The document provides a 3-page summary report of a Somatic Transportation Assessment Record (STAR) conducted for the City of Onawa, Iowa. The STAR assessed the condition of all public sidewalks, paths, and trails within city limits to create a record for future reference and improvements. It found that over 1/3 of properties in the city lack any pedestrian infrastructure and 853 ramps are needed to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The average condition ratings for most streets exceeded 3.0 on a scale of 0-3, indicating many sidewalks are in poor condition. The report identifies establishing a Somatic Transportation Utility as the best opportunity for funding improvements, as it would provide an annual revenue of $51,
3. STAR Report
Page 2 of 94
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTIONS
Background 3
STAR Report Defined 3
Residential Comments 4
Funding Opportunities 5
STAR Summary Findings 5
Opportunities 6
Repeal Chapter 136 6
Compliance with Chapter 136 6
Somatic Transportation Utility 7
Spreadsheets Data Base 8
Culmination 11
TABLES
STAR Summary 5
Somatic Transportation Utility Opportunity 7
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Onawa Municipal Code Chapter 136 11
Appendix B: Iowa State Code Sidewalk Plan 17
Appendix C: STAR Spreadsheets 24
4. STAR Report
Page 3 of 94
Background
On January 27, 2015 the City of Onawa (City), Monona County, Iowa City Council applied to participate in the
Community Visioning Program sponsored through Trees Forever, the Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT), and
Iowa State University (ISU). This program conducts local research to better understand what the community is in
need of or wants in regards to bicycle and pedestrian transportation. The program prepares a document that
demonstrates the possibilities with improved pedestrian and bicycle transportation for a community. This involved
community members through a Community Visioning Steering Committee (Committee), surveys and focus groups.
Further research gathered included, but was not limited to, water sheds, drainage, and local destination locations.
During the Committee meetings, committee members learned almost immediately that this was not a program just
about trails, but a comprehensive picture of the City’s bicycle and pedestrian transportation barriers and assets.
The City has a current sidewalk ordinance, Chapter 136 (see appendix A), which covers areas such as specifications or standards, owner
responsibility, debris (including grass clippings), permit requirements, and responsibility for maintenance. Chapter 136 further includes details of
Council’s ability to force the construction or repair work of any sidewalk. In the late 1970s to the early 1980s the City undertook a sidewalk development
or improvement project using a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) the City received. There was still an associated cost to the City and its
residents that benefitted from the improvements, even though it met with residential resistance due to their individual costs. According to current Iowa
Code (see Appendix B) the City can adopt a sidewalk program that addresses issues such as maintenance, repair, replacement and installation, which
could provide a sound long-term plan for the community. These plans should address the requirements for maintaining sidewalks, how and when the
city will inspect sidewalks, and how the program will be funded. Such programs can be funded by the city, by property owners directly or through special
assessments on the property owner’s taxes that can be repaid over a ten year payback.
STAR Report Defined
Due to the above facts gathered regarding current Iowa Code, current city ordinance, a participant in the
Committee, a City public employee, and a devoted “walker”, and to find a real comprehensive approach to understanding
the City’s pedestrian and bicycle transportation needs and wants; the City Administrator completed this Somatic
Transportation Assessment Record (STAR) Report. The City Administrator was and is not an engineer or somatic
transportation expert. This assessment began at the end of June and ran through the early days of August in 2015. The
purpose behind the STAR was to ensure the City understands the current conditions of pedestrian, bicycle, or wheelchair transportation. Therefore this
report will begin with the definition behind STAR from the Merriam-Webster online dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/):
• Somatic: (1) of, relating to, or affecting the body.
• Transportation: the act or process of moving people or things from one place to another or a way of traveling from one place to another place.
• Assessment: the act of making a judgment about something or an idea or opinion about something.
• Record: is to write something down so that it can be used or seen again in the future.
5. STAR Report
Page 4 of 94
Hence, with the above definitions kept in mind, this report refines those to reflect the use within STAR as:
• Somatic: by use of a physical motion from or affecting the body: either walking, running, or by use of a mechanical device under manual
operation such as: a bicycle, stroller, walker, or wheelchair (both manual and battery operated).
• Transportation: the act or process of moving individuals from one place to another by use of somatic transportation: sidewalk, trail, and/or
path.
• Assessment: the act of making a judgment about the condition of public somatic transportation, sidewalk, trail, and/or path.
• Record: documenting the current somatic transportation, sidewalk, trail, and/or path condition for future reference, correction, and use.
The above definition can be further refined to simply state the STAR Report is an assessment of somatic transportation documenting the current
condition of City sidewalks, paths, and/or trails for future reference, correction, and use. Therefore, the purpose of the STAR report is to create a record
of the current condition of all of the somatic transportation within the City limits that are available for public use. Within this report sidewalks, trails,
and/or paths will be used interchangeably with somatic transportation and one term will reflect the others. STAR did not assess access somatic
transportation to businesses, public entities, or residential properties that were attached to or adjacent to the primary somatic transportation of the
property, such as the sidewalk from the curb to the public somatic transportation, from the somatic transportation to the residential front door, a
business’s access sidewalk from the public sidewalk. The public portion of the sidewalk for purposes of the STAR are those portions of sidewalks
intended to be used as an intermediary sidewalk for an individual to use as transportation through or to the respective property. These assessments
then will become a record that is useable to the City to retain the conditions of the sidewalks and/or trails by useable spreadsheets where the data can
be modified when a portion of a property’s sidewalk is improved, added to, or reconstructed in part or wholly.
Residential Comments
During the assessment of STAR we had the opportunity to discuss the conditions of the somatic transportation
from the Community Visioning program as well as during the actual assessments. Residents understand the need for a
good condition sidewalk upon their property as well as throughout the community. Many stated in retrospect that they
understood their sidewalk was in ill repair and needed some attention. This would be followed up with the comment that
they do not have the money to install or maintain their sidewalk. Further comments included the question of why
sidewalks were needed upon their property since their neighbors across the street had a sidewalk or that people walk in
the street.
Although these comments are valid, walkers from the community mentioned barriers to somatic transportation
and some of those comments included the condition of current sidewalks, animals “protecting their property” and sidewalks ending at property lines in
the middle of the street forcing them to walk across the verge (the area between the curb and property line). The photo to the left shows a pedestrians
walking on a grass filled sidewalk. Other barrier comments included vehicles parked across the sidewalk, grass clippings upon the sidewalk, and low
hanging trees. The sidewalk condition comments demonstrates the need for an improved somatic transportation system within the City and a severe
need for financial assistance.
6. STAR Report
Page 5 of 94
Funding Opportunities
A number of funding
opportunities are available for the City
to consider a sidewalk improvement
plan to address their current
condition. These funding
opportunities will be discussed in
depth within the Community Visioning final report. Some of these
grant opportunities include Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG), Safe Routes to Schools, and other grants through the
United States Department of Agriculture, the Iowa Economic
Development Agency (IEDA) and the Iowa Department of Natural
Resources (IDNR).
STAR Summary Findings
A review of the Iowa Code, the
Community Visioning draft version
and their collected data, and the STAR
data collected derives the conclusion
that the somatic transportation within
the City needs improvement. This
STAR Report can be used as a step in producing a somatic
transportation plan in accordance to the Iowa Code along with the
Community Visioning final product. The current City statistics cover
property encompasses over five (5) square miles or just under 3,340
acres of agricultural land (approximately 1,770 acres), developable
land, and pre-existing developed land; including both residential
and commercial properties. The STAR Summary chart to the right
represents the findings of the assessment portion of this STAR
Report.
Labeled within the STAR Summary Table’s first column is
“Street”. Each North to South bound street is represented with the
East to West streets used as connecting routes. The connecting
routes from alley to the adjoining street statistics are kept with the
north to south street information. From the STAR Summary Chart
you can determine that within the City there are approximately
STAR SUMMARY
Street Prop. Com.
