and Davenport airports?. Only a runway extension at the DVN. No land area expansions expected. • 186: might be a good idea to provide definitions of FRA Class 1 and class 2 RRs. Will call out in an explanation box with how these are defined. • 187: In addition to the Davenport Facility; any other intermodal container facilities planned? Particularly since it is stated that trend is for regional container facilities Note port facility being studied in Muscatine, south of the QC metro area and within the Bi-State Region. • 196: what are the plans for the 8 bottlenecks above? Pages 199-201 do give improvements; including for all 8 above? Discussed generally in text. 2-1-16 Bechtel FTA Chapter 7 – Projects and Price Tags • Page 204: for page 204 and 206 include FTA discretionary new [starts] if wish to apply for streetcar, lightrail and BRT Bus rapid transit is noted as needing additional study. While FTA does have these types of programs, historically in our analysis they have not be utilized. Text noting that the list is not all inclusive was added, as well as a note about the authorization of the FAST act which also provides new sources of funds. • Table 7.1: Now eligible under 5307 (JARC) and 5310 (NF) Table 7.1 is intended to provide a historical summary of programmed funds and does not address eligibility of JARC and NF projects. For the purposes of revenue projections, each project is categorized by project justification. For transit projects, there are three categories: Capital, Operations, and Planning. • Table 7.1: Need to take out transit stimulus (This was a historical summary of programmed funds which is why transit stimulus was captured.) • 206: May wish to include discretionary new starts if wish to establish BRT corridors Noted and addressed as dis- cussed in the first bullet of this section. • 207: [61% of revenue towards maintenance of bus replacements and ongoing operations of the system] what about maintenance and transit facilities (Language was added to indicate the same percentage of revenue goes toward maintenance and transit facilities.) 2-1-16 Bechtel FTA Appendix A • Tremendous Outreach- Make sure we give you a “commendation” at cert review for your LRTP outreach effort
A-68 Page Appendix A
2-3-16 Tunnicliff Hilltop Noted reconstruction of I-80 Mississippi River Crossing, along with the river crossing between Bettendorf and East Moline as representative of Mississippi Parkway Commission. Front burner issue – extending 46th Street (Tremont to Eastern), Inquired about two-way conversions on 3rd and 4th Street, Davenport beyond the long term plan, and Brady and Harrison Streets, Davenport related to road diets, south of Central Park to downtown, as suggested in Davenport in Motion? (Referred this inquiry to the City of Davenport for reference in the planning process.) Inquired on provisions for bike trail extensions along US67 through Scott County, north to Clinton and south to Muscatine. (These continue to be in the plans for the MRT.) 3-3-16 Taylor Quad Cities • Two major national trial networks, the 6,800-mile coast-to-coast American Discovery Trail(ADT) and the Headwa- Convention & ters-to-the-Gulf Mississippi River Trail (MRT), a National Millennium Trail, interest in the Quad Cities. The trails also Visitors Bureau connect the 500-mile Grand Illinois Trail spanning Illinois from east to west and the 65-mile Great River Trail traveling north to south from the Quad Cities to Savanna along the Illinois side of the Mississippi River. The expanse of this trail development illustrates the significant local, regional and national trail development; the need for federal funding for trails; and the need to retain this source of funding. Efforts are being made for Congress to include the ADT in the National Trails System. • The Quad Cities is at the crossroads of two national trail systems, the Mississippi River Trail, a north • south trail along the Mississippi River from the Twin Cities to New Orleans and the American Discovery Trail, travers- ing the United States from Pacific to Atlantic. Trail development has the dual benefit of providing for transporta- tion alternatives and increasing economic impact. The greater connectivity of a trail system enhances the ability of residents and visitors to use the system for work, recreation, and shopping. This reduced the burden on roadways and provides for healthy activity. • The Quad City Health Initiative has launched a new Be Healthy QC initiative which includes a new trail website, www.qctrails.org, which allows users to search for trails by location, type and length. • The Quad Cities has become the national headquarters of the American Discovery Trail by means of a memo of understanding between the Quad Cities Convention and Visitors Bureau and the American • Discovery Trail Society. Additionally, the City of Colona and Friends of the Hennepin Canal have • proposed a pilot program for boat tours on the Hennepin Canal (which is part of the American Discovery Trail). Friends of the Hennepin Canal has proposed to construct a boat if an operator can be found for tours from Lock 29 at the Rock River to 1.3 miles inland to the first culvert on the canal. 