HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2016-03-28Board of Public Works Meeting Proceedings
Regular Meeting 4:45 p.m. March 28, 2016
Present:
Mayor Myrick
Commissioners (4) Greene, Darling, Goldsmith, Jenkins
Others Present:
Supt. of Public Works – Thorne
Director of Engineering – Logue
Asst. Supt. S & F – Benjamin
Asst. Supt. W & S – Whitney
CC Liaison – Fleming
Information Management Specialist – Myers
Director of Parking – Nagy
Bridge Systems Engineer Gebre
Excused:
Commissioner Warden
Call to Order - Additions to or Deletions From the Agenda:
Supt. Thorne requested the addition of the following item to the agenda:
“Stewart Park Picnic (Large) Pavilion Restoration Approval of Grant Funding –
Resolution”
No Board Member Objected.
Mayor Myrick requested that “Discussion” Item G entitled “Tioga Street and the Bicycle
Boulevard” be moved up the agenda and be the first item discussed by the Board after
public speaking.
No Board Member Objected.
Communications and Hearings from Persons Before the Board:
The following people addressed the Board to voice their support for the extension of the
Bicycle Boulevard to the 200 and 300 blocks of North Tioga Street:
David West, Chair of the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Council and city of Ithaca resident
Pat Duff, Town of Ithaca
Vicki Armstrong, City of Ithaca
The following people addressed the Board to voice their opposition for the extension of
the Bicycle Boulevard to the 200 and 300 blocks of North Tioga Street:
Kris Lewis, Downtown Ithaca Alliance Employee and former business owner on the
Commons
John Graves, on behalf of the South Hill Civic Association
Tim Gammons, Hilton Hotel employee
Jan Lawless, Town of Ithaca
Ann Sullivan, City of Ithaca
Pam Mackesey, City of Ithaca
George McGonigal, City of Ithaca Common Council Member, First Ward, speaking on
behalf of First Ward constituents because their comments that were e-mailed to staff
were left out of the information distributed to Board members
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
2
Dave Nutter, member of the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Council and City of Ithaca
resident, addressed the Board to encourage them to choose railings for the Cascadilla
Creekway Project that will be high enough to keep a bike rider from toppling over them.
He agreed that additional accessible parking spaces are needed in the 200 and 300
blocks of North Tioga Street, as well as the need to maintain short-term parking for easy
access to Town Hall, the Post Office, and the County Courthouse. He noted that bike
lanes are very important and there should be a way to also implement the bicycle
boulevard plan. He would like to join in the discussions to problem solve these issues.
Gary Ferguson, Downtown Ithaca Alliance Director, addressed the Board to express
support for keeping the short-term parking along the 200 and 300 blocks of North Tioga
Street. He said that parking on the street is essential to the businesses and public
institutions downtown. He would encourage the City to develop a survey of Post Office
patrons to see if they bike or drive there, and what is most important to them – the
parking or the extension of the Bike Boulevard and removal of the parking. He also
expressed his support for the proposed scratch-off card system to pay for parking
downtown. He agreed that the over 55 demographic does not like the pay stations, and
the difficulty they create for people who need accessible parking spaces. If we want to
keep these visitors coming to downtown, then an alternate solution to the use of the pay
stations is needed.
Response to the Public and Discussion Regarding the Extension of the Bicycle
Boulevard to the 200 and 300 Blocks of North Tioga Street:
Director of Engineering Logue provided the following information about the project for
the Board’s information:
“For your discussion today, I thought it would be useful to present the parking data that
was collected by the Parking Division and to help summarize the public comment that
you have now received (both what I handed out at your last meeting and the additional
comments that were emailed the next day). After a little more discussion, I will be ready
to make a recommendation for April 11th, with the hope of a decision on April 25th.
The parking data shows the parking counts and occupancies for the 200, 300 and 400
blocks of Tioga Street, and for the side street blocks on Buffalo and Court Streets. The
data is broken down by block, by each side of the street and by time of day. The
morning counts were taken mostly between 9 am and 11am. The afternoon counts were
taken between noon and 2 pm. The evening counts were taken later in the day, around
7 pm and 8 pm, when people don’t have to pay to park. You’ll note there are some
zeros with a line through them. These are actually not zeros but a record of no count at
that time on that day. Zeros that are not crossed out represent no cars parked at that
time.
As a reminder, under the bike lane scenario, the proposal would be to remove parking
on the east side of the 200 block and 300 block of N. Tioga Street only (i.e., just
between the Commons and Court Street); no parking would be affected in the 400 block
(north of Court Street).
The data shows that the on-street parking in the 200 and 300 blocks of N. Tioga Street
is fairly well used, but not fully used. Generally, one would want to see about 85%
occupancy to feel that the parking was well used, but still had some occupancy so that
people don’t have to circle the block in order to find a parking space. In the two blocks
closest to the Commons, we generally find that parking is about 50-60% occupied; this
is also true of the blocks of Buffalo Street to either side of Tioga Street. As you go a little
farther north to the 400 block of Tioga Street and the blocks on Court Street, we are
seeing occupancy rates in the 30-45% range. The only place where occupancies
exceed this is the west side of the 400 block of N. Tioga Street, north of Cascadilla
Creek, where we have a free, odd/even parking zone. Using standard lengths for
parallel parking spaces, we would say there were 10 parking spaces available here;
people regularly find ways to cram 11 or 12 cars in this zone and therefore we see
occupancies over 100%.
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
3
Looking at the impacts of removing parking on the east side of the street in the 200 and
300 blocks in order to accommodate bicycle lanes, one can look both at the demand
and supply side of the parking. On the supply side, in the 200 block, there would be five
parking spaces removed; these spaces are posted for a 10 minute limit and they are
free. On the demand side, there is usually at least one and generally two spaces
available on that side of the street. Thus, demand is showing us that there would be
three or four vehicles displaced.
In the 300 block, on the supply side, there are 13 metered spaces on the east side of
the street that would be removed in order to accommodate bicycle lanes. These spaces
are pay to park spaces from 9 am to 6 pm, and each space has a two hour limit during
that time. On the demand side, these spaces are running about 50-60% full during the
pay to park times, meaning that on average there are about eight cars parked in those
spaces that would be displaced.
There is also a policy question as to whether we ought to plan for the average demand
or whether we ought to plan for some percentage of peak demand. The peak demand in
the 200 block was that all five parking spaces were full; this happened four times during
the morning and afternoon times, out of 18 times those spaces were counted. In seven
instances (out of 18 counts), at least four of the five spaces were parked up; this would
represent 80% of peak demand. Thus, in more than half of the counts, there were three
or fewer cars in those spaces.
In the 300 block, the peak count during the work day was 11 occupied spaces out of 13
available. This happened twice out of the 18 parking counts. Only one additional count
had more than eight cars parked. Nine parking spaces would meet the demand for 80%
of the peak demand; however, in fifteen instances (more than 80% of the time), there
were eight or fewer cars parked in that block.
Lastly, counts from the Seneca Street parking garage showed that there is still quite a
bit of vacancy in the garage. Granted, we only had three daytime counts, when demand
would be highest, but even so, there were between 125 and 150 available spaces in the
garage.