No
Trans Ramps Low High Avg
1st 33 4 18 9 0.00 5.50 2.52
2nd 75 6 29 65 0.00 5.10 2.30
3rd 91 2 0 61 0.00 5.00 2.03
4th 93 3 17 57 0.00 6.60 2.40
5th 106 0 24 73 0.00 5.80 2.59
6th 100 1 6 51 0.00 6.60 2.65
7th 73 9 14 39 0.00 5.40 2.55
8th 73 21 24 42 0.00 5.00 2.60
9th 122 43 30 53 0.00 5.50 2.50
10th 137 65 29 46 0.00 5.80 2.44
11th 100 8 9 43 0.00 7.70 2.75
12th 129 1 29 44 0.00 5.60 2.61
13th 118 5 24 46 0.00 5.40 2.77
14th 108 0 49 48 0.40 5.30 2.92
15th 116 7 69 82 0.00 5.40 2.69
16th/Sun 34 0 27 14 2.40 4.80 3.08
17th 26 1 24 12 2.40 3.00 2.95
18th 4 3 4 4 3.00 3.00 3.00
Elmwood 9 0 9 4 3.00 3.00 3.00
Kingsway 8 0 8 4 3.00 3.00 3.00
Granite 20 0 20 2 3.00 3.00 3.00
Lucas 20 0 14 14 2.40 3.30 2.99
Lucas Pl. 9 0 9 0 3.00 3.00 3.00
Pearl 12 4 12 14 3.00 3.00 3.00
N. Iowa 11 11 11 12 3.00 3.00 3.00
S. Iowa 13 11 13 8 3.00 3.00 3.00
E. Iowa 13 10 13 6 3.00 3.00 3.00
7. STAR Report
Page 6 of 94
1,650 mixed use properties (“Prop.” column), varying in size and dimensions, of which over 200 properties are commercially (“Com.” Column) related
and/or zoned; not including agricultural parcels. Under the “No Trans” column represents that 541 properties in the City do not have any somatic form
of transportation; which is nearly one-third of all city properties. The “Ramps” column represent how many American with Disabilities Act ramps are
needed within the City. This act was adopted by the United States Federal Government on July 26, 1990; a total of 853 ramps are needed.
The next three columns are representative of the low, high and average along a north to south streets. Ratings on the spreadsheets are further
explained in the Spreadsheets Data Base of this report. For brevity, the low and high are indicated by their appropriate columns, and the average is the
rating of all somatic transportation along each respective street. These ratings range from 0, 1, 2, or 3. In the “High” column you will notice that the
high exceeds a 3.00 in most cases. Again, this is further explained in the Spreadsheets Data Base, but it can be stated that this is due to the concept that
a poorly maintained sidewalk is worse than no somatic transportation at all, and this is part of the assessment process used within this STAR Report. In
review the STAR Summary Chart indicates that the City of Onawa and its somatic transportation infrastructure needs to be improved. These findings
also suggest possible opportunities for the City to explore.
Opportunities
Grants are a viable, but limited, resource available to small rural communities
including the City of Onawa. Though grants are becoming more competitive each year with
limited resources from the funding agencies. However, with the limited extent of grants, it
would be in the City’s best interest to pursue these grants to aid in the construction and
rehabilitation of existing somatic transportation. This kept in mind there are a couple of
options to repair the somatic transportation system within the City and they include: repeal
the code, require compliance, or create a utility to assume all responsibility for the
maintenance of the City’s somatic transportation infrastructure.
REPEAL CHAPTER 136
Although it may be the easiest decision to remove the requirement of sidewalks with the repeal of the Onawa Municipal Code Chapter 136
entitled “Sidewalks”, it can also have long term drastic effects against the community’s ability to grow, thrive, and prosper. This could include, but is not
limited to, businesses not locating in the City, businesses leaving the community, a future potential resident choosing not to relocate within the City of
Onawa due to the lack of recreational (somatic transportation) opportunities, etc. By removing the sidewalk requirement, no business or resident would
have the financial impact of having to install or maintain the somatic form of transportation. This means that businesses would no longer have to a
sidewalk leading to their front door, pedestrians would have to walk through grass, weeds, gravel, or dirt to get to the store they need or want to shop
at. Though this opportunity is the least amount of a financial impact to the City and its residents, it is only first to be discussed and carries the most
potential harmful impacts to the City and its future. Although, the City Council should consult with the City Attorney to ensure this is a viable option.
COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 136
This opportunity would actually cost the City the most with limited financial resources and multiple hours of staff time to enforce, due to the
current condition of the City’s somatic transportation. The financial resources would be used by the City Attorney’s office to cite those property owners
not in compliance, time spent on the phone with those cited and possible court time and expenses. This expense would be shared with other City staff
8. STAR Report
Page 7 of 94
members due to their time investment with paperwork, phone conversations with
property owners in an attempt to get their property in compliance, and court
appearances. This is also the most detrimental to owners of property that are at
an intersection, as they do not have to install or maintain a sidewalk for 66 feet.
Corner property owners have to install and maintain a sidewalk for at least 198
feet (66 feet of the main street frontage, plus 124 feet side street frontage and
half of the alley way), plus two ramp installation for the curb transition of the
sidewalk to the street. These increased expenses for a corner lot make this an
unfair disadvantage for nearly one-third (1/3) of the City’s residents. This
opportunity to fix the somatic transportation to come into compliance with the
current code would be the most time consuming and expensive to the residents
and City funds.
SOMATIC TRANSPORTATION UTILITY
The best opportunity for the City is to consider a Somatic Transportation
Utility (STU), based on the assessment portion of this report with the current
sidewalk conditions. This is further based upon the City’s resident’s random
comments regarding the cost of maintaining and/or repairing their individual
sidewalks: “it is unaffordable”. The table to the right depicts possible revenue
generation to reconstruct or to maintain current somatic transportation within the
City limits. The “Utility” column depicts the possible amount the certain street
would fund towards a formation of a STU to care for the City’s somatic
transportation. This is an annual amount, with the total at the bottom of the
column and is based on each property paying a monthly base utility fee of $3.00
(although this is an arbitrary number). Under the “Cons. Fees” are an additional
amount for property owners that currently do not have a form of somatic
transportation, or sidewalk, as required by the current code. This amount is four
(4) times the cost of the STU’s base fee; whatever that fee Council would establish,
but the total in the table to the right is again based on $3.00 per monthly fee;
$12.00 in total for a currently non-compliant sidewalk. It will not cover the entire
cost of the construction or reconstruction of somatic transportation, but is paid
over a ten (10) year period and can be used to match any and all grants obtained
for somatic transportation. Once the ten (10) years have expired their rate would
decrease to the established base utility fee at that time. Pooling these resources is
an opportunity to repair and improve the City’s current somatic transportation
Somatic Transportation Utility Opportunity
Street Utility Cons. Fees Cons. Costs
1st $ 1,332.00 $ 2,160.00 $ 40,000.00
2nd $ 2,916.00 $ 864.00 $ 54,400.00
3rd $ 3,348.00 $ 1,836.00 $ 70,600.00
4th $ 3,456.00 $ 4,428.00 $ 111,100.00
5th $ 3,816.00 $ 5,400.00 $ 136,600.00
6th $ 3,636.00 $ 4,752.00 $ 116,800.00
7th $ 2,952.00 $ 4,428.00 $ 101,200.00
8th $ 3,384.00 $ 4,644.00 $ 104,000.00
9th $ 5,940.00 $ 6,912.00 $ 150,800.00
10th $ 7,272.00 $ 7,128.00 $ 150,900.00
11th $ 3,888.00 $ 5,076.00 $ 117,100.00
12th $ 4,680.00 $ 7,128.00 $ 149,700.00
13th $ 4,428.00 $ 7,128.00 $ 152,400.00
14th $ 3,888.00 $ 8,856.00 $ 178,100.00
15th $ 4,428.00 $ 9,072.00 $ 196,800.00
16th/Sun $ 1,224.00 $ 3,240.00 $ 60,600.00
17th $ 972.00 $ 2,592.00 $ 48,000.00
18th $ 252.00 $ 432.00 $ 9,200.00
Elmwood $ 324.00 $ 972.00 $ 17,700.00
Kingsway $ 288.00 $ 864.00 $ 16,000.00
Granite $ 720.00 $ 2,160.00 $ 35,200.00
Lucas $ 720.00 $ 1,944.00 $ 40,200.00
Lucas Pl. $ 324.00 $ 864.00 $ 13,600.00
Pearl $ 576.00 $ 1,296.00 $ 28,800.00
N. Iowa $ 792.00 $ 1,188.00 $ 25,900.00
S. Iowa $ 864.00 $ 1,404.00 $ 26,900.00
E. Iowa $ 828.00 $ 1,404.00 $ 25,700.00
$ 67,248.00 $98,172.00 $2,178,300.00
9. STAR Report
Page 8 of 94
that is fair to all residents and a benefit to all; property owners, tenants, and visitors.
