HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-26-12 Board of Public Works Meeting Agenda part1A meeting of the Board of Public Works will be held on Monday, March 26, 2012, at 4:45 p.m.
in Common Council Chambers — Third Floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New
York.
W-=
i. Approval of Minutes
6.1 March 6, 2012, Regular Meeting Minutes
8. VOTING ITEMS
8.1 Buildings, Properties, Refuse and Transit
A. Award of Contract for Construction of a New Salt Storage Building —
Resolution
A. A Proposed Resolution to Declare Lead Agency Status fortheFloral
Avenue Multiuse Facility
B. A Proposed Resolution to Declare Lead Agency Status fortheGreen and
Seneca Street Bulbouts
8.3 Parking and Traffic
8.4 Greeks, Bridges and Parks
8.5 Water and Sewer
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS
9.1 Recommendation for Detours during Clinton Street/Prospect Street
Reconstruction Project
9.2 Request to Relocate "The Hot Truck" from Stewart Avenue to 410 College
Avenue
9.3 Request for Commemorative Plaque on the Carl Sagan Bridge
9.4 Appeal of Recycling Violation for 631 Hudson Street
If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully
participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk ai8O7-274-6570 at least 48 hours before the
meeting.
The Board of Public Works meets on the first, second and fourth Mondays ofthe months at4:45pm.All meetings are voting meetings,
opening with apublic comment period. Meeting agendas are created from prior public input, Department operating, planning issues, and
requests made k)the Superintendent. The Board reserves the right to limit verbal comments to three minutes and to request written
comments on lengthy or complex issues. This information may then be used to create committee agendas, with the speaker or author
invited toattend.
8.1A Award of Contract for Construction of a New Salt Storage Building - Resolution
Bids for this project will be received on Friday, March 23, 2012. The bid tabulation and
resolution for the award of the contract will be distributed at the meeting on Monday, March 26,
8.2A A Prol2osed Resolution to Declare Lead Agency Status for the Floral Avenue
Multiuse Facility
8.2113 A Proposed Resolution to Declare Lead Agency Status for the Green and Seneca
Street Bulbouts
Please see the information provided by Tim Logue. This starts the environmental review that
,s required before we can proceed with these projects. As "Lead Agency," the BPW will be
responsible for making the community's decision about the level of impacts due to the
proposed projects, and the need for mitigation should any impacts be anticipated.
9.1 Recommendation for Detours during Clinton Street/Prospect Street
Reconstruction Project
The detour that will be signed as part of the project is provided here. I have requested that
Tim Logue review the detour, the related construction -caused transportation impacts studied
as part of the environmental review, the traffic projections for the detour, and any traffic
calming recommended as part of the federally funded project. 1 know Tim has started, and
may have completed this work, but it is not available to me at the time of this agenda. We will
provide it electronically as soon as it is available, or distribute it at the meeting. I know from his
initial work that there was no significant traffic impacts anticipated outside the detour, and no
traffic measures called out in the contract drawings. He is not recommending any initial steps
prior to the start of the contract, beyond collection of some new traffic counts and speeds in
order to be able to judge impacts from the construction detour and design responses if
required. He has run computer models of the expected traffic changes. This stepwise
approach will allow us to test the computer model, and to measure impacts of any measure
that may be installed if they are needed, which will be valuable in the future. While this
approach appeals to the engineer and -economist in me, I expect there will be other views.
9.2 Request to Relocate "The Hot Truck" from Stewart Avenue to 410 College Avenue
I have copied Mr. Smith's request to relocate the '.'Hot Truck" from Stewart Avenue to a location
in front of Sheldon Court. Our initial package of information concerning mobile vending is with
the Board's agenda for March 12, 2012. 1 regard this request as a new request for vending
because it will trigger all the questions and discomfort that starting up a program of this type
will create. The city's two existing hot trucks exist in a vacuum due to the time they have been
in place and the locations they have occupied. They do not hold permits under an existing
program. They are being offered a permit to occupy the street and continue as they are
currently configured. In that sense, they are grandfathered; you cannot relocate a
grandfathered use. While this request makes good business sense for Mr. Smith, it is not
good land use practice for the city. You need to look at the impacts and answer all the
questions before you start up a new program. Kathy created a memo after reviewing the
material and makes recommendations for your review based on the request.
9.3 Request for Commemorative Plaque on the Carl Sagan Bridge
I have not spoken to the individual concerning this request. I think the idea of a plaque is
probably a valuable addition because the bridge has some interesting history and is unique in
its design and construction. I have no idea why the Carl Sagan Bridge would be dedicated "In
memory of David Duncan." It is also not clear to me why the bridge that was precast and ther
erected by the DPW does not merit -some notice of "that effolt, so I am looking forward to
4iscussing this request by Ms. Sullivan.
9.4 Appeal of Recycling Violation for 631 Hudson Street
Recyclable materials that were left at the curb side were picked up and a bill was sent. The
process followed city code requirements and long established DPW practice. The protest from
the prooertv owner, as well as the staff response, is attached.
MLLiPVV-J. CK,2[A, -P.&.