There are a number of possible mitigations for losing these spaces and we can talk
more about these options during the meeting. Possible mitigations include:
• Looking to absorb the displaced parking in other existing parking spaces,
including available parking on Buffalo Street, Court Street, the 400 block of N. Tioga
Street, and in the Seneca Street parking garage
• Further marketing the “shoppers” zone in the Seneca Street parking garage that
allows short term parking (not monthly parking passes) in the lower level, hotel parking.
The first 100 spaces in the hotel parking zone are available to the public Monday
through Friday from 9 am to 3 pm for short term parking, which could include all six of
those hours. Occupancy counts from the garage show that there are plenty of available
spaces in the garage, at least 100 spaces, during the day, and many more in the
evening. This helps mitigate the concern that it takes so long to circulate to the upper
floors of the garage to get past the hotel zone.
• There is room to add two parking spaces on the south side of the 200 block of
East Buffalo Street, alongside Town Hall. There used to be a bus stop at the east end of
that block and two parking spaces were removed to accommodate the bus getting to the
curb. This stop was eliminated, but the parking was never returned to the street.
Note: there are nine free, 10 minute parking spaces in this block (four on the south side
and five on the north side of the street). You could consider adding two new 10 minute
spaces on the south side and making the length of the north side all paid parking.
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
4
• Create a loading zone on the west side of the 200 block of N. Tioga Street. We
used to have a loading zone near Seneca Street, but when the large bump-out was
installed, the loading zone was eliminated instead of relocated. Re-establishing a
loading zone (or short term parking, say 15 min.) near the bump-out would provide for
the quick in and out trips to the post office, coffee shops, etc.
Public comment summary
I hope you had the chance to read through the 60 comments that we received. About
70% of the comments were from individuals and the rest from businesses or groups.
There are many fine points made by many people. In broad strokes, I would summarize
the comments as evenly split between those didn’t want us to remove parking and those
who thought it would be worth it to have the bike lanes extended to the Commons.
There were a number of comments that extending the bicycle boulevard treatment
south of Court Street wouldn’t be appropriate to encourage the design user described in
the Bike Boulevard Plan (sometimes summarized as the 8 to 80 crowd) because the
traffic conditions change. About 80% of the people who wanted bicycle improvements
wanted some sort of bicycle lanes. There were a few people who advocated for
removing all the parking in order to have buffered bike lanes. There were others who felt
strongly that the parking was too important and too full to be removed for a small
number of users and that a shared bike boulevard treatment would be a sufficient
accommodation. There was definitely a theme related to increasing frustration with
parking downtown and a concern that we are already losing parking downtown. This
may be related to the City parking lot between Community School of Music and Arts and
the Carey Building, or construction in or near the parking garages, but I think much of
this relates to people’s experiences or expectations with the new pay machines. Maybe
there is some residual memory related to the bike lanes on North Cayuga Street, but
that parking isn’t really “downtown” in the same way and by my account, things have
settled down there.
Despite people’s frustrations with the pay machines, the installation of the machines
hasn’t reduced the number of parking spaces much, if at all. If anything, they allow more
vehicles to fit in a block face. To be fair, there is still a lot of needed parking signage to
go along with the pay machines, regulating paid parking zones, loading zones, etc., but
otherwise, the pay machines haven’t impacted the supply of on-street parking. There
were a few comments about making sure that there is adequate on-street parking
reserved for people with disabilities, and to ensure there is enough short term, free
parking near the Post Office and Town Hall. There were a number of comments focused
on the regional nature of some of the buildings in these blocks and the recognition that
many people need to drive to get to County Court or County offices, to Town Hall, and
to the Post Office. Lastly, there were a few comments in favor of bike lanes that framed
the discussion in terms of the broader City goals outlined in the Comprehensive Plan
and densification policies, stating that improved walking and biking infrastructure is key
to achieving those goals.”
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
5
Junior Transportation Engineer Johnson provided the following summary of the parking
occupancy data for the proposal:
“This memo contains a summary of the parking
occupancy data that was collected to estimate
the impact of removing half, or all, of the on-
street parking along the 200-300 blocks of N.
Tioga St. (the two blocks between Seneca St.
and Court St.) for the purpose of installing bike
lanes to complete the design approved in the
City’s Bicycle Boulevard Plan along N. Tioga St.
as described in my 1/29/16 memo. Three design
alternatives were provided, two which described
removal of the parking along just the east side
of the 200-300 blocks, and a third alternative
which described the removal of parking from
both sides of the street in those blocks. Removal
of parking along the east side of these blocks
would remove 13 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces
as well as 5 free 10-minute parking spaces – a
total of 18 parking spaces. Removal of parking
along both sides of the street would increase the
above numbers by 18 metered 2-Hr. parking
spaces – for a total of 31 parking spaces.
Data was collected in the blocks highlighted on
the map on the right as well as the Seneca St.
parking garage. The parking occupancy data
includes paid and free parking spaces, but does
not include loading zones (which are present on
the south side of the 100 block of E. Buffalo St.).
On-street parking data was collected between 2/26/16 – 3/10/16 and included counts
during late morning, mid-afternoon, and evening hours. The Seneca Street parking
garage data represents 2/22/16 – 2/24/16.” This information will be attached to the
minutes.
Mayor Myrick thanked staff for the work they did to provide the detailed information
regarding the parking study, public comments and parking revenue. He noted that
between that information and the information provided by the public at tonight’s meeting
that it has provided a lot of information for the Board to consider. He also thanked staff
for their work to make sure the public was aware of the proposal. He asked Board
members, given all the information they received tonight, how they felt about the project.
He still thinks and said this a couple weeks ago, which is unusual for him because he is
a pedestrian and bicyclist and has taken complaints about it, that the traffic in these two
blocks is naturally calm, that it does not seem necessary to take the parking away in
order to provide a safe environment for bicyclists. He stated that not only do cars avoid
these blocks if they not visiting these public institutions, but they drive slowly through
them. The closer one gets to the Commons the more stopping and slower traffic speeds
are encountered. He would support leaving the parking, if other municipalities (the
Town and County) want to provide short term parking for their customers and want to
move employees to garages then the City would work with them so that more on street
parking could be opened up. The Post Office is a public service so if these two blocks
can be safe for bicyclists and convenient to park then that’s what should be done.
Figure 1: Parking occupancy data was collected in
the highlighted blocks as well as the Seneca St.
parking garage. The yellow section indicates the
200-300 blocks of N. Tioga St. where parking
removal is being considered.
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
6
Commissioner Greene expressed his agreement with the Mayor’s comments. He also
noted that part of him, in looking at the data provided, questions some of the
assumptions that the parking is underutilized and that there are open spaces in the
garage. To make the argument that the Post Office lives and breathes and dies
because of the parking near it is ludicrous to him. The Mayor’s argument makes sense
to him; the traffic is calm on these two blocks. He feels like the extension of the Bicycle
Boulevard is something that should be tried to see how it works or doesn’t work for
everyone. The City could always go back to having parking on the street because its
new parking system allows for that. He looks at this as an experiment to see what
happens; if, in a year, it doesn’t work out, then go back to the ways things are now.