The final column, “Cons. Costs” is the estimated total investment for current properties within the City to meet the City’s current code for the
sidewalk requirement. Any property with a “Total” score of 2.8 or more, or with any category in the assessment rated at a “3” should be required to
bring their assessment to a reasonable score of a “0” or “1”, or the property owner should agree to the ten (10) year “Cons. Fee”. The construction fee
recommendation is due to the fairness and equity, unless Council believes that it is acceptable for those residents who have not maintained their
sidewalks should pay the same rate as those residents who have maintained their property’s sidewalk. Once all required properties have a form of
somatic transportation, new construction or repaired, the STU fund total could be used to maintain the sidewalk and create a bicycle/trail system
throughout the City after the ten (10) year pay back. New construction on private property should still be required to install somatic transportation
during the development stages of any vertical structural improvement on the property. After the installation of the sidewalk according to the current
code, the STU would then retain all maintenance, repair, and reconstruction of the newly installed somatic transportation. This maintenance can and
should be contracted out to local contractors as much as possible. At no time should the utility funds be used to construct a new somatic transportation
upon a property that is or has been developed; that should be the property owner’s responsibility. A recommended exception to this rule may be that
of any public benefit of trails, paths, or any form of somatic transportation to a destination site: such as Gramm Wetlands, Blue Lake, or other possible
destinations yet to be determined.
If the decision of the Council is to create a STU, it is the recommendation that a further study be conducted to establish a fair rate to cover the
known and possibly discover some unforeseen issues and costs. The STAR report was not created to form a utility, but instead to assess the existing
somatic transportation’s condition, offer a record to maintain the data on the existing infrastructure, and present some opportunities. Again, the
estimated costs were derived from the assessment completed through the end of June through the beginning of August 2015 and individually can be
reviewed through the generated record or spreadsheets in Appendix C.
Spreadsheets Data Base
As mentioned previously, the assessment of the somatic transportation capability within the City is documented using
spreadsheets (see Appendix C) that shall be retained by the City for future reference and updating when a sidewalk is
improved. The condition of existing PCC concrete sidewalks are assessed based upon five types of deterioration. Each
sidewalk is given a rating based on the severity of deficiency. These ratings are based on property frontage of each individually
owned lot in the City, whether the lot has 66 feet of frontage or more along a street or streets: such as a corner lot. Streets
were assessed along the major portion of a street, that major portion in the City of Onawa are north and south directional
streets that are numbered for the most part. The east to west directional streets are included with the north and south
directional street assessments from the alley to the intersection. Streets that have a limited number of properties, residential or commercial, may be
combined with other street assessments within the spreadsheet data base.
Defining the data base is essential to ensure the understanding and future use of the assessed information and the information provided on
each individual spreadsheet is appropriately utilized for years to come. Further the explanation includes how points were assessed under each category
to reach the total impact on somatic transportation. Some assessed categories carry a different weight than others due to the impact severity to
somatic transportation. When applicable, a photo will precede the definition for each column within the Somatic Transportation Spreadsheets
description supplied here below.
10. STAR Report
Page 9 of 94
Address: Each assessed property has an address whether there is a building on it or not. If there is no known address, one is assigned the vacant lot for
purposes of this report and should be amended as an appropriate address is assigned to the lot due to the construction of a new building
upon the lot. Addresses were obtained from the Monona County, Iowa Assessor’s Geographical Information System (GIS) website
(https://mononaia.mygisonline.com/). An address followed by a small star (*) indicates a corner lot that has some form of somatic
transportation along one street but not the other street.
Corner: Corner or intersecting street name; if there is a star (*) after the intersecting street name the property is along the side or adjoining street
between the main street and the alley or approximately where an alley should be located.
C: Commercial property: if a number “1” appears in this column it signifies that the property assessed is a commercial property. This is done for
informational purposes at the time of the STAR report, but can be used for future reference if the City decides to establish a Somatic
Transportation Utility and if the City would implement a higher fee for commercial properties.
Trans: If there is no sidewalk or somatic transportation this will show an "N"; as depicted in the photo to the left
Ramp II: If a corner of the intersecting street has a ramp that runs perpendicular, or down to the intersection
named street, this column will have a “Y” or it will have an “N” if it does not have a ramp. An “N/A” is an indication of a
continuing street. A continuing street means that one side of the street an intersecting street where the other side
continues without a street; otherwise known as a “T” intersection.
Ramp =: If a corner of the intersecting street has a ramp that runs parallel or along the named street on the
spreadsheet, this column will have a “Y” or it will have an “N” if it does not have a ramp. An “N/A” is an indication of a continuing street. A continuing
street means that one side of the street an intersecting street where the other side continues without a street; otherwise known as a “T” intersection.
CB: Corner Break: [1] one or more corner cracks in a sidewalk with minimum impact to somatic transportation; [2]
one (1) or more severe cracks that could impact somatic transportation significantly or more than six (6) cracks of
category [1]; [3] one (1) or more severe cracks located in a property’s sidewalk that prevents somatic transportation or
more than three [2] rating or more than twelve (12) cracks of no to slight impact to somatic transportation. This
category is weighted at 1.0 times per assessed point.
11. STAR Report
Page 10 of 94
LC:Line Cracking (Long. & Trans.): [1] one or more linear cracks in a sidewalk with minimum impact to somatic transportation; [2]
one (1) or more severe cracks that could impact somatic transportation significantly or more than six (6) cracks of category [1]; [3]
one (1) or more severe cracks located in a panel that prevents somatic transportation or more than three [2] rating or more than
twelve (12) cracks of no to slight impact to somatic transportation. This category is weighted at 1.0 times per assessed point.
JS: Joint Spalling: [1] one or more cracks along the edges of a sidewalk with minimum impact to somatic
transportation; [2] one (1) or more severe cracks that could impact somatic transportation significantly or more than six
(6) cracks of category [1]; [3] one (1) or more severe cracks located in a panel that prevents somatic transportation or
more than three [2] rating or more than twelve (12) cracks of no to slight impact to somatic transportation. This
category is weighted at 1.25 times per assessed point.
MC: Map Cracking: [1] one or more map cracks in a sidewalk with minimum impact to somatic transportation
or minor surface damage to the concrete; [2] one (1) or more severe cracks that could impact somatic
transportation significantly or more than six (6) map cracking of category [1], or significant surface damage; [3]
one (1) or more severe cracks located in a panel that prevents somatic transportation or more than three [2]
rating, or more than twelve (12) cracks of no to slight impact to somatic transportation, or multiple surface
damage preventing or severely inhibiting somatic transportation. This category is weighted at 1.5 times per
assessed point.
JF: Joint Faulting: [1] one or more lifting action of a panel (one panel is higher or lower than an adjoining
panel) with minimum impact to somatic transportation, or weeds have grown in between two panels, or
panels are greater than ADA maximum distance between panels of 0.25 of an inch; [2] one (1) or more
severe cracks that could impact somatic transportation significantly or more than six (6) joint faults of
category [1]; [3] one (1) or more severe joint faults that prevent somatic transportation or more than
three [2] rating or more than twelve (12) cracks of no to slight impact to somatic transportation. This category is weighted at 2.0 times per
assessed point.
TOTAL: Total weighted assessed point value for a property’s somatic transportation including the categories of Corner Break (CB), Line Cracking (LC),
Joint Spalling (JS), Map Cracking (MC), and Joint Fault (JF).
Rating: Severity of sidewalk distress: A rating of [0-1.5] indicates that the sidewalk is absent of distress and does not need to be replaced: [1] = low
severity and should last at least ten (10) or more years, [1.5-2.8] equals moderate severity and should be planned to be replaced in the
12. STAR Report
Page 11 of 94
next five (5) to ten (10) years, and [2.8 or greater] means there is either no existing form of somatic transportation or a high severity of
distress and should be replaced as soon as possible. This rating is based on the "TOTAL" assessed values divided by the five (5) added
categories with a ranking from 0.00 or higher. This demonstrates that a higher number than three (3) and the existing concrete is more
detrimental to somatic transportation than if there was no sidewalk at all.