U
Morc,)/i 21, 20-12
8.2A A Proposed Resolution to Declare Lead Agency Status for the Environment
Review of the Floral Avenue Multiuse F it acMy i
WHEREAS, the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) and the City of Itha
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (CEQR), Section 176 of the City Code,
require that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental review of
projects in accordance with local and state environmental law, and I
WHEREAS, State Law specifies that for actions governed by local environmental
review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for
approving and funding or carrying out the action, and
WHEREAS, SEQR and CEQR both provide for an uncoordinated review for "Unlisted"
projects that involve more than one agency, and
WHEREAS, the proposed construction of Floral Avenue Multiuse Facility project (PIN
375463, Capital Project # 770) is a "Unlisted" action under SEQR and is an "Unlisted"
,2.ction under CEQR; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works does hereby declare itself
lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed construction of the Floral
Avenue Multiuse Facility project.
Im
CITY OFTHACA
108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850-6590
OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
Telephone: 607/274-6530 Fax: 607/274-6587
To: Board of Public Works
From: Tim Logue, Transportation Engineer
Date: March 7, 2012
Re: Environmental Review for Floral Avenue Multiuse Facility
PIN 375463, CP # 770
1. A resolution to declare lead agency for the environmental review of the Floral Avenue
Multiuse Facility (trail) project,
2. Preliminary plans for the project
3. Short Environmental Assessment Forms (one for the State Environmental Quality
Review and one for the City Environmental Quality Review)
4. A proposed resolution to declare that the project will have no significant adverse
environmental impact.
I am proposing that the environmental review for this project be conducted as an
uncoordinated review. Both SEAR and CEQR provide for this manner of review provided that
the action is an Unlisted Action and provided that the action is not determined to have a
significant negative impact on the environment. If during the uncoordinated review, the lead
agency determines that the action will have a significant negative impact, then it must
coordinate with other involved agencies. My list of involved agencies includes: Common
Council, NYSDOT, the Federal Highway Administration, NYS DEC and the Army Corps of
Engineers. Based on previous experience, it does not seem likely that any of these agencies
would like to be the lead agency, so it seems reasonable to proceed with an uncoordinated
review.
If you have any questions, feel free to reach me at 274-6535 or tin-do@cityofithaca.org.
CITY SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
Project Information: To be completed by applicant or project sponsor.
Date:
I. Applicant/Sponsor: 2. Project Name:
-1 7,
Q EPNI
3. Project Location:
4. Is Proposed Action:
vNew 0,Expansion o Modification/Alteration
5. Describe project briefly:
6. Precise Location (Road Intersections, Prominent Landmarks, etc. or provide
A,
ni* Al
7. Amount of Land Affected:
Initially I rs or S�.2t. Ultimately A4J�s or S(`:qt.
8. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use
restrictions?
)kYes o No If No, describe briefly:
9. What is present !and use in vicinity of project:
-0 Residential o Industrial o Agricultural Par*nd/Og6n Spy
—
o Commercial 6 Other 604—(k—%1kV-D r_
Describe:
10. Does action involve a permit/approval, or funding, now or ultimately, from
governmental agency (Federal, State or Local):,A Yes o No
If Yes, List Agency Name and Permit/Approval Type:
[1 TDoes any aspect of the action have a currently valid permit or approval?
o Yes A No
If Yes, List Agency Name and Permit/Approval Type:
121. As a result of proposed action will existing permit/approval require modification?
o Yes o No f'Z
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
PREPARER'S SIGNATURE-' DATE:
PREPARER'S TITLE:
A, REPRESENTING: armVI
j:\fon-ns\city seaf form.doc
Part 11
To Be CoMleted
In order to answer the questions in this Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), the preparer is to use
currently available information concerning the project and the likely impacts of the action.
Name of Proiect: Floral Avenue Multiuse Facility
Yes No
1. Will project result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter ❑ X
more than one acre of land?
2. Will there be a change to any unique or unusual land form found on the site or to any ❑ X
site designated a unique natural area or critical environmental area by a local or state
agency?
3. Will the project alter or have any effect on an existing waterway? ❑ X
4. Will the project have an impact on groundwater quality? ❑ X
5. Will the project affect drainage flow on adjacent sites? ❑ X
5. Will the project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? ❑ X
7. Will the project result in an adverse effect on air quality? ❑ X
8. Will the project have an effect on -visual character of the community or scenic views ❑ X
or vistas known to be important to the community:
9. Will the oro*cct adversely impact any site or structure of historic, pre -historic, or ❑ X
paleontological importance or any site designated a local landmark or in a landmark
district?
10. Will the project have an effect on existing or future recreational opportunities? ❑ X
Positive effect by extending a popular recreational facility
11. Will the project result in traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing ❑ X
transportation systems?
12. Will the project cause objectionable odors, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical ❑ X
disturbance as a result of the project's operation during construction or after
completion?
13. Will the project have any impact on public health or safety? ❑ X
14. Will the project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in ❑ X
permanent populations of more than 5 percent over a one-year period OR have a
negative effect on the character of the community or neighborhood?
15. Is there public controversy concerning the project? ❑ X
If any question has been answered YES, a completed Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) is
necessary.