Mayor Myrick stated that the idea that if cities don’t make room for cars they will wither,
is not necessarily true because the use of bicycles and more people walking to their
destinations in the future will be increasing. The balance between what the City
provides for parking and what is needed seems to be met here as traffic on these blocks
is already calm. He noted that if the City makes some changes to the intersection
treatments that will draw attention to pedestrians and bicyclists that would help as well.
CC Liaison Fleming asked if it is possible to make a compromise by keeping the short
term parking in front of the Post Office and on the west side of the street. She said that
one of the memos provided to the Board indicated there could be parking on one side
and two bike lanes created. She would then encourage Tompkins County to provide or
find parking for their customers elsewhere.
Director of Engineering Logue stated that right now on the 200 block there is parking on
the side of the street in from of the Post Office and Town Hall. The proposal would
eliminate parking on the other side of this block; then on the next block parking is
eliminated on both sides of the street. There would be a balancing act with the
compromise since the shift thorough the intersection is tricky. One side of parking will
be lost but the question is which side.
CC Liaison Fleming noted that she does not understand why parking can’t be eliminated
on the west side on both blocks, with just parking on the east side.
Director of Engineering Logue responded that bicyclists would not be able to navigate
through the intersection safely if that were done.
Supt. Thorne stated that there are a lot of things that could be done with parking; he
isn’t sure why sharrows aren’t enough and if not why should parking be lost because the
rest of the street has sharrows. The traffic on these two blocks is not high speed, and
sharrows on both blocks accomplish what bicyclists want and keeps the parking for
businesses.
Commissioner Goldsmith stated that he lives downtown; he walks a lot and rides bike a
lot. He agrees with the Mayor, which does not happen often, that on these two short
blocks the traffic is pretty contained and slow - safer than a lot of places. He supports
the use of sharrows, for now – especially since the City does not have the money to do
that much with the proposal. He noted that he spent a long time being anti-car because
of all the automobile subsidies; however, in this case those public facilities downtown do
require parking. There is also a need for additional accessible parking spots as well as
short term parking spaces – especially since short term parking will be able to be
enforced more in the future with the increased use of license plate readers. The County
and Town dominance of parking in this area annoys him and he feels they should pay
some way for taking it away from the public. He would suggest, in this instance, that the
City do less rather than more and continue to think about this proposal. He agreed that
the City wants to encourage biking, and the more it is encouraged the more there will be
a demand for bike lanes. The comments from the West Hill and South Hill residents are
valid as well regarding the need for parking to remain on these two blocks.
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
7
Commissioner Darling stated that he concurs with Commissioner Goldsmiths’
comments. He feels that the Board needs to talk and think more about the proposal and
stop operating on assumptions and focus more on the supply and demand for parking.
There are people who work downtown but park in neighborhoods, for free, so that
needs to be looked at. The City should also have conversations with the Town of Ithaca
and Tompkins County about their employee parking. Director of Parking Nagy has
extensive knowledge on parking that still needs to be tapped and implemented. The
Board should take a broader approach rather than piece meal and do a comprehensive
parking study.
Director of Parking Nagy reported that the biggest complaint the City had been receiving
before from the public was that they were not able to find parking in front of the
businesses on these two blocks. The City resolved that problem by charging more for
parking on the street; people are now parking in the garages and paying for long term
parking. The short term parking spaces on the street are now open and available for
those people that are just running in and out on their errands to these businesses. The
complaints have stopped and parking is now open for visitors’ downtown. Why would
the City want to change that, because it just accomplished what it had set out to do by
resolving the complaints about the lack of parking on the street?
Commissioner Goldsmith noted that for the 55 and over demographic it would be good
to have a more concerted effort made to educate them on the use of the pay stations
because people can’t figure them out.
CC Liaison Fleming urged the Board to reconsider because she still thinks that if half
the parking is taken away and the City urged the Town and County to free up their lots,
there would be free spaces for those people who need to use those buildings. City
residents are paying twice for their County services, the City is sacrificing
implementation of the goals of its Comprehensive Plan to accommodate them. She
agreed that more study is needed, and expressed her support for keeping the short
term parking by the Post Office. She noted that there may be flexibility in other areas as
well that should be considered.
Supt. Thorne stated that the City may have time to consider this proposal longer
because it may not even be able to afford the work on North Tioga Street this year. This
might be a good thing because it would allow the City and the Board to take a better
look at the bigger picture and obtain additional information and feedback that could be
used as the proposal is discussed.
Commissioner Darling agreed that there is a lack of accessible parking especially at the
Court House. The Court House has one accessible parking space on the street but it is
reserved for one employee, and there are no accessible spaces in the County parking
lot. That is problematic, it’s the same thing around the Library; curb cuts also need to be
improved to provide better access. These things should be part of the discussions of
the Board as it considers the proposal.
Commissioner Jenkins supports keeping the short term parking. The Town of Ithaca has
a parking lot behind Town Hall but it is just for town employees. She feels those
employees should be parking in the garage to free up spaces for short term parking and
to provide additional accessible spaces.
Common Council Member McGonigal, with the Mayor’s permission, noted for the Board
that Director of Engineering Logue’s memo indicated that there was room for two more
cars to park on the Buffalo Street side of Town Hall where there used to be a bus stop.
He wondered if the parking could be put back there that would provide for short term
parking and provide an accessible parking space.
Director of Engineering Logue responded that he sees no reason not to add those
parking spots on Buffalo Street. He noted, however, that they are not truly accessible
spaces because they are not near a ramp or curb cut. He said the City tries to provide
accessible spaces near the corners and in parking garages for people. He noted that
the City has created and made accommodations for accessible spaces by the doctor’s
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
8
office on North Aurora Street. In addition, the Disability Advisory Council has asked staff
to look at providing additional accessible parking downtown. He reported that new
regulations may be in the works at the Federal level to increase the number of required
accessible on street parking spaces that municipalities have to provide. Staff will be
reviewing that information; it does sound like there is a general consensus to keep
parking on street and come up with a traffic calming plan for bicyclists. This issue can
come back to the Board in the future because the City can experiment now with traffic
calming and keeping parking spaces on the street. In addition, staff do want to find a
way to have a budget for this project. He will prepare a resolution for Board that would
support traffic calming/sharrows and keep parking on the street. He could have the
resolution for the April 11th meeting of the Board; Board members indicated that there is
no rush and they would prefer to have the resolution on the agenda for their April 25th
meeting.
Commissioner Greene stated that the idea of talking to Tompkins County and the Town
of Ithaca about making accommodations for the public to park in their lots should be
investigated further. He wondered if there might be anyway that staff could have initial
conversations with them to get a sense of their support, and then report back to the
Board.
Mayor Myrick responded that he has already spoken to Joe Mareane from Tompkins
County about parking, and the New York State Court System calls a lot of the shots for
their parking accommodations.