Notes: Notes are used either to aid in the assessment to ensure the property was connected to the correct address within the spreadsheet. This area
could also be used to document other items of interest or for future use.
For the purpose of this written report the following columns are not included in the body of the report, but are available with the City provided
spreadsheets, as these were used for a possible solution of an STU and are based on a potential fee and therefore the figures are not fixed:
Install: This is the estimated cost to install a new sidewalk upon a property for a 66’ frontage along the named street. This is for a four feet by four
feet panel at four inches thick and includes the removal of an existing sidewalk.
Deduct: The deduction column deducts $350.00 from the $2,000.00 for properties that do not currently have a sidewalk in disrepair under the “Install”
column, it is the deduction that represents the increase in cost if a sidewalk needs to be removed prior to installation of a new sidewalk.
Total: This is the total of the Install column minus the Deduct column totals.
Fee: This column includes the extra fee for a property that needs to replace, repair or the new construction of a sidewalk. This is the cost the
property owner would reimburse the City to replace the sidewalk over a period of ten (10) years that would be included in a monthly
payment plan, that is if the City decides to pursue the improvement of the property owners responsibility of sidewalk maintenance by the
creation of a STU.
Culmination
The Community Visioning program enhanced and addressed assets and barriers to the somatic transportation within the City of Onawa. This
STAR Report was completed based on the concerns of sidewalk conditions expressed by residents of the City throughout the Community Visioning study.
This was a comprehensive study assessing all pedestrian and bicycle transportation and storm water that could impede all somatic transportation.
Therefore, to really be an entirely comprehensive study, this STAR Report was completed to aid in the Community Visioning study and to help the City
Council form a positive direction on what to do for its citizens and its future. The City Council has three options to consider: repeal the sidewalk
ordinance, enforce the current sidewalk ordinance, or form a somatic transportation utility. If the second option is adopted, then the City Council should
consider the completion of a sidewalk plan according to the Iowa Code, which could be the most expensive solution to the City and its residents. If the
City adopts the third option, then a further study should be completed prior to the implementation of the utility to ensure the correct base fee amount
is established and how to collect the Somatic Transportation Utility fee on the properties within the City’s limits. The last opportunity is the middle
ground in expense, development, and improvement and will be more expensive to some residents, but it is possibly the most fair to the entire City’s
resident’s base.
13. STAR Report
Page 12 of 94
If the second or third option is selected to pursue for the City’s future, this STAR Report will enhance either program as the spreadsheets will aid
City staff in the maintenance and installation of sidewalk or replacements if needed. Therefore, the last two options should consider the adoption of the
STAR Report to enhance and target the beginning and continuance of somatic transportation within the City by use of the STAR Report’s spreadsheet
information. Both the second and third opportunity are aided by the adoption and implementation of the spreadsheet use to target where to begin with
somatic transportation improvement. Either opportunity should also include a plan as outlined from the Iowa League of Cities and the Iowa Code. The
STAR Report enhances the plan and is a good starting point for the development and direction of a plan.
16. STAR Report
Page 15 of 94
CHAPTER 136
SIDEWALK REGULATIONS
136.01 Purpose 136.11 Interference with Sidewalk
Improvements
136.02 Definitions 136.12 Awnings
136.03 Removal of Snow, Ice, and
Accumulations
136.13 Encroaching Steps
136.04 Responsibility for Maintenance 136.14 Openings and Enclosures
136.05 City May Order Repairs 136.15 Fires or Fuel on Sidewalks
136.06 Sidewalk Construction Ordered 136.16 Defacing
136.07 Permit Required 136.17 Debris on Sidewalks
136.08 Sidewalk Standards 136.18 Merchandise Display
136.09 Barricades and Warning Lights 136.19 Sales Stands
136.10 Failure to Repair or Barricade 136.20 Water Spouts
136.01 PURPOSE. The purpose of this chapter is to enhance safe passage by citizens on sidewalks, to place the responsibility for the maintenance,
repair, replacement, or reconstruction of sidewalks upon the abutting property owner and to minimize the liability of the City.
136.02 DEFINITIONS. For use in this chapter the following terms are defined:
1. “Broom finish” means a sidewalk finish that is made by sweeping the sidewalk when it is hardening.
2. “Defective sidewalk” means any public sidewalk exhibiting one or more of the following characteristics:
A. Vertical separations equal to three-fourths (¾) inch or more.
B. Horizontal separations equal to one (1) inch or more.
C. Holes or depressions equal to three-fourths (¾) inch or more and at least four (4) inches in diameter.
D. Spalling over fifty percent (50%) of a single square of the sidewalk with one or more depressions equal to one-half (½) inch or
more.
E. Spalling over less than fifty percent (50%) of a single square of the sidewalk with one or more depressions equal to three-fourths
(¾) inch or more.
F. A single square of sidewalk cracked in such a manner that no part thereof has a piece greater than one square foot.
G. A sidewalk with any part thereof missing to the full depth.
17. STAR Report
Page 16 of 94
H. A change from the design or construction grade equal to or greater than three-fourths (¾) inch per foot.
3. “Established grade” means that grade established by the City for the particular area in which a sidewalk is to be constructed.
4. “One-course construction” means that the full thickness of the concrete is placed at one time, using the same mixture throughout.
5. “Owner” means the person owning the fee title to property abutting any sidewalk and includes any contract purchaser for purposes of
notification required herein. For all other purposes, “owner” includes the lessee, if any.
6. “Portland cement” means any type of cement except bituminous cement.
7. “Sidewalk” means all permanent public walks in business, residential or suburban areas.
8. “Sidewalk improvements” means the construction, reconstruction, repair, replacement, or removal, of a public sidewalk and/or the
excavating, filling or depositing of material in the public right-of-way in connection therewith.
9. “Wood float finish” means a sidewalk finish that is made by smoothing the surface of the sidewalk with a wooden trowel.
136.03 REMOVAL OF SNOW, ICE, AND ACCUMULATIONS. It is the responsibility of the abutting property owners to remove snow, ice, and
accumulations promptly from sidewalks. If a property owner does not remove snow, ice, or accumulations within a reasonable time, the City may do so
and assess the costs against the property owner for collection in the same manner as a property tax.
(Code of Iowa, Sec. 364.12[2b & e])
136.04 RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. It is the responsibility of the abutting property owners to repair, replace or reconstruct, or cause to be
repaired, replaced or reconstructed, all broken or defective sidewalks and to maintain in a safe and hazard-free condition any sidewalk outside the lot and
property lines and inside the curb lines or traveled portion of the public street.
(Code of Iowa, Sec. 364.12[2c])
136.05 CITY MAY ORDER REPAIRS. If the abutting property owner does not maintain sidewalks as required, the Council may serve notice on such
owner, by certified mail, requiring the owner to repair, replace or reconstruct sidewalks within a reasonable time and if such action is not completed within
the time stated in the notice, the Council may require the work to be done and assess the costs against the abutting property for collection in the same
manner as a property tax.
(Code of Iowa, Sec. 364.12[2d & e])
136.06 SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION ORDERED. The Council may order the construction of permanent sidewalks upon any street or court in the City and
may specially assess the cost of such improvement to abutting property owners in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 384 of the Code of Iowa.
(Code of Iowa, Sec. 384.38)
136.07 PERMIT REQUIRED. No person shall remove, reconstruct, or install a sidewalk unless such person has obtained a permit from the City and has
agreed in writing that said removal, reconstruction, or installation will comply with all ordinances and requirements of the City for such work. The permit
will include any special allowances, such as location or grade variances, and the permittee will be furnished with a copy of the City’s sidewalk regulations.
18. STAR Report
Page 17 of 94
136.08 SIDEWALK STANDARDS. Sidewalks repaired, replaced, or constructed under the provisions of this chapter shall be of the following construction
and meet the following standards:
1. Cement. Portland cement shall be the only cement used in the construction and repair of sidewalks.
2. Construction. Sidewalks shall be of one-course construction.
3. Sidewalk Base. Concrete may be placed directly on compact and well-drained soil. Where soil is not well drained, a three-inch sub-base
of compact, clean, coarse gravel or sand shall be laid. The adequacy of the soil drainage is to be determined by the City.