3-7-16 Bechtel FTA Appendix C • The discussion of where transit needs to be expanded to meet EJ related needs was good. What needs to be added is the statement that the quality of transit vehicles and transit infrastructure (stops, benches, etc.) will be the same for all social demographics areas in the Quad Cities transit service area. Equal service and equal amenities within the transit system is also a major EJ analysis factor. Added a similar statement within the paragraph. Recognized the importance of quality and equal transit infrastructure in addition to transit services. 2-1-16 Bechtel FTA Addendum / Appendix C • C-1: CMP- Very important. Consider this being a chapter in LRTP (maybe after roadway network) or a stand alone document referenced by the LRTP • C-2: Where is MAP-21 • C-8: [step 4: performance measure] Can lead to targets to attain • C-15: [In August 2009… 2005-2009…] Needs to be Updated • C-16: 2010-2011… Needs to be Updated • Table C-4: out of date; need more recent runs • C-17: [increase the number of routes and/or service hours by 5% in the next 5 years] Is this still good? • C-18: [Second objective to increase the frequency of the top 3 routes] Still applicable or need updating? • C-18: Transit part of CMP is in need of updating 2-3-16 Tunnicliff Hilltop Campus Chapter 5 – Multipurpose Trails and Pedestrian Network Village • Are there to be provisions for extension of bike trails along Hwy 67 through Scott County, connecting them to both Clinton and Muscatine Counties? (Making connections to Clinton and Muscatine Counties are noted under “Mobility Alternatives Today.”) 3-2-16 Burgstrum Scott County Discussed grading and paving along Indiana Avenue/205th Street from East Bettendorf City Limits to Holland Street at West LeClaire City Limits. The road segment is currently classified as a local road. The project will need further study to evaluate the reclassification to major collector, the cost of right of way, grading and paving. It is not anticipated to be a project in the next five years. Include project in Chapter 7 as a project requiring additional study. Revise Table 7.8 and Map 7.3 to include the project. Note revision in text. 3-3-16 Taylor Visit Quad Chapter 4: Notes Cities • Two major national trial networks, the 6,800-mile coast-to-coast American Discovery Trail(ADT) and the Headwa- ters-to-the-Gulf Mississippi River Trail (MRT), a National Millennium Trail, interest in the Quad Cities. The trails also connect the 500-mile Grand Illinois Trail spanning Illinois from east to west and the 65-mile Great River Trail traveling north to south from the Quad Cities to Savanna along the Illinois side of the Mississippi River. The expanse of this trail development illustrates the significant local, regional and national trail development; the need for federal funding for trails; and the need to retain this source of funding. Efforts are being made for Congress to include the ADT in the National Trails System. (Note added regarding efforts in Congress. Discussion of the MRT and the Great River Trail under “Mobility Alternatives Today.”) • The Quad Cities is at the crossroads of two national trail systems, the Mississippi River Trail, a north south trail along the Mississippi River from the Twin Cities to New Orleans and the American Discovery Trail, traversing the United States from Pacific to Atlantic. Trail development has the dual benefit of providing for transportation alternatives and increasing economic impact. The greater connectivity of a trail system enhances the ability of residents and visitors to use the system for work, recreation, and shopping. This reduced the burden on roadways and provides for healthy activity. (These points are discussed in varying sections of the chapter: discussion of the ADT under “Mobility Alterna- tives Today” and the benefits of the bicycle and pedestrian system under “Local Impact.”.)