Reports:
Commissioner Greene reported, as the Board liaison for the food truck meetings, that
the proposed revisions to the policy are going well. At the last meeting, the assessor
from Tompkins County was there to discuss the potential for re-assessment of the
property values for the location of food trucks with respect to zones and potential
increased fees associated with the location of a food truck. He suggested and some at
the meeting agreed looking at locations where they want food trucks instead of where
they don’t want them. They have to consider public safety, whether there is room on
the sidewalk, and does it make sense physically to have a food truck at a particular
location. He made a proposal for sites near schools, current regulations say that food
trucks are not allowed near schools, because depending upon the time of day it might
conflict with school hours. He suggested, for example, the location of Belle Sherman
Elementary school between the hours of 4-6 pm or 4-8 pm. There is a lot of street
parking at those off hours and there would be the potential to serve a particular
population. During the Summer, that area is packed with families and a food truck
might be welcomed and do well there. There is also a fear of lash back from restaurants
from some committee members. To him, it feels like a factual based analysis of that
idea has not been done and should be as it has been a sticking point for many in
whether they support food trucks or not. He would like a way to conduct an analysis
that would provide clear evidence and fact that food trucks affect restaurants negatively;
especially the idea that food trucks steal business from brick and mortar restaurants, as
he is not sure that is necessarily true.
Mayor Myrick agreed that it would be good to have an answer to that question. His
sense is that they are different markets and that food trucks do not take away the
business from restaurants.
Commissioner Greene plans to visit restaurants so can conduct a survey to determine
what, if any, negative impacts food trucks have on restaurants. He’s already visited
“Gorger’s” and talked to an employee there. The employee told him that they wouldn’t
want a food truck by them during hours when they’re open, but a sushi truck after hours
would work because it is a completely different type of food being served and would not
conflict with the restaurant since it would be closed. That applies a little more complexity
in how food truck regulations are set up. He feels that it is a good question that every
restaurant should be asked.
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
9
CC Liaison Fleming reported on concerns from Third and Fourth Ward constituents
about construction in and near Collegetown and safety concerns for pedestrians and
motorists. She thanked Supt. Thorne and Board members who met with developers
about those concerns. As a result, signage has improved and the sidewalk is now open
on one side of Dryden Road. On another note, she reported that she has been running
along the Cayuga Waterfront Trail and it’s just amazing. On Saturday there was a
regatta taking place in the inlet which was wonderful to see. She expressed her
gratitude for that project and the people involved with it.
Commissioner Goldsmith agrees regarding the Cayuga Waterfront Trail. He would like
to add, in addition to the construction concerns in Collegetown, about the traffic jams in
downtown because he is worried about communication and regulation. He was coming
downtown from South Hill school at about 2:30 p.m. and tried to turn onto State Street
and couldn’t because there was a Fedex tractor trailer truck stopped in the middle of the
street unloading stuff for the construction project. No one could go in either direction, he
did call City Hall and the Chamberlain’s Office so staff could transmit his message to the
appropriate people.
Commissioner Darling, Liaison to the Planning and Development Board, reported that
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Chain Works project is available for
public review and comment; it is about 300-500 pages long. There is a public hearing
tomorrow, which will remain open at each meeting of the Planning and Development
Board. He also reported on a project located at 102 Cherry Street that may have
impacts on Black Diamond Trail right-of-way; they are working with New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation.
Director of Engineering Logue reported that the 200 block of Dryden Road has been
closed and detours should be in place to re-direct traffic onto NYS Route 366 to go
around Collegetown. He is trying to accommodate business deliveries for that block as
well. It will be closed only until May 1 and then it has to be re-opened due to all of the
end of the year activities at Cornell University. This summer is going to be crazy with a
lot of construction and city projects. Staff is preparing to put the construction contract
out for bid for the sidewalk program this year. He offered to bring the sidewalk work plan
to the next meeting if the Board wants. Staff are also reviewing applications for the new
Sidewalk Program Manager position, which they hope to fill soon.
Asst. Supt. Benjamin reported that the night snow watch shift has ended, and Spring
street cleaning has started. The Parks crew are doing a lot of stump grinding in
preparation for tree planting. Crews are repairing storm sewers, where needed, NYS
Department of Environmental Conservation has issued the permit for the pipe cleaning
on Floral Avenue – he is still waiting to hear from the Army Corp. of Engineers.
Asst. Supt. Whitney offered to provide Board members a tour of the new Water
Treatment Plan. He thought a Monday between board meetings at 4:45 p.m. might be a
possibility. The Mayor and Board members supported that idea and scheduled the tour
for Monday, April 18, 2016. Commissioner Greene will be unavailable that day, so Asst.
Supt. Whitney will schedule a separate tour for him.
Supt. Whitney reported that the construction on the new Water Treatment Plan should
be completed by December 1, 2016. There was one water main break since the
Board’s meeting last month. Crews will be working on Osmun Place cleaning the water
mains, they will then head up to Richard Place to do same thing. Two water mains are
scheduled to be replaced on the 500 block of South Plain Street, and then the road will
be repaved. They are currently conducting interviews for seasonal hires.
Director of Parking Nagy reported that parking revenue, through the month of March so
far, was just short of $40,000, which is an increase over last year. The Parking
Committee for the placement of the new pay stations has chosen locations for the 23
new machines. Committee members will take a field trip for their next meeting to make
sure the proposed locations will work, and then mark them so that Dig Safe can come in
to mark them as well. They will also be looking at where accessible on-street parking
spaces are located and how many there are so they can decide where and how many
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
10
additional spaces are needed. The Parking Committee on education is working on
three videos and they are just starting to write the actual lines for them and creating a
story board, which they hope to have completed by the end of next month. He has a
meeting on Wednesday at a local senior center where he will do a presentation on the
pay stations, and then assist people in setting up an account with Park Mobile so they
can use the pay stations. He will also be attending a Senior Citizen Expo being hosted
by Tompkins County Office for the Aging at the Ramada Inn, and will have an
information table set up with parking information and will offer assistance in setting up
accounts with Park Mobile for people. He will also be providing information on the City’s
new scratch-off card system that can be used to pay for parking instead of using the pay
stations.
Supt. Thorne reported that the City is studying and trying to find where the problem is
on Forest Home Drive that has caused erosion of the road near the gorge, which
necessitated the road being closed. They are trying to develop a plan that could be
given to a contractor to pull back the asphalt so that a good look can be taken
underneath the road. Since there are such tricky aspects to this project, the City will be
contracting out project. One piece that will need study and repair is the retaining wall
failing which has caused quite a bit of undermining under the road. Staff is waiting for
the proposal on that, and will conduct some limited additional investigative work but an
actual cost analysis needs to be done. He further reported that there is a lot of
construction work occurring in Collegetown involving street work and underground
utilities work. Since this is such a large and extensive project it may require the
extension of work hours on Dryden Road in order to complete it while the students are
away. New boat racks will be going up in April, and the Youth Bureau will be ready to
start taking reservations on April 15 for them. The City hopes to have vendors selected
to operate the boat rentals by then as well.
Commissioner Goldsmith asked whether there would be any cost sharing on the project
analysis needed for the repairs to Forest Home Drive. Supt. Thorne responded that
since the project will be tricky that no one, at this point, has been able to provide that
information.