4. Sidewalk Bed. The sidewalk bed shall be so graded that the constructed sidewalk will be at established grade.
5. Length, Width and Depth. Length, width and depth requirements are as follows:
A. Residential sidewalks shall be at least four (4) feet wide and four (4) inches thick, and each section shall be no more than four (4)
feet in length.
B. Business District sidewalks shall extend from the property line to the curb. Each section shall be four (4) inches thick and no more
than six (6) feet in length.
C. Driveway areas shall be not less than six (6) inches in thickness.
6. Location. When a residential sidewalk is constructed, it shall be located so that there is a distance of one foot between the property line
and the sidewalk unless a different location is approved by the inspector in the sidewalk construction permit. No sidewalk shall be repaired,
replaced or reconstructed so as to change the location of the sidewalk unless such change is similarly approved by the inspector.
7. Grade. Curb tops shall be on level with the centerline of the street, which is the established grade.
8. Elevations. The street edge of a sidewalk shall be at an elevation even with the curb at the curb or not less than one-half (½) inch above
the curb for each foot between the curb and the sidewalk.
9. Abutting Sidewalks. If either end of a sidewalk abuts on an existing sidewalk, it shall be constructed, replaced, or reconstructed so as to
meet the grade of the abutting sidewalk and the standards set out in subsections 6, 7, and 8 of this section may be modified to the minimum
extent necessary to meet the grade of the abutting sidewalk.
10. Exceptions to Grade Requirements. If the designated inspector finds that, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the
provisions of subsections 6, 7, and 8 of this section will result in unnecessary hardship, the inspector may, in specific cases, authorize such variance
from the provisions of said subsections as is necessary to avoid such unnecessary hardship.
11. Slope. All sidewalks shall slope one-quarter (¼) inch per foot toward the curb.
12. Finish. All sidewalks shall be finished with a “broom” or “wood float” finish.
13. Curb Ramps and Sloped Areas for Persons with Disabilities. If a street, road, or highway is newly built or reconstructed, a curb ramp or
sloped area shall be constructed or installed at each intersection of the street, road, or highway with a sidewalk or path. If a sidewalk or path is
19. STAR Report
Page 18 of 94
newly built or reconstructed, a curb ramp or sloped area shall be constructed or installed at each intersection of the sidewalk or path with a street,
highway, or road. Curb ramps and sloped areas that are required pursuant to this subsection shall be constructed or installed in compliance with
applicable Federal requirements adopted in accordance with the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act, including (but not limited to) the
guidelines issued by the Federal Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board.
(Code of Iowa, Sec. 216C.9)
136.09 BARRICADES AND WARNING LIGHTS. Whenever any material of any kind is deposited on any street, avenue, highway, passageway or alley
when sidewalk improvements are being made or when any sidewalk is in a dangerous condition, it shall be the duty of all persons having an interest
therein, either as the contractor or the owner, agent, or lessee of the property in front of or along which such material may be deposited, or such dangerous
condition exists, to put in conspicuous places at each end of such sidewalk and at each end of any pile of material deposited in the street, a sufficient
number of approved warning lights or flares, and to keep them lighted during the entire night and to erect sufficient barricades both at night and in the
daytime to secure the same. The party or parties using the street for any of the purposes specified in this chapter shall be liable for all injuries or damage
to persons or property arising from any wrongful act or negligence of the party or parties, or their agents or employees or for any misuse of the privileges
conferred by this chapter or of any failure to comply with provisions hereof.
136.10 FAILURE TO REPAIR OR BARRICADE. It is the duty of the owner of the property abutting the sidewalk, or the owner’s contractor or agent, to
notify the City immediately in the event of failure or inability to make necessary sidewalk improvements or to install or erect necessary barricades as
required by this chapter.
136.11 INTERFERENCE WITH SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS. No person shall knowingly or willfully drive any vehicle upon any portion of any sidewalk or
approach thereto while in the process of being improved or upon any portion of any completed sidewalk or approach thereto, or shall remove or destroy
any part or all of any sidewalk or approach thereto, or shall remove, destroy, mar or deface any sidewalk at any time or destroy, mar, remove or deface
any notice provided by this chapter.
136.12 AWNINGS. It is unlawful for a person to erect or maintain any awning over any sidewalk unless all parts of the awning are elevated at least eight
(8) feet above the surface of the sidewalk and the roof or covering is made of duck, canvas or other suitable material supported by iron frames or brackets
securely fastened to the building, without any posts or other device that will obstruct the sidewalk or hinder or interfere with the free passage of
pedestrians.
136.13 ENCROACHING STEPS. It is unlawful for a person to erect or maintain any stairs or steps to any building upon any part of any sidewalk without
permission by resolution of the Council.
136.14 OPENINGS AND ENCLOSURES. It is unlawful for a person to:
1. Stairs and Railings. Construct or build a stairway or passageway to any cellar or basement by occupying any part of the sidewalk, or to
enclose any portion of a sidewalk with a railing without permission by resolution of the Council.
20. STAR Report
Page 19 of 94
2. Openings. Keep open any cellar door, grating, or cover to any vault on any sidewalk except while in actual use with adequate guards to
protect the public.
3. Protect Openings. Neglect to properly protect or barricade all openings on or within six (6) feet of any sidewalk.
136.15 FIRES OR FUEL ON SIDEWALKS. It is unlawful for a person to make a fire of any kind on any sidewalk or to place or allow any fuel to remain
upon any sidewalk.
136.16 DEFACING. It is unlawful for a person to scatter or place any paste, paint, or writing on any sidewalk.
(Code of Iowa, Sec. 716.1)
136.17 DEBRIS ON SIDEWALKS. It is unlawful for a person to throw or deposit on any sidewalk any glass, nails, glass bottle, tacks, wire, cans, trash,
garbage, rubbish, litter, offal, or any other debris, or any substance likely to injure any person, animal, or vehicle.
(Code of Iowa, Sec. 364.12[2])
136.18 MERCHANDISE DISPLAY. It is unlawful for a person to place upon or above any sidewalk, any goods or merchandise for sale or for display in
such a manner as to interfere with the free and uninterrupted passage of pedestrians on the sidewalk; in no case shall more than three (3) feet of the
sidewalk next to the building be occupied for such purposes.
136.19 SALES STANDS. It is unlawful for a person to erect or keep any vending machine or stand for the sale of fruit, vegetables or other substances or
commodities on any sidewalk without first obtaining a written permit from the Council.
136.20 WATER SPOUTS. It is unlawful to cause or permit any water spout, trough, gutter or balcony extending from any building (owned or leased) to
discharge or conduct water upon the surface of any public sidewalk.
21. STAR Report
Page 20 of 94
Appendix B: Iowa League of Cities and the Iowa Code
22. STAR Report
Page 21 of 94
Iowa League of Cities
Zoning & Building
Right of Way Responsibilities
Web Exclusive June 2014
Cities are responsible for maintaining most of the public property in the community, including the city streets. However, there are some questions
regarding who is responsible for other parts of the public right of way (ROW), such as sidewalks and alleys. City officials should have a good
understanding of who is responsible for maintaining the right of way so they can effectively plan for future improvements. As detailed in Code of Iowa
Section 364.12, cities are responsible for keeping all public grounds “in repair, and free of nuisance." This includes streets, sidewalks, alleys, bridges and
a number of other public properties. However, the law does provide some exceptions and places specific responsibilities on abutting property owners.
Sidewalk Maintenance Requirements and Responsibilities
The Code allows cities to enact ordinances that require abutting property owners to maintain and repair sidewalks (this is often detailed in a city’s
nuisance ordinance). Approving a sidewalk program that addresses issues such as maintenance, repair, replacement and installation can provide a sound
long-term plan for citizens, council members and city employees. These plans should address the requirements for maintaining sidewalks, how and
when the city will inspect sidewalks, and how the program will be funded. Such programs can be funded by the city, by property owners directly or
through special assessments on the property owner’s taxes. Cities often use a combination of these sources to fund sidewalk programs. Cities also have
the authority to approve ordinances that require the installation of sidewalks following proper notice. This is typically done to address areas of the city
that do not have a sidewalk or where new construction occurs.
Removal of Snow and Ice from Sidewalks
Code of Iowa Section 364.12(2)(b) places the onus of removing natural accumulations of snow and ice from sidewalks on the abutting property owners.