P PARER'S SIGNATURE:
t.� �' � � DATE: 31 %12
PREPARER'S TITLE: City Transportation Eng er
REPRESENTING: City of Ithaca DPW/ENG
617.20
Appendix
ReviewState Environmental Quality
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION To be completed by A 3plicant or Project onsor
1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR 2, PROJECT NAME
City of Ithaca DPW/ENG Floral Avenue Multiuse Facility
3. PROJECT LOCATION:
Municipality City of Ithaca County Tompkins
4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
Along the west bank of the Flood Control Channel, just east of Floral Avenue (Rt 79), extending the existing trail from under the
West State/MLK Jr. Street (Rt 79) bridge, approximately 0.4 miles to the south. Project also includes two spurs and midblock
pedestrian crossings of Floral Avenue: one near the Cedar Creek apartments and the other near 214 Floral Ave.
5. PROPOSED ACTION IS:
New Expansion El Modification/alteration
6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
Construct an asphalt, multiuse trail with two spurs and mid -block pedestrian crossings. Project may also include amenities such as
landscaping, benches and pedestrian scale lighting.
t
7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED:
Initially i acres Ultimately I acres
8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
Yes Li No If No, describe briefly
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
Residential Industrial El Commercial Agriculture Park/Forest/Open Space Other
Describe:
The west side of Floral Avenue is predominantly residential. The area in between Floral Avenue and the Flood Control Channel is
primarily open space, though there is one house at 201 Floral Avenue. Immediately east of the proposed trail is the Flood Control
Channel. The cast side of the Flood Control Channel is primarily industrial/commercial.
10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY
(FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)?
Yes No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
NYS DEC - permit for Protection of Waters and for Use of Flood Control Lands. Funding is 80%
federal (FHWA) and 20% local.
11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
Yes No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
Federal funding is approved.
12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
Li Yes No
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
Applicant/sponsor name: Tim Logue Date: 3/8/12
Signature:t;ta
If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the
Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment
a
PART 11 - IMPACT ASSESSMENT To be coo feted by Lead Agency)
c
FFI
DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.4? If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL EAF.
Yes MT No
B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No, a negative
declaration may be superseded by another involved agency.
® Yes No
C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible)
C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic pattern, solid waste production or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly:
No.
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly:
No.
C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly:
No.
C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly:
No.
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly:
No.
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-05? Explain briefly:
No.
C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly:
No.
D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)?
11 Yes F,71No If Yes, explain briefly:
E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
D Yes 1771 No If Yes, explain briefly:
LLJ
PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each
effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e)
geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain
sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. if question D of Part ii was checked
yes, the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA.
Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULI
EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration.
Checkthis box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed actionWILl
NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide, on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination
City of Ithaca Board of Public Works 3/8/12
Name of Lead Agency Date
William J. Gray, P.E. Superintendent of Public Works
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible O icer
Tim Logue, Transportation Engineer
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (if different from responsible officer)
Board of Public Works
Proposed Resolution
Environmental Review for the Floral Avenue Multiuse Facility, PIN 375463
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has declared itself to be the lead agency for the
environmental review for a project ("the Project") entitled "Floral Avenue Multiuse
Facility" (PIN 375463) in accordance with Section 176 of the Ithaca City Code (CEQR)
and in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation
Law (SEAR), and
WHEREAS, the Project includes construction of a multiuse trail and appurtenances
between Floral Avenue and the Flood Control Channel, including two spurs and
midblock pedestrian crossings, and
WHERAS, the Project is an Unlisted action according to CEQR and an Unlisted Action
according to SEAR, and
WHERAS, a Short Environmental Assessment form was prepared by staff for CEQR and
for SEAR, and
WHERAS, on March , 2012, the Board of Public Works declared itself lead agency
for an uncoordinated environmental review for CEQR/SEAR, and
WHEREAS, the Conservation Advisory Council has received a copy of the CEQR/SEOR
short forms and a set of plans for the project, and
WHERAS, the Board of Public Works, acting as lead agency, has, on March , 2012,
reviewed and accepted as complete Short Environmental Assessment Forms Part I and
Part Il prepared by staff, and Project plans prepared on behalf of the City by Erdman
Anthony, and other project materials, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Board of Public Works determines that the project for the Floral
Avenue Multiuse Facility located in the City of Ithaca will result in no significant
negative environmental impact and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article g
of the NYS Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions
of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act and that a Negative
Declaration for purposes of Section 176 of the City Code be filed in accordance with the
City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance.
8.21B A Proposed Resolution to Declare Lead Agency Status for the Environment
Review of the Green and Seneca Street Bullbouts
WHEREAS, the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) and the City of Ithaca
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (CEQR), Section 176 of the City Code,
require that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental review of
projects in accordance with local and state environmental law, and
WHEREAS, State Law specifies that for actions governed by local environmental
review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for
approving and funding or carrying out the action, and
WHEREAS, SEQR and CEQR both provide for an uncoordinated review for "Unlisted"
projects that involve more than one agency, and
WHEREAS, the proposed construction of Green and Seneca Street Bulb out project
(PIN 375462, Capital Project # 769) is a "Unlisted" action under SEQR and is an
"Unlisted" action under CEQR; now, therefore, beer it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works does hereby declare itself
lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed construction of the Green and
Seneca Street Bulbout project.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850-6590
OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
Telephone: 607/274-6530 Fax: 607/274-6587
To:
Board of Public Works
From:
Tim Logue, Transportation Engineer
Date:
March 7,2012
Re:
Environmental Review for Green and Seneca Street Bulbouts
PIN 375462, CP # 769
Please find enclosed for your consideration:
5. A resolution to declare lead agency for the environmental review of the Green and
Seneca Street Bulbout project.