Buildings, Properties, Refuse & Transit:
Cascadilla Creekway Project Railing Replacement Design Alternative Decision -
Resolution
By Commissioner Goldsmith: Seconded by Commissioner Greene
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca established Capital Project #802 for the Cascadilla
Creekway Project (“the Project”) in the amount of $750,000; and
WHEREAS, $250,000 additional funding is allocated for the Project from
Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton Office; and
WHEREAS, the Project includes the following four infrastructure components:
Cascadilla Avenue enhancement; railings replacement along Cascadilla Creek; Sears
Street Pedestrian Bridge replacement; and pedestrian/ADA improvement at Cascadilla
Avenue/North Cayuga Street intersection; and
WHEREAS, the following four design alternatives to replace the railing along Cascadilla
Creek are being considered: (Design Alternative #1, to use a Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) approved railing system; Alternative #2, modify FHWA approved
railing system including a tall curb and pedestrian railing; Alternative #3, crash test a
railing system of City’s own design and seek FHWA approval and Alternative #4, Return
the Federal funds and seek other funding source); and
WHEREAS, the design alternatives to replace the railing across Cascadilla Creek were
presented to the City’s Board of Public Works on January 11, 2016; and
WHEREAS, On February 8, 2016 staff received input from Common Council members,
the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Council, and the public on the design alternatives;
now, therefore be it
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
11
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends Design Alternative
#2 to modify FHWA approved railing system including a tall curb and pedestrian railing;
and, be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works does hereby agree that Cascadilla
Avenue bike boulevard enhancement; Sears Street Pedestrian Bridge replacement; and
pedestrian/ADA improvement at Cascadilla Avenue/North Cayuga Street intersection
components of the project will be included in the project contract document as an
alternate bid items.
Bridge Systems Engineer Gebre joined the Board for discussion of the resolution. He
referred them to his memorandum dated March 22, 2016 that showed the revisions to
the original scope of the project as follows:
“In light of a new information regarding the Mayor’s decision to allocate $250,000
outside funding towards the project, the Board has agreed to move forward with a
design alternative (#2) to modify FHWA approved railing system including a tall curb
and pedestrian railing. So I would like to request the Board to review (and subsequently
vote on April 11, 2016) the draft resolution to formalize the Board’s decision on the
design alternative and revised project scope.
As you can see in order to bring the construction cost within budget, we may have to
eliminate the pedestrian bridge, the bike boulevard component along Cascadilla
Avenue, and the intersection enhancements at Cayuga Street. It may be possible that
these elements can be included based on actual bid price, and they still are part of the
preferred alternative, but we will carry them forward in the project contingency and
structure bidding to include them as alternatives.
Original Project Scope:
Estimated Total Project Scope: $1,200,000
Available Funding (Including the $250,000 additional funding): $1,000,000
Revised Project Scope:
Estimated Total Project Scope: $996,000
Available Funding (Including the $250,000 additional funding): $1,000,000
Bridge Systems Engineer Gebre would like a formal recommendation from the Board on
any adjustment to the project scope that they might have, or whether they support the
project as proposed.
Commissioner Goldsmith noted that this resolution, in a way, is a blank check
authorizing possible elimination of certain parts of the project. He stated that the crisis
for the project was that Asst. Supt. Benjamin walked across the pedestrian bridge and
closed it due to safety concerns – that was about a year and a half ago. The major
stimulus for moving the project ahead was to figure a quick solution for the bridge. He
had a class of students study the project to design a possible solution. What they came
up with was a prefabricated wood bridge. He strongly objects to the proposed bike
boulevard to be included in the project, it’s such a small bridge, and is a perfect Dutch
calmed road on both sides of the bridge itself where cars travel very slowly either
direction. He agrees that a railing is needed as well as parging of the bridge. He feels
the price for the railing is outrageous. He does not want this project to go forward
without a pedestrian bridge.
Director of Engineering Logue responded that it would be up to the Board to
recommend additional money if the project costs goes over budget. In order to get a
cost estimate that meets the budget, this is the proposal. Staff did hear and understand
Commission Goldsmith’s recommendation as noted above.
A Vote on the Resolution Resulted As Follows:
Carried Unanimously
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
12
Authorization to the Install a Pay Machine with Park Mobile Capabilities in the
Municipal Parking Lot at 611 West Buffalo Street – Resolution
By Commissioner Goldsmith: Seconded by Commissioner Darling
WHEREAS, the municipal parking lot at 611 West Buffalo Street is currently a monthly
permitted lot only; and
WHEREAS, requests for hourly transient parking have been submitted by the local
businesses for use by their customers and patients; and
WHEREAS, there is very little on-street parking available in this area to handle the
growth of the small business; and
WHEREAS, there will not be an additional expense of funds other than the actual
installation of the pay machine due to the City having an extra machine in its inventory;
now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works does hereby authorize the Superintendent
of Public Works, or his designee, to install a pay machine with Park Mobile capabilities
in the municipal parking lot at 611 West Buffalo Street to convert it to an hourly transient
parking lot as well as a monthly permitted lot, with enforcement of applicable parking
laws.
Carried Unanimously
Water & Sewer:
Denial of the Appeal of Water & Sewer Bill for 424 Richard Place - Resolution
By Commissioner Jenkins: Seconded by Commissioner Darling
WHEREAS, the water consumption at 424 Richard Place changed significantly in the
fourth quarter of 2015 resulting in a water bill which was considerably larger than past
bills, and the property owner has requested an adjusted bill based on their belief that
the water meter possibly malfunctioned between September 3 and September 18, 2015;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca reads water meters on a 90 day cycle to provide bills,
then again every 45 days to detect leaks as a courtesy to residents; and
WHEREAS, it is not City policy to credit an account for water billed but not consumed as
that water must go through the wastewater treatment plant; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works has reviewed the request to modify the
water bill covering the fourth quarter of 2015 at 424 Richard Place and denies the
request based on its understanding that the water was consumed at that address; and,
be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board requests that the City Chamberlain work with the property
owner to develop a payment plan, and that no late fees or interest be charged on the
bill.
Carried Unanimously
Recommendation to Establish a Capital Project & Funding to Replace a Portion of
the Sanitary Sewer Main Along the South Hill Trail Above Renzetti Place -
Resolution
By Commissioner Goldsmith: Seconded by Commissioner Darling
WHEREAS, two sanitary sewer mains along the west end of the South Hill Trail have
experienced storm related high flows on at least two occasions since 2011 resulting in
overflows which spilled onto the trail and along the south ditch line of Renzetti Place;
and
WHEREAS, the carrying capacity of the two mains is exceeded during high flows due to
slope, size, and both mains being connected perpendicular to the flow in the Hudson
Street sanitary sewer main at the same location; and
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
13
WHEREAS, installing 4 new manholes and 463 feet of new 15-inch diameter pipe and
making a new point of connection with the sanitary sewer main on Hudson Street
downhill of the existing connection will provide both increased slope and a more
hydraulically efficient transition in that the flows will be converging in the same direction;
and
WHEREAS, City Department of Public Works Water & Sewer Division staff have
estimated the maximum cost for this project to be $36,000.00; and
WHEREAS, a 41.57% share of the costs of this sanitary sewer project could be
reimbursed by the Town of Ithaca under the Joint Sewer Interceptor Agreement, not to
exceed $14,965.20; and
WHEREAS, City Department of Public Works Water & Sewer Division staff estimates
our Crews could complete this work in two to four weeks. Work would be schedule for
Summer or Fall of 2016; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works recommends that Common Council
establish a capital project with funding not to exceed $36,000.00 to facilitate the
construction of a 463-foot length of sanitary sewer main along South Hill Trail above
Renzetti Place.