The law states that this must be done within a reasonable time and that property owners may be liable for damages caused by the failure to, “use
reasonable care in the removal of the snow or ice.” Most city ordinances contain these provisions and provide definition on what is considered
reasonable (such as clearing sidewalks within 48 or 72 hours).Many city ordinances also address the issue of a property owner failing to remove snow
and ice in the prescribed timeframe. In these situations, the city may perform the necessary work and assess the cost to the property owner in the same
manner as a property tax. The Code states that the city's general duty does not include the removal of natural accumulations of snow and ice from
sidewalks. However, when the city is the abutting property owner, it must remove the snow and ice accumulations as any other abutting property
owner.
Maintaining Other Parts of the ROW
According to Code Section 364.12(2)(c), cities are permitted to require property owners to maintain the ROW. The law specifically says this can include
the area between the street and sidewalk. City councils should approve an ordinance that details this requirement and give the city the authority to
enforce its provisions. Typically, such an ordinance requires the property owner to keep the sidewalk and ROW safe and in a hazard-free condition,
which includes mowing the area between the street and sidewalk. In addition, cities can require property owners to maintain trees that are in the ROW,
including trimming trees when necessary and clearing any debris. However, property owners cannot be required to remove diseased trees or dead
23. STAR Report
Page 22 of 94
wood from publicly owned property or the ROW. Most cities find that existing trees located in the city ROW are an annual financial burden. For this
reason, many cities have decided to adopt a tree ordinance that specifically prohibits planting trees in the ROW, thus limiting future liabilities.
Funding ROW Maintenance
Cities have several options for funding ROW maintenance and repair projects. Obviously, cities can use the general fund to pay for such costs. They can
also use Road Use Tax funds if the work to be done is part of the platted street system. Local Option Sales Tax funds can be used if the revenue purpose
statement allows for such use. The city can sell bonds or agree to a loan to raise money. Finally, the city can assess abutting property owners to help pay
for the improvements.
IOWA CODE
The entire Chapter 364 of the Iowa Code has not been included within this appendix, but codes that could be referenced in regards to somatic
transportation and reference for this report.
364.12 RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC PLACES.
1. As used in this section, "property owner" means the contract purchaser if there is one of record, otherwise the record holder of legal title.
2. A city shall keep all public grounds, streets, sidewalks, alleys, bridges, culverts, overpasses, underpasses, grade crossing separations and
approaches, public ways, squares, and commons open, in repair, and free from nuisance, with the following exceptions:
a. Public ways and grounds may be temporarily closed by resolution. Following notice as provided in section 362.3, public ways and
grounds may be vacated by ordinance.
b. The abutting property owner is responsible for the removal of the natural accumulations of snow and ice from the sidewalks within a
reasonable amount of time and may be liable for damages caused by the failure of the abutting property owner to use reasonable care in the
removal of the snow or ice. If damages are to be awarded under this section against the abutting property owner, the claimant has the burden
of proving the amount of the damages. To authorize recovery of more than a nominal amount, facts must exist and be shown by the evidence
which afford a reasonable basis for measuring the amount of the claimant's actual damages, and the amount of actual damages shall not be
determined by speculation, conjecture, or surmise. All legal or equitable defenses are available to the abutting property owner in an action
brought pursuant to this paragraph. The city's general duty under this subsection does not include a duty to remove natural accumulations of
snow or ice from the sidewalks. However, when the city is the abutting property owner it has the specific duty of the abutting property owner
set forth in this paragraph.
c. The abutting property owner may be required by ordinance to maintain all property outside the lot and property lines and inside the
curb lines upon the public streets, except that the property owner shall not be required to remove diseased trees or dead wood on the publicly
owned property or right-of-way.
d. A city may serve notice on the abutting property owner, by certified mail to the property owner as shown by the records of the county
auditor, requiring the abutting property owner to repair, replace, or reconstruct sidewalks.
24. STAR Report
Page 23 of 94
e. If the abutting property owner does not perform an action required under this subsection within a reasonable time, a city may perform
the required action and assess the costs against the abutting property for collection in the same manner as a property tax. This power does not
relieve the abutting property owner of liability imposed under paragraph "b".
f. A city has no duty under this subsection with respect to property that is required by law to be maintained by a railway company.
3. A city may:
a. Require the abatement of a nuisance, public or private, in any reasonable manner.
b. Require the removal of diseased trees or dead wood, except as stated in subsection 2, paragraph "c" of this section.
c. Require the removal, repair, or dismantling of a dangerous building or structure.
d. Require the numbering of buildings.
e. Require connection to public drainage systems from abutting property when necessary for public health or safety.
f. Require connection to public sewer systems from abutting property, and require installation of sanitary toilet facilities and removal of
other toilet facilities on such property.
g. Require the cutting or destruction of weeds or other growth which constitutes a health, safety, or fire hazard.
h. If the property owner does not perform an action required under this subsection within a reasonable time after notice, a city may
perform the required action and assess the costs against the property for collection in the same manner as a property tax. Notice may be in the
form of an ordinance or by certified mail to the property owner as shown by the records of the county auditor, and shall state the time within
which action is required. However, in an emergency a city may perform any action which may be required under this section without prior
notice, and assess the costs as provided in this subsection, after notice to the property owner and hearing.
4. In addition to any other remedy provided by law, a city may also seek reimbursement for costs incurred in performing any act authorized by this
section by a civil action for damages against a property owner. However, a city shall not seek reimbursement for costs incurred in performing an act if
the same act has not been performed by the city on adjoining city-owned property. For the purposes of this subsection, a county acquiring property for
delinquent taxes shall not be considered a property owner.
5. A city may cause, without prior determination and notice, the repair or replacement of public improvements including, but not limited to,
sidewalks, water stop boxes, and driveway approaches if the property owner does all of the following:
a. Requests the repair and replacement of the public improvements specified in this subsection abutting the property owner's property
located outside the lot and property lines and inside the curb lines.
b. Waives the requirement of a prior finding by the city council that the condition of the public improvements constitutes a nuisance and
the requirement of prior notice.
c. Consents to the repair of the public improvements and the assessment of the cost of the repair to the abutting property.
6. If, in repairing and replacing improvements in the area between the lot or property lines and the curb lines pursuant to subsection 5, it becomes
necessary for the city to repair or replace adjacent improvements in the area, the cost of repairing or replacing the adjacent public improvements may
be assessed, with consent of the property owner, against the property which the public improvements abut.
7. A city may accumulate individual assessments for the repair and replacement of sidewalks, driveway approaches, water stop boxes, or similar
improvements or for the abatement of nuisances, and may periodically certify the assessments to the county treasurer under one or more assessment
schedules.
25. STAR Report
Page 24 of 94
364.13 INSTALLMENTS.
If any amount assessed against property under section 364.12 will exceed one hundred dollars, a city may permit the assessment to be paid in up to
ten annual installments, in the same manner and with the same interest rates provided for assessments against benefited property under chapter 384,
division IV.
364.13A SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS -- LIEN AND PRECEDENCE.
A special assessment levied pursuant to section 364.11 or 364.12, including all interest, is a lien against the benefited property from the date of
filing the schedule of assessments until the assessment is paid. Special assessments have equal precedence with ordinary taxes and are not divested by
judicial sale.
364.14 PERSONAL INJURIES.
When action is brought against a city for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by its negligence, the city may notify in writing any person
by whose negligence it claims the injury was caused. The notice shall state the pendency of the action, the name of the plaintiff, the name and location
of the court where the action is pending, a brief statement of the alleged facts from which the cause arose, that the city believes that the person notified
is liable to it for any judgment rendered against the city, and asking the person to appear and defend. A judgment obtained in the suit is conclusive in
any action by the city against any person so notified, as to the existence of the defect or other cause of the injury or damage, as to the liability of the city
to the plaintiff in the first named action, and as to the amount of the damage or injury. A city may maintain an action against the person notified to
recover the amount of the judgment together with all the expenses incurred by the city in the suit.
364.18 FEDERAL AID.
Subject to applicable state or federal regulations in effect at the time of the city action, a city may accept contributions, grants, or other financial
assistance from the state or federal government. Upon a finding of public purpose, the city may disburse the assistance to any person to be used for
economic development projects, including but not limited to the purchase or improvement of land and buildings for residential, commercial, or
industrial use.