6. Preliminary plans for the project
7. Short Environmental Assessment Forms (one for the State Environmental Quality
Review and one for the City Environmental Quality Review)
8. A proposed resolution to declare that the project will have no significant adverse
environmental impact.
I am proposing that the environmental review for this project be conducted as an
uncoordinated review. Both SEAR and CEQR provide for this manner of review provided that
the action is an Unlisted Action and provided that the action is not determined to have a
significant negative impact on the environment. If during the uncoordinated review, the lead
agency determines that the action will have a significant negative impact, then it must
coordinate with other involved agencies. My list of involved agencies includes: Common
Council, NYSDOT, and the Federal Highway Administration. Based on previous experience, it
does not seem likely that any of these agencies would like to be the lead agency, so it seems
reasonable to proceed with an uncoordinated review.
PER! 111
CITY SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
Project Information: To be completed by applicant or project sponsor.
Date: 61V--v- —1
1. Applicant/Sponsor: 2. Project Name:
3. Project Location:
4. Is Proposed Action:
o New o Expansion X Modification/Alteration
5. Describe project briefly:
P -ox llcs'3ot C' /b V'V'-e-'5 fivt)A
J
6. Precise Location (Road Intersections, Prominent Landmarks, etc. or provide
map) e�? vJ
Ga
7. Amount of Land Affected:
Initially AZZs E1:
Ultimately1CPCQ1) Aqks or
2LSq. 2
8. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use
restrictions?
-0� Yes o No If No, describe briefly:
9. What is present land use in vic-mit., of project:
Residential o Industrial o Agricultural o Parkland/Open Space
'6 Commercial o, Other
Describe:
10. Does action involve a permit/approval, or funding, now or ultimately, from
governmental agency (Federal, State or Local): o. Yes o No V'W
If Yes, List Agency Name and Permit/Approval Type: 1", AA,
11. Does any aspect of the action have a currently valid permit or approval?
o Yes No
If Yes, List Agency Name and Permit/Approval Type:
12. As a result of proposed action will existing permit/approval require modification?
o Yes o No -3 1 A
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: DATE: z
PREPARER'S TITLE:
REPRESENTING:
J
j:\fon-ns\city seaf fon-n.doc
SNORT ENVIRONMENTAL EN'I ASSESSMENT FORM
Part 11
To Be Completed By Staff
In order to answer the questions in this Short Environmental Assessment Form (SERF), the preparer is to use
currently available information concerning the project and the likely impacts of the action.
Name of Proiect: Green and Seneca Street Bulbouts
Yes No
1. Will project result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter ❑ X
more than one acre of land?
2. Will there be a change to any unique or unusual land form found on the site or to any
site designated a unique natural area or critical environmental area by a local or state ❑ X
agency?
3. Will the project alter or have any effect on an existing waterway? ❑ X
4. Will the project have an impact on groundwater quality? ❑ X
5. Will the project affect drainage flow on adjacent sites? ❑ X
6. Will the project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? ❑ X
7. Will the project result in an adverse effect on air quality? ❑ X
8. Will the project have an effect on visual character of the community or scenic views ❑ X
or vistas known to be important to the community:
7. Will the project. adversely im:;act any alit_ yr ,—i.:ct�..�.re of....W.—, pre -I s. Ic fJ'Y
El X
paleontological importance or any site designated a local landmark or in a landmark
district?
10. Will the project have an effect on existing or future recreational opportunities? ❑ X
11. Will the project result in traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing ❑ X
transportation systems?
12. Will the project cause objectionable odors, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical
disturbance as a result of the project's operation during construction or after ❑ X
completion?
13. Will the project have any impact on public health or safety? ❑ X
14. Will the project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in
❑
permanent populations of more than 5 percent over a one-year period OR have a X
negative effect on the character of the community or neighborhood?
15. Is there public controversy concerning the project? ❑ X
If any question has been answered YES, a completed Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) is
necessary.
PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: � ���~t"'� �,:��'`�' � "�1 _11IL-1
BATE: 3/7/12
PREPARER'S TITLE: Transportation Engine
REPRESENTING: City of Ithaca — Office of the City Engineer
617.20
Appendix
QualityState Environmental
SHORT.. ASSESSMENT
1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR
2. PROJECT NAME
City of Ithaca - DPW/ENG
Green & Seneca Street Bulbouts, PIN 375462
3. PROJECT LOCATION:
Municipality City of Ithaca County Tompkins
4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
The following four intersections: W. Green/S. Plain, W. Green/S. Corn, W. Seneca/N. Plain, W. Seneca/N. Corn streets
5. PROPOSED ACTION IS:
® New ® Expansion ❑✓ Modification/alteration
6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY:
The improvements consist of two curbed bulb -outs on the upstream traffic side of each of the subject intersections. Curb ramps with
detectable warning surfaces will be constructed to comply with ADA standards. Existing drainage will be modified. Pavement
markings and signage will be included.