Carried Unanimously
Discussion Items:
Babe Ruth Shed Proposal in Cass Park:
Babe Ruth Baseball League has submitted a proposal to the City of Ithaca for the
installation of a new shed next to Field 9 in Cass Park. The proposed size would be
either 10’ x 10’ or 12’ x 12’, the proposed location would have limited visual impact, and
City staff will have access to the interior, if needed. The Parks Commission reviewed
the request, and while there was not a quorum present at their meeting, those members
of the Parks Commission in attendance supported the request. Recreation Facilities
Director for Cass Park, Jim D’Alterio supports the request, with the following conditions:
“If the proposed Babe Ruth Shed located at Union Field 9 of Cass Park is approved, I
would request the following:
-Shed placement location be selected by the Recreation Facilities Director.
-The group will add the shed to their insurance coverage.
-Include the clause below that was included in a 2008 license agreement with Babe
Ruth/Cal Ripken for group funded and implemented improvements at Union Fields 8
and 9:
Upon the termination of this license by forfeit or voluntary surrender, the League
covenants and agrees to at once peaceably deliver up to the City the demised premises
together with all improvements thereon in good condition, and that all improvements
thereon shall thereafter belong to the City without the necessity of any deed of
conveyance or other assignment or transfer by the League and that no compensation
shall be allowed or paid therefore to the League or to anyone claiming by, through, or
under the League”
The Board expressed support for the proposal. Staff will work with Cass Park
Recreation Facilities Director D’Alterio to write a resolution and an agreement, which will
come back to the Board for a vote.
Columbia Street Park Project:
Director of Engineering Logue referred Board members to Engineering Technician,
Leland O’Connor’s memo dated February 10, 2016 that outlines the project as follows:
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
14
“Common Council authorized $81,000 for Columbia Street Park railing improvements in
the 2014 budget. Columbia Street doesn’t have sidewalks along the road for pedestrian
travel, thus the stairs and walkways in the park provide a route for pedestrians heading
between downtown and South Hill. The park also serves as a place for people to walk
their dogs, relax, and enjoy the outdoors.
The funding approved by Common Council in 2014 should be sufficient to restore the
walkways to a safe condition. However, before moving forward with the project, I’d like
the Board of Public Works to agree to the scope, along with recommendations from the
Parks Commission. We have currently spent $2,600 from the budget on survey for the
park.
The proposed scope of work includes:
• Repair of 6 stair sets to a safe condition, including repair of the hand railings at
these locations.
• Replacing approx. 55 linear feet of cracked and damaged sidewalk between the
stairs.
• Removing the sidewalk and stairs at the NW corner of the park that are in poor
condition.
• At location of stair removal, install short retaining walls for new planting beds.
• Install a safety handrail at the NW corner of the park.
• Install concrete or asphalt driveway at South end of park to provide access for
the City mower.
I am looking for comments and feedback relating to construction within the park. As the
main focus of the project is to restore the park to a safe condition for people, I want to
consider all options for the funding. Any comments or ideas relating to construction at
Columbia St. Park can be sent to Leland O'Connor at loconnor@cityofithaca.org.”
The proposal was presented to the Parks Commission and they support it. The
proposal will removal of the sidewalk and stairs at the northwest corner of the park
because they are in poor condition. The Parks crew has also requested a concrete or
asphalt driveway at the south end of the park to provide access for the City mower.
Staff wanted the Board’s concurrence on the scope of work before proceeding with
obtaining cost estimates. The adjacent property owner supports removal of the one
stairway as well.
Board members expressed their support for the project. Director of Engineering Logue
will come back with a resolution to the Board’s next meeting in order to formalize the
project.
Donation of a Bench at Six Mile Creek From Jeffrey Ruoff:
Asst. Supt. Benjamin reported that the family of Jeffrey Ruoff would like to donate a
bench as noted above. A “Six Mile Creek Trust Fund” was established at the City of
Ithaca for this memorial and, according to City Chamberlain Parsons, the total amount
in the fund is $2,765.00. City Forester Grace supports the request, as does the Natural
Areas Commission.
Supt. Thorne reported that the City would order or build the bench, and confirmed that
the Trust Fund covers the cost of bench and foreseeable maintenance.
Commissioner Greene asked if there was any criteria that should be followed by the
Board for this type of request before granting or denying it.
Commissioner Goldsmith responded that the Board has said no within the past four
years or so for something the City really didn’t want and didn’t want the obligation of it.
The real rule, as far as criteria, is that staff who maintain the City’s parks don’t want to
be stuck with things to maintain that they don’t want, and may not necessarily have the
funds with which to provide maintenance.
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
15
Board members expressed their support for the request.
Appeal of Water Bill for 309 Center Street:
Asst. Supt. Whitney reported that the property owner’s contractor removed the water
meter, which is not allowed and there was no communication made to the City to inform
us that had been done. The outstanding water bills weren’t addressed when the
property was sold at the closing as they should have been. Staff recommendation would
be to deny the request. The amount of the bill was the minimum whether the water was
used or not. In addition, there is a cost for removal of the meter so the City went back
five years and took an average of the highest water bill amounts to determine what the
cost/fine for removal of the meter should be at this property.
Board members agreed with staff’s recommendation, and noted that the attorney’s
should have addressed the outstanding bills at the closing. They recommended that the
appeal be denied.
Asst. Supt. Whitney will prepare a resolution to deny the appeal for the Board’s next
meeting.
Appeal of Water Bill for 1109 North Aurora Street:
Asst. Supt. Whitney reported that there were multiple accounts for a single tax parcel;
the storm water bills are sent directly to the actual property owners. In this case, the
property was a duplex with two water meters and two separate accounts. The water
and sewer utility bills are sent to the payee designated by the owner. No change was
filed with the City Chamberlain for the water and sewer billing. The only address
specific request filed with the City Chamberlain was to have the taxes only sent to the
owner’s address. Certified Properties was managing this property for the owners for
some period of time. It is up to the owners to provide notice to the City as to changes in
billing address upon changes in property management. Communication between a
property owner and their property management company to ensure bills are paid should
not be construed to be the responsibility of the City. He would not recommend support
for this appeal.
Board members expressed their support for staff’s recommendation. A resolution to
deny the appeal will be prepared for the Board’s next meeting.
Creeks, Bridges and Parks:
Stewart Park Picnic Pavilion Restoration—Resolution
By Commissioner Jenkins: Seconded by Commissioner Goldsmith
WHEREAS, Friends of Stewart Park received a $70,500 grant over 4 years to enhance
Stewart Park buildings, specifically the Picnic (Large) Pavilion; and
WHEREAS, Tompkins County Tourism Program has authorized $40,000 to be spent to
address the door and window units of the Large Pavilion; and
WHEREAS, Most of this funding will be spent on restoring 3 north-facing units with
laminated glass that is vandal resistant and will relieve the City of having to protect the
units during the winter months; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works supports utilizing the grant funding to be
used toward restoration of the three window units at the Large Pavilion.