364.22 MUNICIPAL INFRACTIONS.
1. a. A municipal infraction is a civil offense punishable by a civil penalty of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars for each violation or if the
infraction is a repeat offense, a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars for each repeat offense. However, notwithstanding section 364.3, a
municipal infraction arising from noncompliance with a pretreatment standard or requirement, referred to in 40 C.F.R. § 403.8, by an industrial user may
be punishable by a civil penalty of not more than one thousand dollars for each day a violation exists or continues.
b. (1) A city may classify a municipal infraction, other than a violation arising from noncompliance with a pretreatment standard
or requirement, as an environmental violation if the infraction is a violation of chapter 455B or 459, subchapters II and III, or a violation of a standard
established by the city in consultation with the department of natural resources, or both. The discharge of airborne residue from grain, created by the
handling, drying, or storing of grain by a person, shall not be subject to an ordinance, the violation of which is classified as an environmental violation,
unless the person is engaged in industrial production or manufacturing of grain products. The discharge of airborne residue from grain, created by the
handling, drying, or storing of grain by a person engaged in industrial production or manufacturing of grain products, shall not be subject to an
26. STAR Report
Page 25 of 94
ordinance, the violation of which is classified as an environmental violation, if the discharge occurs from September 15 to January 15. A municipal
infraction which is classified an environmental violation is punishable by a civil penalty of not more than one thousand dollars for each occurrence. A
person committing an environmental violation is not subject to a civil penalty, if all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(a) The violation results solely from the person conducting an initial start-up, cleaning, repairing, performing scheduled
maintenance, testing, or conducting a shutdown, of either equipment causing the violation or the equipment designed to reduce or eliminate the
violation.
(b) The person notifies the city of the violation within twenty-four hours from the time that the violation begins.
(c) The violation does not continue in existence for more than eight hours.
(2) A city shall not enforce this section against a person committing an environmental violation, until the city offers to participate in
informal negotiations with the person. If the person accepts the offer, the city and the person shall participate in good faith negotiations to resolve
issues alleged to be the basis for the violation.
2. A city by ordinance may provide that a violation of an ordinance is a municipal infraction.
3. A city shall not provide that a violation of an ordinance is a municipal infraction if the violation is a felony, an aggravated misdemeanor, or a
serious misdemeanor under state law or if the violation is a simple misdemeanor under chapters 687 through 747.
4. An officer authorized by a city to enforce a city code or regulation may issue a civil citation to a person who commits a municipal infraction. A
copy of the citation may be served by personal service as provided in rule of civil procedure 1.305, by certified mail addressed to the defendant at the
defendant's last known mailing address, return receipt requested, or by publication in the manner as provided in rule of civil procedure 1.310 and
subject to the conditions of rule of civil procedure 1.311. A copy of the citation shall be retained by the issuing officer, and the original citation shall be
sent to the clerk of the district court. The citation shall serve as notification that a civil offense has been committed and shall contain the following
information:
a. The name and address of the defendant.
b. The name or description of the infraction attested to by the officer issuing the citation.
c. The location and time of the infraction.
d. The amount of civil penalty to be assessed or the alternate relief sought, or both.
e. The manner, location, and time in which the penalty may be paid.
f. The time and place of court appearance.
g. The penalty for failure to appear in court.
5. In municipal infraction proceedings:
a. The matter shall be tried before a magistrate, a district associate judge, or a district judge in the same manner as a small claim. The matter
shall only be tried before a judge in district court if the total amount of civil penalties assessed exceeds the jurisdictional amount for small claims
set forth in section 631.1.
b. The city has the burden of proof that the municipal infraction occurred and that the defendant committed the infraction. The proof shall be
by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence.
c. The court shall ensure that the defendant has received a copy of the charges and that the defendant understands the charges. The defendant
may question all witnesses who appear for the city and produce evidence or witnesses on the defendant's behalf.
d. The defendant may be represented by counsel of the defendant's own selection and at the defendant's own expense.
27. STAR Report
Page 26 of 94
e. The defendant may answer by admitting or denying the infraction.
f. If a municipal infraction is proven the court shall enter a judgment against the defendant. If the infraction is not proven, the court shall
dismiss it.
6. All penalties or forfeitures collected by the court for municipal infractions shall be remitted to the city in the same manner as fines and
forfeitures are remitted for criminal violations under section 602.8106. If the person named in the citation is served as provided in this section and fails
without good cause to appear in response to the civil citation, judgment shall be entered against the person cited.
7. A person against whom judgment is entered, shall pay court costs and fees as in small claims under chapter 631. If the action is dismissed, the
city is liable for the court costs and court fees. Where the action is disposed of without payment, or provision for assessment, of court costs, the clerk
shall at once enter judgment for costs against the city.
8. Seeking a civil penalty as authorized in this section does not preclude a city from seeking alternative relief from the court in the same action.
9. a. When judgment has been entered against a defendant, the court may do any of the following:
(1) Impose a civil penalty by entry of a personal judgment against the defendant.
(2) Direct that payment of the civil penalty be suspended or deferred under conditions imposed by the court.
(3) Grant appropriate alternative relief ordering the defendant to abate or cease the violation.
(4) Authorize the city to abate or correct the violation.
(5) Order that the city's costs for abatement or correction of the violation be entered as a personal judgment against the defendant
or assessed against the property where the violation occurred, or both.
b. If a defendant willfully violates the terms of an order imposed by the court, the failure is contempt.
c. A magistrate or district associate judge shall have jurisdiction to assess or enter judgment for costs of abatement or correction in an
amount not to exceed the jurisdictional amount for a money judgment in a civil action pursuant to section 631.1, subsection 1, for magistrates
and section 602.6306, subsection 2, for district associate judges. If the city seeks abatement or correction costs in excess of those amounts, and
the matter is not before a judge in district court, the case shall be referred to the district court for hearing and entry of an appropriate order.
The procedure for hearing in the district court shall be the same procedure as that for a small claims appeal pursuant to section 631.13.
10. The defendant or the city may file a motion for a new trial or may appeal the decision of a magistrate, district associate judge, or a district judge
to the district court. The procedure on appeal shall be the same as for a small claim pursuant to section 631.13. A factual determination made by the
trial court, supported by substantial evidence as shown in the record, is binding for purposes of appeal relating to the violation at issue, but shall not be
admissible or binding as to any future violation for the same or similar ordinance provision by the same defendant.
11. This section does not preclude a peace officer of a city from issuing a criminal citation for a violation of a city code or regulation if criminal
penalties are also provided for the violation. Each day that a violation occurs or is permitted to exist by the defendant, constitutes a separate offense.
12. The issuance of a civil citation for a municipal infraction or the ensuing court proceedings do not provide an action for false arrest, false
imprisonment, or malicious prosecution.
13. An action brought pursuant to this section for a municipal infraction which is an environmental violation does not preclude, and is in addition
to, any other enforcement action which may be brought pursuant to chapter 455B, 455D, 455E, or 459, subchapters II, III, and VI.
