HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Attachments - 8/26/2019City of Waterloo
Finance Committee Preliminary Draft Invoice Report
For itugust 26 2019 Approval
Finance Committee Accounts Payable Open Invoice Report Total
As of Friday, August 23, 2019
EFT Transactions:
3,084,552.84
Add: Wellmark Weekly Claims 172,143.59
3,256,696.43
Workers Compensation Issued by TPA
Housing Authority Housing Assistance EFT's
Housing Authority Housing Assistance EFT's
Payroll
9,249.79
3,561.05
381,439.32
Bill Payment Total - Monday, August 26, 2019
3,650,946.59
Payment to Council members or related entities:
Oval P&wv1�rs
SIDEWALK INFILL AND MISSING SIDEWALK SEGMENT POLICY
The City of Waterloo Complete Streets
Committee has identified the need for the
creation of the Sidewalk Infill and Missing
Sidewalk Segment Policy. This report defines
the strategy that the Complete Streets
Committee developed to categorize and score
the sidewalk infill and missing sidewalk areas
throughout the City of Waterloo.
SIDEWALK INFILL
A sidewalk infill is a length of sidewalk that is
greater than 150 feet, but less than 600 feet in
length. As the missing sidewalk segment, the
sidewalk infill also depends on the connection
between existing sidewalks. Sidewalk infills can
be less cost effective and can require a more
detailed design to accommodate difficult grades
or obstructions.
As seen in the picture below, sidewalk infills can
have multiple driveways, trees, power poles,
and grade issues. Construction of a sidewalk
infill can be extensive consisting of construction
of driveway approaches as well as replacing
curb and gutter sections for ADA ramps.
Each sidewalk infill receives a score (as detailed
in the following pages) that takes into account
the constructability, length of the missing
segment, and the overall connectivity achieved.
MISSING SIDEWALK SEGMENTS
A missing sidewalk segment is a stretch of
sidewalk that is Tess than 150 feet in length. The
criteria is that the sidewalk connects, at both
ends, by two existing sidewalks. Sidewalk
construction of this type is beneficial to the City
of Waterloo due to the minimal length of
SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN
construction and the possibility of connecting to
an overall sidewalk network.
As depicted below, most missing sidewalk
segments result from undeveloped Tots. If a
connection is constructed, the subdivision or
area, would gain connectivity to the
surrounding areas.
Constructing missing sidewalk segments can be
a cost effective approach to connecting large
areas of pedestrian traffic. Each sidewalk infill
receives a score (as detailed in the following
pages) in which surrounding connectivity is
taken into account.
PROJECT BUDGETING AND SELECTION
Each year, the City of Waterloo Staff receives a
recommended project list with associated
construction costs for the Sidewalk Infill and
Missing Sidewalk Segment Policy. The selection
areas are evaluated in conjunction with:
• Annual Street Reconstruction/Overlay
Programs
• Annual Sidewalk Repair Program
PAGE 1
SIDEWALK INFILL AND MISSING SIDEWALK SEGMENT POLICY
ANNUAL STREET RECONSTRUCTION/OVERLAY
PROGRAMS/ANNUAL SIDEWALK REPAIR
PROGRAM
The Complete Streets Committee will analyze
the Annual Street Reconstruction, Annual
Asphalt Overlay Program, and the Annual
Sidewalk Repair Program to determine if any
sidewalks in those areas are viable candidates
for the funding available. The missing sidewalk
segments or sidewalk infills in the annual
program areas receive scores. The
determination for the funding is derived from
the scoring system illustrated in the following
pages. The score for each missing segment or
sidewalk infill is accompanied by a cost estimate
that is compared to the available funding set
aside in the Capital Improvement Plan set forth
by the City of Waterloo. The City of Waterloo
will be responsible for 100% of the design and
construction costs associated with this policy.
After construction, the adjacent property owner
is responsible for snow removal and repairs to
the sidewalk just as any other property owners
within the city.
SELECTION PROCESS
Once the scores and estimates are developed
and the budget is reviewed, the Complete
Streets Committee makes their
recommendations to the City Engineer and the
Waterloo City Council for their review.
The selection process looks at the overall
sidewalk network and analyze the connectivity
that each proposed project achieves. The
Complete Streets Committee's goal with this
policy is to find cost effective ways to improve
pedestrian traffic connectivity.
SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN
SCORING CRTIERIA
DEVELOPMENT OF SCORING CRITERIA
The Complete Streets Committee and the
Complete Streets Steering Committee discussed
and reviewed different City processes and
developed three main criteria that fit the goals
of the City of Waterloo. The three criteria are as
follows:
• Pedestrian Use
• Pedestrian Safety
• Ease of Implementation
The scoring criteria adds up to a point total of
100. Pedestrian Use accounts for40 points,
Pedestrian Safety accounts for 20 points, and
Ease of Implementation accounts for the
remaining 40 points.
The following page illustrates the scoring flow
chart:
PAGE 2
SIDEWALK INFILL AND MISSING SIDEWALK SEGMENT POLICY
Pedestrian Use (40)
Pedestrian Safety (20)
Ease of Implementation
(40)
SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN
On an Existing Route (5)
Not On an Existing Route (0)
Y. Mile (20)
Mile (15)
% Mile (10)
1 Mile (5)
1 Mile + (0)
�n
No Sidewalk on Either Side (10)
Sidewalk on One Side — Continuous Path (5)
Sidewalk on One Side — No Continuous Path (0)
Neighborhood Acceptance
Yes (5)
No (0)
Arterial (10)
Collector (5)
Local (5)
45 mph + (10)
25-45 mph (5)
0-25 mph (5)
Support (5)
Neutral (0)
Opposition (-5)
r
High — Easy install (20)
Medium (10)
Low (5)
Very Low (0)
•l
0-150' (15)
151'-300' (5)
301'-600' (2)
600' + (0)
PAGE 3
SIDEWALK INFILL AND MISSING SIDEWALK SEGMENT POLICY
PEDESTRIAN USE
The first criteria is pedestrian use. This criterion
analyzes the parts of the sidewalk system in the
City of Waterloo that can be connected to
enhance the pedestrian use. The goal of this
category is to optimize the completion of
pedestrian paths with high amounts of foot
traffic.
This category has a total score of 40 points and
is separated into four subcategories as follows:
• On a Bus Route
• Proximity to Generator
• Connectivity
• Evidence of Pedestrian Use
ON A BUS ROUTE
The City of Waterloo's bus system is an
important mode of transportation to many
people in the City. People who chose to use
public transportation need a way to travel from
their homes to the bus stop locations. If a
missing segment or a sidewalk infill is along a
bus route, it is a strong indication of pedestrian
use. The following table depicts the scoring for
this category:
ON A BUS ROUTE
Bus Route Criteria
Points
On an Existing Route
5
Not on an Existing Route
0
PROXIMITY TO GENERATOR
A generator is defined as a facility that provides
an important destination for pedestrian traffic
such as schools, event centers, etc.
Each missing segment or sidewalk infill location
is scored by how far away the location is from a
generator. This category is broken down into
five subcategories. The categories are 1/4 mile, Y2
mile,'/ mile, 1 mile, and 1 mile +. The following
SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN
table indicates the point breakdown for this
category.
PROXIMITY TO GENERATOR
Proximity to Generator
Criteria
Points
% Mile
20
1/2 Mile
15
Mile
10
1 Mile
5
1 Mile +
0
CONNECTIVITY
Connectivity is an important subcategory for
the Complete Streets Committee because it
looks at how smaller sidewalk projects can
connect to larger areas of the community.
Connectivity was broken down into three
subcategories consisting of; no sidewalk on
either side, sidewalk on one side (continuous
path), and sidewalk on one side (no continuous
path). Continuous path means that the sidewalk
infill or missing sidewalk segment would
complete a direct route for pedestrian traffic.
The scoring breakdown is represented in the
following table:
PROXIMITY TO GENERATOR
Connectivity Criteria
Points
No Sidewalk on Either
Side
10
Sidewalk on One Side
(Continuous Path)
5
Sidewalk on One Side (No
Continuous Path)
0
PAGE 4
SIDEWALK INFILL AND MISSING SIDEWALK SEGMENT POLICY
EVIDENCE OF PEDESTRIAN USE
This category is intended to take into account
existing pedestrian traffic movements
regardless of the existence of sidewalk.
Evidence of pedestrian use is a good indicator
that pedestrian traffic uses the route to get to
their destination. Worn down grass or a dirt
path indicates a pedestrian need for a sidewalk
at that location. The following table illustrates
the point breakdown:
Evidence of Pedestrian Use
Evidence of Pedestrian
Use Criteria
Points
Yes
5
No
0
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
The second criteria is pedestrian safety. The
Steering Committee identified two categories
that score streets with higher vehicular traffic
volumes and higher vehicular traffic speeds at a
higher point value. These categories are as
follows:
• Roadway classifications
• Speed limit
The Iowa DOT has classified the streets
throughout the City of Waterloo and this
information is used in the determination of the
classifications.