Carried Unanimously
Parking Scratch-Off Tickets:
Director of Parking Nagy reported that there have been many conversations with the
Disability Advisory Council (DAC), and the over 50 age demographic because they don’t
like the pay stations. The DAC recommended that the City implement a scratch-off card
system like what is currently in use in Portland, Oregon. The following information,
through a Power Point Presentation, was presented to the Board for their consideration
of the proposal:
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
16
Review of Portland’s Scratch Tag System a DAC Recommendation
Dashboard placard for Customers with mobility issues and have a handicap
placard.
Buy by month or by Year (Buy multiples use whenever, no expiration date.)
One good for each Parking session
Pre-Paid Dollars
No walking back and forth to pay machine
Scratch off date and time then put on dashboard.
Why did Portland go to this?
Loss of Revenue - all parkers with a placard parked for free anywhere in the city
Spaces were not turning over
Pay And Display T2 System doubled the walk to pay machines
Pay by cell system too hard to use for individuals with hand mobility issues
Pros and Cons
Pros:
Pre-paid parking dollars
No need to use pay station or cell phone
No walking issues
Resolves an issue for senior drivers
open a Parking Office on the Commons or street store front for a place to sell
tickets
Cons:
Must be visually enforced
Revenue collection by Chamberlain or Clerk’s Offices
Added burden to Chamberlain or Clerk’s office
Cost of ticket management and cost of placards
Recommendation to DAC
Monthly On-Street Permit
Sell monthly permits just like garages and surface lots. (Challenge will
be setting prices to what is fair for all users)
Both T2 and Genetic both have permit systems available. City is
currently are using Genetic for Residential Parking System based on
license plate numbers. No visual inspection required.
Keep working on educating seniors and people with accessibility
issues.
Director of Parking Nagy reported that colors for different times (2 hour, 4 hour, etc.)
have been discussed and supported. Portland went to it because they were losing
money, on street parking was being lost because everyone had a handicap placard so
they were parking all day on the street, and not paying. This new system freed up on
street parking, which resulted in visitors to their downtown finding parking spots, which
Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016
17
before had been impossible to find. He stated that going to this system would be a step
backwards as the City of Ithaca is trying to automate all the parking; however, it
addresses the many concerns that have been raised and will bring those people who do
not want to use the pay stations back downtown. He would propose using this system
for two years or so. He will continue with the ongoing education efforts and outreach to
show people how to use pay stations; he proposes this as a short term a solution. He
stated that it still needs to be determined where the scratch-off cards will be sold.
Whether it be the City Clerk’s Office or the City Chamberlain’s office – there has also
been a suggestion made that they be sold at the same locations as garbage tags to
make them more convenient for the public to purchase. It will cost .27 per card; the
current rate for parking on the street is $1.50 so out of that revenue the City will lose
.27. This is about a 30% reduction in the fee; however, it is the same discounted cost
the City offers to people to park in the garages. He would want to start with a minimal
quantity of the cards. Another option would be to sell a monthly on street permit
scratch-off card similar to the monthly permits already sold for the parking garages. The
advantage to going with the scratch-off card system is that the 55 and older age group
want it and love it. He wants to see the City have its parking completely automated in
the future, but in the short term this resolves the issue that has been the number one
concern since the pay stations went into operation.
CC Liaison Fleming wondered what the closest to New York States “E-Z Pass” system
that the City might be able to offer.
Director of Parking Nagy responded that an “E-Z Pass” type system could only be used
in the parking garages if they put license plate readers in the garages.
Commissioner Darling stated that he feels this is good solution in the interim, it’s a
gateway to using the electronic pay stations as well as a step forward for the education
campaign. He suggested that merchants could also purchase them for their customers.
Director of Parking Nagy stated that the .27 cost for the card is not a concern for those
over 55. Their concern is walking back and forth to use the pay machines; or, they think
they have to have a smart phone to use the pay stations and they don’t.
He further reported that the City is seeing more than 400 transactions per day with Park
Mobile. It is slowly working up to almost 40% of the parking revenue coming in through
Park Mobile on a monthly basis which is great
Board members expressed their full support for the proposal. Director of Parking Nagy
will prepare a resolution approving the implementation of this system for the Board’s
next meeting.
Adjournment:
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
_________________________________ _____________________________
Sarah L. Myers, Svante L. Myrick,
Information Management Specialist Mayor
Mnrc[ 4S,Qorv Ww n'tr9
2/26/20L6
2l29l2OL6
3/7/2016
3/2/2016
3/3l2OL6
3/4/20L6
3/7 /2016
3/8/2016
3/9/20L6
3/tol2oL6
% occupancy
ave. surplus
4
5
3
5
2
58.93%
2.9
2/26/2076
2/2e/2076
3/t/2076
312/2016
3/3/2076
314/2076
317 /2076
3/8/2076
319/2076
3/7012076
% occupa ncy
ave. surplus
Parking occupancy 200 block N. Tioga 5t. (west side)
Approx. T metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
Parking occupancy 200 block N. TioBa St. (east side)
Approx. 5 free 10-minute parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon EveninB
0
4
4
2
3
4
4
4
1
1
54.OO%
2.3
58.55%
2.5
5
3
3
4
3
1
3
4
1
5
2
3
5
0
6
4
4
6
5
3
4
3
4
5
4
5
4
6L.43Yo
2.7
5
4
4
6
4
3
3
0
2
5
5l.43Yo
3.4
5
2
4
5
3
67 .50Yo
1.6
oo%58
Average parking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available per block face
Total average number surplus parking spaces along block
2,L
fi,furd,48, Qo tl,
Parking occupancy 300 block N. Tioga St. (""r, ,ia") ffi'\,/Ntty
Approx. 13 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
2/26/2016
2/29/20!6
3/L/20]^6
3/2/2076
3/3/2076
3/4/2016
3/7 /2076
3/8/2076
3/9/2016
3/70/2076
% occupa ncy
ave. surplus
4
6
3
5
6
39.77o/o
6.6
5
5
3
3
5
5
4
8
6
7
47.27%
5.8
2/26/20L6
2/29/2016
3/L/20L6
3/z/20L6
313/2ot6
3/4/20L6
3/7 /201.6
318/2016
3/9/2076
3/70/201.6
% occupa ncy
ave. surplus
56.73Yo
5.6
56.r5%
5.7
4
2
6
4
10
6
4
3
6
L
8
8
6
6
8
3
8
7
11
8
6
7
6
7
L7
6
7
9
8
4
4
7
t2
7
3
2
7
2
50.97Yo
5.4
35.38%
8.4
Average pa rking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available per block face
Total average number surplus parking spaces along block
47 .7OYo
6.3
12.5
Parking occupancy 300 block N. Tioga St. (west side)
Approx. 11 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
4
4
3
Parking occupancy 400 block N. Tioga st, (west side)
Approx. 10 odd/even parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
Parking occupancy 400 block N. Tioga St. (east side)
Approx. 8 free 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
L/nrch ;s
2
0.5
0.5
5.5
3.5
2.5
3.5
2.5
5
0.5
3250%
5.4
,a0 lb
t
Slnt 'Uty
2/26/2016
2/2912016
3/L/2016
3/2/2Ot6
3/3/20t6
3/4/20t6
3/7 /2ot6
3/8/2076
3/e/20t6
3/LO/2016
% occupa ncy
ave. surplus
t2
t2
L2
10
11
T2
t2
2126/2016
2/29/2016
3 /r/20t6
3/2/2ot6
3/3/zoL6
3/4/2016
3/7 /2016
3/8/zoL6
3/9/20L6
3/tolzoL6
% occupancy
ave. surplus
73.L7%
2.3
4.7
6
6
4
5
0
2
0
4.5
5
3
2.5
t
3
1
5
10
6
t7
11
10
10
11
1,L0.O0%
- 1.0
10
10
t2
11
10
10
1o8.89%
-0.9
22.OOYo
7.8
8
7
7
7
9
84.72%
1.2
9
6
8
5
4
5
80.56%
1.6
Average parking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available per block face
Totalaverage number surplus parking spaces along block
tutnrrh qt,Qo rb
HtLt?