14. A police department may dispose of personal property under section 80.39.
30. STAR Report
Page 29 of 94
Address Corner C Trans Ramp II Ramp = CB LC JS MC JF TOTAL Rating Notes
1ST STREET
700 N 0 3.00
710 N 0 3.00
120 Ruby N 0 3.00
800 Ruby N 0 3.00
801* Pearl N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
103 Pearl N 0 3.00
916 Iowa 1 N 0 3.00
100 Iowa* 1 N N N 0 3.00
103* Iowa 1 0 1 0 2 1 6 2.40
105 Iowa* N 0 3.00
1004 0 1 0 0 1 3 1.20
100 Diamond N 0 1 0 0 1 3 1.20
1001 Diamond N 0 3.00
1107 Diamond N 0 3.00
1102* Diamond N N 0 1 0 0 1 3 1.20
1106 1 1 0 1 1 5.5 2.20
1108 1 1 0 0 3 8 3.20
1112 1 1 0 3 1 8.5 3.40
1122* Marble N N 2 2 0 3 2 12.5 5.50
1200 Marble N 0 3.00
1201 N N 0 1 0 0 2 5 4.00
1204 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
1210 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
1214 1 1 0 0 1 4 1.60
1221* Granite 1 0 0 0 1 3 1.20
103* Granite 1 0 0 0 1 3 1.20
220 Granite* 1 N 0 3.00
1301 Granite N 0 3.00
1306 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
31. STAR Report
Page 30 of 94
1312 1 1 0 2 1 7 2.80
1318* Maple N 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00
1400 Maple N 0 3.00
1401 N 0 3.00
32. STAR Report
Page 31 of 94
Address Corner C Trans Ramp II Ramp = CB LC JS MC JF TOTAL Rating Notes
2ND STREET
500 Emerald N N 0 3.00
501 Emerald N N 0 3.00
506 N 0 3.00
510 N 0 3.00
516 N 0 3.00
520 Jasper N N N 0 3.00
523 Jasper N N N 0 3.00
600 Jasper N N N 0 3.00
601 Jasper N N N 0 3.00
612 N 0 3.00
612 N 0 3.00
204 Cameo N N N 0 3.00
623 Cameo N N N 0 3.00
702 Cameo N N N 0 3.00
703 Cameo N N N 0 3.00
706 N 0 3.00
714 N 0 3.00
715 N 0 3.00
718 N 0 3.00
719 Ruby N N N 0 3.00
722 Ruby N N N 0 3.00
801* Ruby 1 N 0 1 0 0 1 3 1.20
812 Ruby N N 0 0 0 0 1 2 0.80
816 0 0 0 0 1 2 0.80
821 Pearl 1 N N 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
822* Pearl N N 1 1 0 1 3 9.5 3.80
901 Pearl N N N 0 3.00
902 Pearl N 2 1 0 2 2 10 4.00
905 N 0 3.00
45. STAR Report
Page 44 of 94
1307 N 0 3.00
1310 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
1313 N 0 3.00
1314 0 0 0 0 1 2 0.80
1318 0 0 0 0 2 4 1.60
1320* Maple N N 0 0 0 0 3 6 2.40
1323* Maple N N 1 0 0 1 1 4.5 1.80
1400* Maple N N 1 2 0 0 1 5 2.00
1401* Maple N N 2 1 0 0 2 7 2.80
1405 N 0 3.00
1410 N 0 3.00
1415 N 0 3.00
1418 N 0 3.00
1419 N 0 3.00
1423 N 0 3.00
52. STAR Report
Page 51 of 94
1118 0 0 0 0 1 2 0.80
1122 Marble N 0 1 0 0 1 3 1.20
612 Marble 2 1 0 3 3 13.5 5.40
609 Marble N N N 0 3.00
700 Marble N N N 0 3.00
1205 1 2 0 1 2 8.5 3.40
1209 N 0 3.00
1213 2 2 0 2 3 13 5.20
1217 N 0 3.00
614 Granite N N N 0 3.00
1301 Granite N 0 1 0 0 1 3 1.20
700 Granite N N N 0 3.00
702 Granite N N N 0 3.00
53. STAR Report
Page 52 of 94
Address Corner C Trans Ramp II Ramp = CB LC JS MC JF TOTAL Rating Notes
8TH STREET
710 N 0 3.00
802 Emerald N N 0 3.00
804 Emerald* 1 N 0 3.00
500 Emerald N N N 0 3.00
715* Emerald N N 0 0 0 1 1 3.5 1.40
509 1 1 0 0 1 4 1.60
511 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
519 0 0 0 0 2 4 1.60
712* Jasper N N 0 0 0 0 1 2 0.80
522 Jasper N N 0 3.00
600 Jasper N N 0 3.00
713* Jasper N N 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.40
611 2 1 0 1 0 4.5 1.80
613 2 2 0 2 0 7 2.80
623 Cameo N N 1 3 0 0 2 8 3.20
622 Cameo N 0 3.00
700 Cameo N N 0 3.00
701 Cameo N N 0 1 1 0 2 6.25 2.50
713 0 1 0 3 1 7.5 3.00
717 0 0 0 0 1 2 0.80
714* Ruby N 0 0 0 3 3 10.5 4.20
803* Ruby N N 0 0 0 3 3 10.5 4.20
809 1 N 0 3.00
700 Pearl N N 0 3.00
721 Pearl 1 N N 0 3.00
814* Pearl N 1 1 0 0 2 6 2.40
900* Pearl 1 N 1 0 1 0 1 4.25 1.70
901 N 0 3.00
911 N 0 3.00
55. STAR Report
Page 54 of 94
1305 Granite N N 0 3.00
1310 0 0 0 2 0 3 1.20
1311 1 N 0 3.00
1314 1 1 0 3 1 8.5 3.40
1318 1 1 0 3 1 8.5 3.40
1412 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
1313 N 0 3.00
1418 N 0 3.00
1500 N 0 3.00
1510 N 0 3.00
1512 N 0 3.00
1514 N 0 3.00
1609 1 N 0 3.00
56. STAR Report
Page 55 of 94
Address Corner C Trans Ramp II Ramp = CB LC JS MC JF TOTAL Rating Notes
9TH STREET
100 220th N N N 0 3.00
101 220th N N N 0 3.00
200 N 0 3.00
201 N 0 3.00
300 N 0 3.00
301 N 0 3.00
318 N 0 3.00
320 N 0 3.00
400 N 0 3.00
401 N 0 3.00
422 Emerald N N N 0 3.00
423 Emerald N N N 0 3.00
500 Emerald 1 N N N 0 3.00
501 Emerald N N N 0 3.00
504 N 0 3.00
505 N 0 3.00
508 N 0 3.00
509 1 N 0 3.00
510 N 0 3.00
511 N 0 3.00
522 Jasper N N N 0 3.00
519 Jasper 1 N 0 3.00
523 Jasper 1 N 0 3.00
600 Jasper N N N 0 3.00
601 Jasper 1 N 0 3.00
606 0 1 0 0 1 3 1.20
609 1 1 0 3 2 10.5 4.20
610 1 2 2 2 1 10.5 4.20
613 3 1 0 0 2 8 3.20
64. STAR Report
Page 63 of 94
1417 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
1419 1 1 0 0 3 8 3.20
1423 1 1 0 0 2 6 2.40
1501 N 0 3.00
1502 N 0 2 0 0 1 4 3.80 Not Complete
1505 1 N 0 3.00
1511 N 0 3.00
1519 Lucas 1 N 0 3.00
1000 Lucas 1 N N N 0 3.00
1006 Lucas 1 N N N 0 3.00
1523 Lucas N 0 3.00
1603 N 0 3.00
1629 N 0 3.00
1631 N 0 3.00
1622 N 0 3.00
65. STAR Report
Page 64 of 94
Address Corner C Trans Ramp II Ramp = CB LC JS MC JF TOTAL Rating Notes
11TH STREET
1019 Emerald N N N 0 3.00
1105 Emerald N N 2 2 2 2 3 15.5 6.20
504 1 1 0 0 0 2 0.80
505 N 0 3.00
506 1 1 0 0 1 4 1.60
511 N 0 3.00
512 2 2 0 0 1 6 2.40
515 N 0 3.00
517 N 0 3.00
518 3 2 0 0 2 9 3.60
520* Jasper N N 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
1018 Jasper N N 1 2 0 1 3 10.5 4.20
600* Jasper N N 1 0 0 1 1 4.5 1.80
601 Jasper N N 1 3 0 1 1 7.5 3.00
605 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
606 1 1 1 0 2 7.25 2.90
611 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
612 1 1 1 1 2 8.75 3.50
613 1 1 0 0 1 4 1.60
616 1 1 2 1 1 8 3.20
619 1 1 0 0 2 6 2.40
622 Cameo N N 2 3 3 3 3 19.25 7.70
1012 Cameo N N 1 3 1 2 2 12.25 4.90
700* Cameo N N 3 1 0 0 2 8 3.20
701* Cameo N 0 1 0 0 2 5 2.00
705 0 1 0 0 1 3 1.20
706 0 0 1 1 1 4.75 1.90
708 1 1 0 0 1 4 1.60
711 2 2 0 3 3 14.5 5.80
73. STAR Report
Page 72 of 94
1417 N 0 3.00
1418 13th Pl N N N 0 3.00
1423 13th Pl N 0 3.00
1501 13th Pl N 0 3.00
1506 13th Pl N N N 0 3.00
1507 N 0 3.00
1512 N 0 3.00