7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED:
Initially 0.018 acres Ultimately 0.018 acres
8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
® Yes ® No If No, describe briefly
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
® Residential ❑ Industrial 0 Commercial ❑ Agriculture ® Park/Forest/Open Space ® Other
Describe:
The north side of West Seneca Street and the south side of West Green Street is almost all residential. The south side of West
Seneca Street and the north side of West Green Street is mostly commercial.
10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY
(FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)?
✓❑ Yes No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
NYSDOT - Highway Work Permit
11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
Yes ® No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals:
12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
® Yes ® No
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
Applicant/sponsor name: Tim Logue, Transportation Engineer Date: 3/8/12
Signature:
If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the
CoastalAssessment
.. sy Form before ` proceeding -;. this assessment
OVER
1
Reset
A.
DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.4? If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL EAF.
® Yes ® No
B.
WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No, a negative
declaration may be superseded by another involved agency.
® Yes ® No
C.
COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible)
C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic pattern, solid waste production or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly:
No.
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly:
No.
C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly:
No.
C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly:
No.
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly:
No.
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-05? Explain briefly:
t�To.
C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly:
No.
D.
WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)?
® Yes IZ No If Yes, explain briefly:
E.
IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
® Yes [Z] No If Yes, explain briefly:
PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each
effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e)
geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary,add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain
sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was checked
yes, the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA.
® Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FUI
EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration.
® Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WIL
NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide, on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determinatio
City of Ithaca Board of Public Works 318I12
Name of Lead Agency Date
William Gray, P.E. Superintendent of Public Works
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer
Tim Loaue
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer)
Board of Public Works
Proposed Resolution
Environmental Review for the Green and Seneca Street Bulbout Project
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has declared itself to be the lead agency for the
environmental review for a project ("the Project") entitled "Green and Seneca Street
Bulbouts" (PIN 375462) in accordance with Section 176 of the Ithaca City Code (CEQR)
and in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation
Law (SEAR), and
WHEREAS, the Project includes construction on curb bulbouts on Green and Seneca
Streets on the upstream side of the intersections with Plain Street and Corn Street, which
should improve conditions for pedestrians, and
WHERAS, the Protect is an iJi ails Led action i according to CEQR and anUr'ihs led Action
a
according to SEAR, and
WHERAS, a Short Environmental Assessment form was prepared by staff for CEQR and
for SEQR, and
WHERAS, on March , 2012, the Board of Public Works declared itself lead agency
for an uncoordinated environmental review for CEQR/SEQR, and
WHEREAS, the Conservatior°a A Avisory Council has recei� ecl a copy of the CEQR/SEQR
short forms and a set of plans for the project, and
WHERAS, the Board of Public Works, acting as lead agency, has, on March 2012,
reviewed and accepted as complete Short Environmental Assessment Forms Part I and
Part II prepared by staff, and Project plans prepared on behalf of the City by Erdman
Anthony, and other project materials, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Board of Public Works determines that the project for Green and
Seneca Street Bulbouts located in the City of Ithaca will result in no significant negative
environmental impact and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the
NYS Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part
617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act and that a Negative Declaration for
purposes of Section 176 of the City Code be filed in accordance with the City
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance.
-- — —————————— — — — — — —
EMBANKMENT IN PLACE (TYPJ
3' TOPSOIL AND
ESTABLISH TRH ITYPJ�
MIN GARDEN PLANTS (TYPJ
6"
t JAB
UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION AND DISPOSAL (TYPJ
STONE CtBB. GRANITE
TYPE C (TYPJ
1 % HA)A TOP COURSE (TYPJ
$— — (TYPJ
— — — — —
2 %i xuA BINDER COA?SE (TYPJ
6' HYA BASE CGSRSE tTYP.)
— — — — — — — — — — — —
12' SUBBASE COURSE (TYPJ
EXISTING PAVE NT SECTRON — — — — —
N"—CDLVERT AND TRENCH
EXCAVATION 6 UNDERORAIN
FILTER. TYPE I (TYPJ
(SEE NOTE 3)
WEST GREEN STREET
STD CURBB, GRANITE
TYPE C (TYPJ
S-- ----
i'/i HANATOP COIHRSE(TYPJ --_---------------
2 '/i H_ BINDER COtA:SE 11YPJ — — — —
6' HMNA BASE C049RSE Ty,..
SUBBASE 12" SUBBASE COURSE (TYP.D EXISTING PAVE4117 SECTION
CULVERT AND THE"
EXCAVATION 6 RORAIN_
FILTER. TYPE I (TYPJ
WEST SENECA STREET
2 (TYPJ
AND
TURF (TYPJ
a x VARIES_
----_.----
----------
r•-o'
PERFORATED COATED POLY.
UNERDRAIN PIPE. 4- DIA. (TYPJ
(SEE NOTE 3)
UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION AND DISPOSAL (TYPJ
3
3' MI CH
— — —------__--- IV 810-RENTION AND
—`- DRY SWALE SOIL (TYPJ
EMBANKMENT IN PLACE (TYPJ `6' UNDERORAIN FILTER, TYPE I (TYPJ
PERFORATED COATED POLY. GEOTEXTILE SEPERATION (TYPJ
UNDERORAIN PIPE. 4' DIA. (TYPJ
(SEE NOTE 3)
NOTES:
I. WIDTH OF RAIN GARDEN 15 DEPENDENT ON THE
LOCATION OF EXISTING SIDEWALK AND NEW CURB.