2/26/2016
2129/2016
3/t/2016
3/2/2016
3/3/2ot6
3/4/2016
3/7 /2016
3/8/2016
3/9/2016
3/to/2016
% occupancy
ave. surplus
Parking occupancy 400 block N, Tio8a St. (west side)
11 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
MorninB Afternoon Evening
Parking occupancy 400 block N. Tioga St. (east side)
12 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
2Z 2
0.5
0.5
5.5
3.5
2.5
3.5
2.5
5
0.5
2r.67%
9.4
29.t0%
8.1
16.3
5
2
5
3
1
32.32%
7.4
0
2
0
4.5
5
3
2.5
1
3
t
20.oo%
8.8
2/26/2016
2/2e/2016
3/tl2OL6
3/zl2oL6
3/3/2016
3/4/20t6
3/7 /2Ot6
3/8/201.6
3/9/20t6
3/70/201.6
% occupa ncy
ave. surplus
2
3
5
4
2
3
29.63%
8.4
3
7
4
2
7
4
6
4
6
3
6
5
6
3
6
5
7
41-.67%
7.0
Average parking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available per block face
Total average number surplus parking spaces along block
1
3
4
4
7
2
29.29%
7.8
t\,tu"rch Q&,0c lb
tsPt l utyParking occupancy 100 block E. Buffalo St. (north side)
Approx. 17 parklng spaces available
Morning Afternoon
11
E
2/26/2076
2/29/2076
3 /7/2076
3/2/2076
3/3/2076
3/4/2Ot6
317 /2076
3/8/201^6
3/e/2ot6
3/70/201.6
% occu pancy
ave. surplus
10
10
8
13
13
59.48yo
5.9
t2
16
\2
tL
3
7
62.75%
6.3
vening
2
7
4
10
5
3
7
2
2
4
27.06%
72.4
8
9
9
9
13
13
Average pa rking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available per block face
Totalaverage number surplus parking spaces along block
49.76%
8.5
8.5
2/26/2076
2/29/2076
3/t/2076
3/2/2076
3/3/2076
3/4/2076
3/7 /2016
3/8/zoL6
3/9/2016
3/Lo/2016
% occupancy
ave. surplus
Parking occupancy 200 block E, Buffalo St. (north side)
3 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces and 5 free 10-minute parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
)\'ttfcl^ Ql ' ]otto *r ,
Parking occupancy 200 block E. Buffalo St. (soutl LlfLl
Approx.4 free lO-minute parking spaces available - J
Morning Afternoon Evening
212612076
2/29/2076
3/7/2ot6
312/2016
313/2016
3/4/2ot6
3/7 /2016
3/8l2Ot5
3/9/2016
3/LO/2016
% occupancy
ave. surplus
55.44yo
2.8
5.5
3
3
3
2
2
L
2
7
6
4
6
3
1
2
4
3
4
1
7
3
54.t7%
3.7
4
2
4
3
2
6t.tL%
1.6
3
2
3
1
4
2
66.67%
1.3
0
0
4
9
0
0
2
3
3
0
52.SOYo
1.9
5
2
5
3
5
44.44%
4.4
Average parking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available per block face
Total averaBe number surplus parking spaces along block
4
3
4
6
4
8
3
7
5
5
53.75%o
3.7
Parking occupancy lfi) block E. Court St. (north side)
11. metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
\|att, a8
Parking occupancy 1fi) block E. Court 5t, (south side!
19 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
106
712
26
0
5
8
8
7
9
32.75Yo
L2.8
3
2
7
2
5
0
25.t5%
L4.Z
28.65%
10.9
27.8
a0 tbMI
2126/2OL6
2/29/2OL6
3/L/2OL6
3/2/2016
3/3/2016
3/4/2OL6
3/7 /2OL6
3/8/20t6
3/9/2OL6
3/70/20t6
% occupancy
ave. surplus
2/26/2076
2/29 /2076
3l!/2076
3/2/201.6
3/3/2076
3/4lzot6
3/7 /2OL6
3/812Ot6
3lsl2oL6
3/1012016
% occupancy
ave. surplus
4
5
6
4
38.38%
5.8
1
0
6
5
5
8
35.35%
7.t
2
2
8
3
2
4
1
1
7
1-
28.r8%
7.9
1
0
6
3
3
0
2
L
6
L
L
6
3
1
4
6
1
Average pa rking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available per block face
Total average number surplus parking spaces along block
ry
L2.LtYo
t6.7
Q)tb
A1nt l,tfJParking occupancy 200 block E. Court St. (north side)
9 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
3
4
4
4
4
3
6
2
4
1
38.89%
5.5
Parking occupancy 200 block E. Court 5t. (south side)
7 metered 2-Hr. parking spaces available
Morning Afternoon Evening
z/26/20t6
z/2e/?ot6
3/tl20t6
3/2/2Ot6
3/3/2OL6
3/4/201.6
317 /2016
3/8/2076
3/9/201.6
3/1O/2016
% occupancy
ave. surplus
3
1
3
3
1
5
29.63yo
5.3
2/26/2016
2/29/20t6
3/L/201.6
3/2/2076
3/3/2076
3/4/201.6
3/7 /2016
3/8l2oL6
3/e/2016
3/Lo/2016
% occupancy
ave. surplus
43.78%
4.6
9.2
3
5
3
3
4
44.44yo
3.9
4
1
4
4
3
32.70yo
5.1
0
7
5
2
5
1
t2
7
7
2
2
5
2
1
1
4
3
1
3
5
1
o0%70
2.L
Average parking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available per block face
Total avera8e number surplus parking spaces along block
[kMn Qt,
4
1
4
5
1
5
47 .62Yo
3.7
0
5
5
Llnrd,t ,18, A o16
ffl( LrySeneca St. parking garage
451 pa rking spaces available
Daytime Evening
2/22/2016 327
2/23/2016 296
2/24/2076 311
62
70
74
% occupancy
ave. surplus
69.O3Yo
139.7
L5.23%
382.3
Average parking occupancy %
Average number of surplus parking spaces available
42.t3%
267