Page A-69 Appendix A
• The Quad City Health Initiative has launched a new Be Healthy QC initiative which includes a new trail website, www.qctrails.org, which allows users to search for trails by location, type and length. (This was mentioned under the “Pedestrians and Sidewalks” and “Mobility Alternatives Tomorrow” sections.) • The Quad Cities has become the national headquarters of the American Discovery Trail by means of a memo of understanding between the Quad Cities Convention and Visitors Bureau and the American Discovery Trail Society. Additionally, the City of Colona and Friends of the Hennepin Canal have proposed a pilot program for boat tours on the Hennepin Canal (which is part of the American Discovery Trail). Friends of the Hennepin Canal has proposed to construct a boat if an operator can be found for tours from Lock 29 at the Rock River to 1.3 miles inland to the first culvert on the canal. (Sections added.) 3-7-16 Bechtel FTA Thanks for the opportunity to review the EJ Appendix (Appendix C). The discussion of where transit needs to be expanded to meet EJ related needs was good. What needs to be added is the statement that the quality of transit vehicles and transit infrastructure (stops, benches, etc.) will be the same for all social demographic areas in the Quad Cities transit service area. Equal service and equal amenities within the transit system is also a major EJ analysis factor. Lack of equal service has led to lawsuits in LA (bus vs light rail service) and Harlem (prevalence of maintenance/storage facilities in low income minority areas. Will address in text as referenced. 3-22-16 Grove Public I want to propose a bicycle path opportunity using the Blackhawk rail spur in west Davenport from Schmidt road up to Clark St and possibly farther. Most of the old right of way is not owned by home owners according to assessors records. It could connect Sunderbrook [sic] park to the riverfront trail. More possibilities are awaiting in Muscatine using Telegraph road. Thanks for your interest. In sharing the inquiry with the City of Davenport, we received the following response: “The City of Davenport had considered using the Blackhawk spur as a bikeway upon learning of the railroad plan to abandon a part of this trackage. We found that all of the old rights of way west of Clark Street has been in private ownership for some time, and if used for a bikeway would need to be purchased from individual owners. The railroad is retaining ownership and operation on the trackage south of Rockingham Road to serve as tail track for service to Purina. Only the section between Rockingham Road and Clark Street would be available for a bikeway. There are several industrial operations next to and crossing the existing railroad right of way. Additionally there is a trestle bridge over Blackhawk Creek in this section which is in bad shape and would need to be replaced for bikeway use. Also the mid-block crossings of several streets could be a safety concern. Because of the relatively short length available, the safety and cost concerns, and the availability of alternate routes on existing streets, it was decided not pursue the use of this abandoned railroad right of way for use as a bikeway. For these reasons, city staff would also recommend that it not be added to the current plan, or considered for the future plan.” 3-28-16 Kennelly Public “I may too late in submitting my thoughts about the future transportation plan for the QC metro area but nonetheless here are my thoughts. I would love to see a transportation system similar to cities in England, Europe, and Scandinavia, especially a system like that in Strasbourg, France. Strasbourg has a metro population similar to that of the QC but has an exemplary public transportation system. (see http://www.en.strasbourg.eu/en/discover-the-city/key-number/strasbourg- sets-the-example-in-transport/the-tram-the-largest-network-in-france/). I envision a similar system for the QC that would parallel the major traffic thoroughfares we have (trams running parallel to the John Deere Expressway corridor, the I74 corridor, the Avenue of the Cities corridor, River Drive corridor in IL and IA, Locust Street corridor, Kimberly Road corridor, and 53rd street corridor). These could be tied in with either trams or buses on major north south streets in the QC (e.g., 9th street RI, 17th st RI, 30th street RI, 38th street RI, 7th street Mol, 41st street Mol, 53rd street Mol, 7th street EM, and similar connections on the Iowa side. The tram system could be constructed in phases beginning with John Deere Expressway and I74 corridor and then the other systems later. If you have been to England, Europe, or the Scandinavian countries and used their excellent public transportation networks you discover that at each tram stop economic activity is created with small and large business outlets to serve the traveling public. It makes for a vibrant urban area which the QC really needs.” Will bring to the attention of the Transportation Technical Committee and local transit managers as implementation of the plan moves forward.
A-70 Page