SEE DWG. NO. XX-X FOR CONTOURS.
2. GRADE LANDSCAPE AREA TO DRAIN TOWARDS ROADWAY.
MATCH INTO EXISTING SIDEWALK WITH A MAX. 33% SLOPE.
3. SEE DWG. NO. XX-X FOR UNDERORAIN DETAIL.
E R D A N
ANTS- ONY A
2165 Brighton Henrietta Town Line Road
Rochester. NY 14623
[T] 585.427.8888
[F] 585.427.8914
erdmanonthony.com
DATE DATE
i NOTE: MAO HORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITION TO THIS
DRAWING IS A VIOLATION OF THE NEW YORK STATEI
EDUCATION LAW ARTICLE 145. SECTION 7204.
REVISIONS
�NO. DESCRIPTION I BY DATE
04 ITI�
CITY OF ITHACA
PROJECT (NAME
ITHACA BULB -OUTS
WEST GREEN STREET &
i WEST SENECA STREET
TOMPIUNS COUNTY,
CITY OF ITHACA
DRAWING TITLE
I
TYPICAL SECTIONS
1
iSCALE OdiE ,..
i
1/4"
PJ.N. E. PROJECT N0.
3754.62 19373.(XD
SHEET NO. DRAWING NO.
a OF X TYP-I
0
a
NO PARKING t�
18" MAPLE
z I
0 ^'
8
I l yy-'ll�
� I t
STOP j
v �I
18" MAPLE CONC SW
_
rn----
o-a'-0o
CONC 14" MAPLE
— R=2fi'-fi" I j. -- — i
79 WEST WAY
� NO PARKING 1
PROPOSED GRANITE
CURB. TYPE C (TYP.)
WEST SENECA STREET 9
WS 8+71 WS 9+00 — — _ _ WS Ally +00
1
PROPOSED SAWCUT (TYP.)
NYSEG
1139A
NYT118
NYT119\ CONC -y9 ' P o .`24" LOCUST 0
—59�i CONC S43'
14" MAPLE
� O
�lJ
N , —REMOVE EXISTING CURB
PROPOSED CAST IRON
1 I DETECTABLE WARNING
I SURFACE (TYP.)
I 1
I I 1
1 RELOCATE SIGN•
I I °
I1 sue, -a-
I ► ,
1 , i NE WAYa
k °
R-12'-O-
-ADJUST MANHOLE
a
'U
ADJUST FRAME AND GRATE TO GRAVE
PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN LOCATION
I
COIL, SW
0
FRAME AND COVER
TO GRADE / 08 - v e
,.� D 12� GIP ST — CIP ST
UNTL k✓` R-25'-6- 7
-�a- rrii 103
0 I 1
STO
NO PARKING
Ta2" CIP of
V
WEST SENECA STREET AND
CORN STBEET INTFRSFCTIQd
SCALE: 1"-20'
\ 1 0 �714" MAPLE e
WS 11+00,
�3
92
NO PARKING
-392 - CONC _ —
° O WAY
..--392- CONC SW
PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN LOCATION
NYSEG
RELOCATE SIGN a 25
7-187
NYT117
ADJUST FRAME AND GRATE TO GRADE
'--REMOVE EXISTING CURB
18" MAPLE
EROMAN
ANTHONY WMA
2165 Brighton Henrietta Town Line Road
Rochester, NY 14623
[T] 585.427.8888
[F] 585.427.8914
erdmanon than y.com
DATE DATE
NOTE: UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITION TO THIS
DRAWING IS A VIOLATION OF THE NEW YORK STATE
EDUCATION LAW ARTICLE 145. SECTION 7209.
CLIENT
CITY OF ITHACA
PROJECT NAME
ITHACA BULB -OUTS
i WEST GREEN STREET &
WEST SENECA STREET
TOMPKINS COUNTY,
CITY OF ITHACA
iDRAWING TITLE
GENERAL PLAN
SCALE DATE
1' = 20' ???'?
P.I.N. EAA PROJECT NO.
3754.62 i 19373.00
SHEET NO. DRAW[NG NO. {
a OF X j GNP-1 {
m
CONC SW
cam_
—
...— --..._ WEST 79 - --
_395—
WEST SENECA STREET
_..._.......®.®._.--- 4—._.—._._.e._._
WS 15+00
NYSEG II
NO STANDING NY208
CONC SW
PROPOSED CONCRETE
SIDEWALK (TYP,)
NO STANDING
C731
NYSEG
L125
207
O � 118" OAK
—o-iiI NO PARKING
STOP If
�tPE WAY —PROPOSED GRANITE
CURB, TYPE C (TYP,)
0-
O
r-PROPOSED SAOCLIT (TYP.)
bNE, WeY
R_27'
'o \
`` C 781
P�YSEG i 1
0 NYT
i`� � ST 15
I
i
Iw m
POLE
a 11�t0�i
I Ir
l,l al
28" OAK )
0
NO PARKING'
o I E
I REMOVE EXISTING CURB
2o•-r' �
PROPOSED CAST IRON
I w� ADJUST FRAME AND GRATE TO GRADE
I� DETECTABLE WARNING
SURFACE (TYPJ
1 i PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN LOCATION
I - - RELOCATE SIGN
+
9 ,
+ONE WAY CONC SW
1 STR s v
RCP 5T- S ___ST ST ST i
6"
0
N
R=12'-0"
I
a
.I._.—._.®.