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION
The classification system developed by the Iowa
Department of Transportation is used to
determine if a street being analyzed is an
arterial, collector, or local street. The
classifications are based of traffic volumes and
traffic patterns throughout the City of
Waterloo. By understanding the volumes of
traffic and traffic patterns, Complete Streets
can put an emphasis on these areas to create
safer pedestrian pathways along higher traffic
streets. The following table reveals the scoring
for this category:
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION
Roadway Classification
Criteria
Points
Arterial
10
Collector
5
Local
5
SPEED LIMIT
Speed limit is also an emphasis for the
Complete Streets Committee. The Committee
correlates higher traffic speeds with pedestrian
safety concerns. The goal is to construct
sidewalks along higher speed streets to increase
safety as pedestrians travel from one
destination to the next. The following table
depicts out the points for the speed limit
subcategory:
SPEED LIMIT
Speed Limit Criteria
Points
45 mph+
10
25-45 mph
5
0-25 mph
5
SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN
PAGE 5
SIDEWALK INFILL AND MISSING SIDEWALK SEGMENT POLICY
EASE OF IMPLEMENTATION
The Complete Streets Committee developed a
scoring systems composed of neighborhood
acceptance, constructability, and missing
sidewalk segment/sidewalk infill length that
correlate to the ease of implementation of the
sidewalk construction. This category was
derived from the Committee's idea to install
simple, cost effective, sidewalk segments that
create connectivity throughout a certain area.
The ease of implementation directly correlates
with how many sidewalk locations can be
constructed within the allotted budget.
NEIGHBORHOOD ACCEPTANCE
Neighborhood acceptance is an important
factor to the Complete Streets Committee and
the Community. The evaluation of this category
is broken down into three subcategories:
• Support
• Neutral
• Opposition
Each missing sidewalk segment or sidewalk infill
is impacted by the number of community
inquiries that have been made about a select
location. If no inquiries are made about a select
location, that location will be viewed as neutral.
The scoring for this category is as follows:
NEIGHBORHOOD ACCEPTANCE
Neighborhood
Acceptance Criteria
Points
Support
5
Neutral
0
Opposition
-5
CONSTRUCTABILITY
With the ease of implementation goal in mind,
the Complete Streets Committee created the
constructability category. Constructability
focuses on each location and takes into account
all the design aspects involved with each
location. Some considerations will be trees,
driveways, power poles, etc. Constructability is
divided into High (easy install), Medium, Low,
and Very Low (very difficult install). The point
breakdown for this category is as follows:
CONSTRUCTABILITY
Constructability Criteria
Points
High (Easy Install)
20
Medium
10
Low
5
Very Low
0
MISSING SEGMENT/SIDEWALK INFILL LENGTH
The length of the sidewalk project is also a key
factor in the cost effectiveness of a missing
segment/sidewalk infill project. The following
table depicts the point breakdown for the
length of the missing segment/sidewalk infills:
MISSING SEGMENT/SIDEWALK INFILL LENGTH
Criteria
Points
0 —150'
15
151' — 300'
5
301' — 600'
2
600' +
0
The 0-150' category is viewed as one half of a
city block, the 151'-300' is one city block, and
301'-600' is two city blocks.
SIDRATALK MASTER PLAN
PAGE 5
SIDEWALK INFILL AND MISSING SIDEWALK SEGMENT POLICY
COST ESTIMATES
The cost estimates developed and presented to
the City Engineer and City Council are based on
a linear foot cost of construction. A linear foot
cost will be developed or reviewed each year
depending on the width of sidewalk and the
constructability level.
CONCLUSION
Overall, this policy assists in analyzing sidewalk
needs in the Annual Street Reconstruction
Program, the Annual Asphalt Overlay Program,
and the Annual Sidewalk Repair Program. Each
street or zone in these annual projects is
analyzed for missing sidewalk segments or
sidewalk infill locations. Once the locations are
identified, the scoring algorithm provides the
Complete Streets Committee a ranking of
locations with the highest scores. The Complete
Streets Committee selects a sample group to
receive cost estimates based on the scoring
algorithm. The budgeted money set aside in the
Capital Improvements Plan is reviewed and the
project locations that fit within that budget are
selected. After the selection process, the
projects are presented to the City Engineer and
the City Council for approval.
SIDEWALK MASTER PLAN PAGE 7
CITY ' F 4 TERL "MITE STREETS