_ :_.
e._}_.�._.a.
._._.—._._.
15+00205
YSEG
D'!2�
2' RCE-
NYT III
ST
2 CIF
_
e
T ST
ONE W
28 LOCUST
E
+oo
GONG SW
PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN LOCATION
RELOCATE SIGN
1
STbP
ADJUST FRAME AND GRATE TO GRADE
20' (i" 1
REMOVE EXISTING CURB
P
Si
I /1
WEST SENECA STREET AND
PLAIN STREET INTERSECTION
SCALE: 1'=20'
v
z
0
U
28" OAK
IS 17+00
=ST ST
WS 17+27
ROMAN
ANTHONY
y�
1 H O i alA
2165 Brighton Henrietta Town Line Road
Rochester, NY 14623
[T] 585.427.8888
[F] 585.427.8914
erdmonanthony.com
UAIE DATE
NOTE: UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITION TO THIS
DRAWING IS A VIOLATION OF THE NEW YORK STATE
EDUCATION LAW ARTICLE 145. SECTION 7209.
CLIENT
CITY OF ITHACA
I ITHACA BULB -OUTS
WEST GREEN STREET &
WEST SENECA STREET
TOMPKINS COUNTY,
CITY OF ITHACA
DRAWING TITLE
SCALE
DATE
1„ = 20'
????
P.lN.
EAA PROJECT NO.
3754.62
19373.00 1
SHEET NO.
�. DRAWING NO.
a OF X
i GNP 2
m'
m
a
0
m
NO
_ — _�
r� i
30" MAPLE- —�
_395
RG 8+76 NG 9400
WEST GREEN STREET
13- MAPLE
P � -
NO RIGHT TURN
L21 °
7-160 i
k
r i
J 4 I t
NO PARKINGI U I
i N Il I r7
�Tr
I �
I 1
� I �
REMOVE EXISTING CURB RELOCATE SIGN
� a
STOB
i
-, ,--`
GONG SW
\ \ � ONE WAYI1
024-
MAPLE `;92, 1 \ I R-22'-5"
US MAIL BOX13
I
i PROPOSED GRANITE
CURB. TYPE C tTYP")
WG I *m
N 1 I O
ST"� ST SPEED
2" RCP
® }S' RCP LIMIT
30
J i
\
R-24'-0"
30" MAPLE
- J�
16" MAPLE
NYSEG 53 CONC- -"" —392
I-x NYT 7
o
P a (°
1i \
RELOCATE SIGN -
GONG SW
REMOVE EXISTING C1IR8
RELOCATE SIGN
26" MAPLE
ONE
STREET 1
SIGN 1
I 15'-2"( [
C
O
PROPOSED SAWCUT 1TYP.1
7-1s9
NYSEG 24" LOCUST
159 -1
' 0 p
r
NO STANDING
fIc n°
PROPOSED CAST IRON
g:-,-- DETECTABLE WARNING
SURFACE tTYPJ
NYSEG (.
7 47
,t �I NYT 2.5
4 i STOP
o{ �4" StAPIE I 3
z _
/ U
Z
„ w
w
rz
NO PARKING
V
WEST GREEN STREET AND
CORN STREET INTFRSECTION
SCALE: 1"-20'
PROPOSED CONCRETE
SIDEWALK :TYP.1
WG I1+00
SPEED NYSEG
30 L11272
30
.� CONC o = _393-
6" MAPLE 09N6 SW
EROMAN 0,
ANTHONY
2165 Brighton Henrietta Town Line Road
Rochester, NY 14623
[T] 585.427.8888
[F] 585-427.8914
erdmanonthony.com
DATE DATE
NOTE: UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR AD�YORK
DRAWING IS A VIOLATION Of THE EDUCATION LAW ARTICLE 145. SEC
CLIENT
CITY OF ITHACA
PROJECT NAME
ITHACA BULB -OUTS
WEST GREEN STREET &
WEST SENECA STREET
TOMPKINS COUNTY,
f CITY OF ITHACA
DRAWING TITLE
I GENERAL PLAN
I
SCALE DATE
20' ????
P.I.N. FAA PROJECT NO.
3754.62 19373.00
i SHEET NO. DRAWING NO..
a Of x GNP-3
m
1 l
j
i 0
z
0
12" OAK a
NO PARKING
� I I
RELOCATE SIGN
REMOVE EXISTING CURS —.
_1-8=-MAPLE—_ — _ _ CONC SW
CONC _385-- — o ' 18" MAPLE ONE Y
NO STANDING TRUCKS _
NO LEFT 7.
TURN `
i395— — o
\ ---
i N
WEST GREEN STREET__ —
—.—.—. AG i5+00
` N
NYSEG
L-23
14
NYT 34
0
_�.1.
1 ST t2"
ADJUST FRAME AND
�1
STOP
0-0
GRATE TO GRADE
00
PROPOSED CAST IRON
e I DETECTABLE WARNING
T SURFACE (T YP,)
(B
\ N 9O
NYSEGEG
L127 --
235
NYT I
_ — — -- — 04E WAIF
i7- 28' LOCUST 26" LOCUST o C0
7
CONC SW
I-7 F_ s
RELOCATE SIGN
REMOVE EXISTING CURB/1
j 0 I 11-267
NYT 5
N II
U �
Z
U
MH 1 1
RIM 395.6a 2" OAK
O
N
w z
NO PARKING C)
{ I
,t
—ST
I TSP
O
i TRAFFIC
°,° „ o° CONC SW 4" MH CRABAPPLE
R:22'-6" TAND S9ING o 20" MAPLE
lq—
PROPOSED SAICUT (TYP.) 2 GIP sr 12" RCP
Q-
.—.—.- —.—.—. ¢_ —.—. .—.—...... ...... ......
—.�.—.—.
NGoJ6+00 \ _ RG 17+00 WG 17+14
R:24'-O' ST 6" RCP ���� ---CP --
i
L TSP O — —396CONC
RTE 79
„ j, 20" LOCUST CONC SW 28" LOCUST -0-
PROPOSED GRANITE > ,,,,
CURB. TYPE C (TYPJ
ADJUST PULLBOX TO GRADE
(a STOP
PROPOSED CONCRETE SIDEWALK (TVP.)
6" CRAPPAPPLE I�
H
1.a.8
W
V) i
9£'£ 1+6 d 1
a
WEST GREEN STREET AND
PLAIN STREET INTERS CTION
SCALE: 1":20'
—396_
i`
i t
21
`r ,J 74" CRABAPPLE
NO PARKING
�EROMAN
ANTHONY
2165 Brighton Henrietta Town Line Road
Rochester, NY 14623
[T] 585.427.8888
[F] 585.427.8914
erdmonanthony.com
DATE DATE
NOTE: UNAUTHORIZED ALTEHAIWN OR AODITfON TO THIS
DRAWING [S A VIOLATION OF THE NEW YORK STATEORAWING [5 A VIOLATION OG THE NEW YORK STATE
EOUCATWN LAW ARTICLE I45. SECTION 7209.
CLIENT
aRmll "Sim
CITY OF ITHACA
PROJECT NAME
ITHACA BULB -OUTS
i ',SST GREEN STREET «
WEST SENECA STREET
TOMPKINS COUNTY,
CITY OF ITHACA
DRAWING TITLE
GENERAL PLAN
{
SCALE DATE
1'= 20' ????
i
P.I.N. EAA PROJECT NO.
j 3754.62 19373.00
SHEET N0. DRAWING NO.
zz OF X GNP-4
i
�I�Is
I
_JI
I � /
J
-1
DET(
HE
Eli
I W20
--"- — _— ..... ........
-
li.
r
I �I
.,- -
Ul -4
4
LANE i_ i
U5-4--
-- - - -
U 3
—_
ST CLINTON ST
96B
,I
DETOUR
I.
CLOSED _. _ —
AHEAD--
_.
Rli-4 MOD _i
n
U4-9
NOTES: �( r j
1. SEE WORK ZONE TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE —
REQUIREUENTS.
IRID GE OUT
2. THIS SPECIAL SIGN SHALL HAVE BLACK LEGEND ON AN _ __
:I
J�-
ORANGE BACKGROUND AS INDICATED BY TABLE 2A-5 OF THE 2009 4 — d L
M.U.T.C.D. FOR LETTERING CRITERIA REFER TO SECTION 2105 OF THE
2009 U.U.T.C.D. �� LOCALS T fC t1N
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE THIS SIGN AT EACH END OF THE iii
BRIDGE A MINI" OF 21 DAYS PRIOR TO THE CLOSING DATE OF THE J , � 1 lt-38
a';,
BRIDGE. LOCATION OF THE SIGNS DURING THE ADVANCE NOTICE PERIOD j
SHALL NOT INTERFERE WITH TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN / BICYCLE FLOW4 j
OR SIGHT DISTANCE.
Ij I ,
4. (2) PVUS TO BE INSTALLED FOR A PERIOD OF 3 WEEKS PRIOR TO [ ;
BRIDGE CLOSURE. SEE CONSTRUCTION PHASING NOTES ON DWG. NO.
mm
ORT
i - is
H
-J, ` •t -
IJ U 1
-9 B
r - -_
rUl 4
i
1 LEFT
I .I :LANE
- J i [ {.��
:r ,
----
cco
Al�'
V1,
OUT
-
i
®® `v --- -
THBOUND DETOUR ROUTE ®� ® m -
_. END '"=;
=r
U1-4'.. _
I
i
�'
RTiT13R
LEFT
U4
E
1-41
WORK ZONE AREA
r.tSEE NOTE it
�( �\
yy(�/ INGr a —;
/Va
SEE NOTES 2 '&. 3= II
AST GLIi'ON ST '
AHEAD
e
Kulw
BEGINNING
a !
-'( :I�� G �� -t
,. ' Ir r D TOUR
�AHA
,- i
i
4 - K
+ 22
4
Pith 3754.57
CITY OF ITHACA
PROSPECT STREET RECONSTRUCTION
REPLACEMENT OF THE EAST CLINTON STREET BRID
OFFSITE
VEHICULAR DETOUR SIGNING PLAN
SCALE DRAWING NO.
NONE.. UP5=O1,�
wamamcs, wean CT%sw Dmwmsvve m DATE SHEET
,,,,-- art,, ,, flC , .