No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMaster Plan for Improvement of the Stewart Park Complex -1984 1 M A S T E R P L A N F 0 R I M P R O V E M E N T O F T H E S T E W A R T P A R K C O M P L E X Prepared for: THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK by: PLANNING/ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CONSULTANTS Land Planners GLAVIN & VAN IDERSTINE Landscape Architects tk LEONARD MANKOWSKI Architect September, 1984 r ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Completion of this report required ten months of investigation, evaluation and analysis. Throughout this period the consultant contacted many indi- viduals, in the Ithaca community and beyond, who had a special interest in, or concern for, all or parts of the Stewart Park complex. Much information i- and valuable insights were gathered this way; there is no doubt that the plan is much stronger because of the many people who were involved. 1 r The consultant is particularly appreciative of the fine work done by David A. Rash in his thesis for a Masters Degree in Architectural History from Cornell University. His The Works of Clinton L. 'Vivian, Architect, of Ithaca was invaluable for the detailed information it contains on the build- ings in Stewart Park. We also thank Charles Barber for his historical knowledge and the wonderful photographs and documents he was able to pro- vide. The. Stewart Park Advisory Group was set up to provide guidance and give meaningful response and advice during the planning process. This committee did its job well. It's reaction to proposals and ideas helped shape final recommendations and gave the plan a strong sense of realism. The design sub- committee, Mayor Gutenberger, Bob Cutia, Jack Dougherty, John Meigs and Ben Nichols, was a constant source of solid advice and firm decision. In years to come, hundreds of thousands of people who find a source of re- laxation and enjoyment from a visit to Ithaca's remarkable lakeside rec- reation area will owe a debt of gratitude to all those who helped in the preparation of this plan. STEWART PARK ADVISORY GROUP Andrew Aasen Tompkins County Federation of Sportsman Damon Boynton Conservation Advisory Council Susan Blumenthal Planning and Development Board Margo Clynes Circle Greenway Charles Dunlop Finger Lakes Park Commission Geoffrey Gyrisco Historic Ithaca Sean Killeen Common Council Ben Nichols Board of Public Works Richard Pieper Landmarks Preservation Committee Sam Weeks Cayuga Bird Club David Woolley Youth Bureau Advisory Board * Robert Cutia City Staff Jack Dougherty City Staff John Gutenberger Mayor Jon Meigs City Staff .k t CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA AND HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE - - - 3 3. USE AND DEVELOPMENT: RECOMMENDED POLICY 6 1. REGIONAL USE 6 2. PARK CHARACTER 6 3. PARK EXPANSION 7 4. PUBLIC NATURAL AREAS 7 5. SWIMMING - - - 7 6. TRAFFIC AND PARKING 7 7. HISTORIC REHABILITATION 8 8. IMPLEMENTATION 8 4. LAND USE AND CIRCULATION PLAN PROPOSALS - - - 9 1. LAND USE RELATIONSHIPS 10 2. ROADWAYS AND PARKING 16 3. FUERTES BIRD SANCTUARY 20 4. PATHWAYS AND PROMENADE 23 5. STEWART PARK SWIMMING 26 6. NEWMAN GOLF COURSE IMPROVEMENTS 31 7. YOUTH BUREAU 36 8. FALL CREEK AND CAYUGA INLET SHORELINE 39 9. THE LAGOON 43 10. HISTORIC RENEWAL 45 11. LAKEFRONT MODIFICATIONS 49 12. MUNICIPAL PIER 54 13. DUCK POND AND ZOO 56 14. ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION 59 15. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 61 5. LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS 63 6. ANALYSIS OF PRINCIPAL PARK STRUCTURES 68 1. CASCADILLA BOATHOUSE - - - 68 2. EXHIBIT AND INTERPRETIVE CENTER r 72 3. PICNIC PAVILION - - - - - - - - - - -- - 75 4. CENTRAL COURTYARD -- - - - - - - 78 7, IMPLEMENTATION: TIMETABLE AND COST ESTIMATE 82 A 8. FUNDING CONCERNS 93 9. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS - - 96 APPENDIX A 99 APPENDIX B - - 107 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION This report contains the components of a comprehensive master plan for the long-range development and improvement of the Stewart Park complex. In- cluded in the study are four major areas of interest: the waterfront rec- reation area known as Stewart Park, the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary, Newman Golf Course and Cornell University's Biological Station. All totaled there are approximately 12,000 feet of shoreline and 180 acres of parkland and natural areas in this unique resource at the head of Cayuga Lake. The Stewart Park complex offers a wide variety of active and passive recreation opportunities in a setting that contains long-established parkland, a golf course, wetlands and a large area of natural old-growth lakeshore forest. In the overall recreation system for Ithaca and Tompkins County, the Stewart Park complex has become a primary site for family and group picnics, large community gatherings, special events, fishing, golfing and similar low intensity sporting activities, strolling, sitting, bird watching, lake watching, and generally communing with nature in a variety of beneficial ways. The complex is well suited to its function. It is, in fact, no longer simply a recreation place for local residents; it is now a facility of growing re- gional popularity and is beginning to suffer the impact of overuse. Large scale improvements in the park have not occurred since the massive Work Relief accomplishments of 1934. Time and use have taken their inevitable toll and major repair and maintenance projects are now required in the park. The City wishes to undertake this work in a way that will contribute to the per- manent improvement and long-range renovation of the entire complex. To this end, the master plan study contained in this report was undertaken. It should be noted that this study describes a generalized plan for the long- range development and use of the entire Stewart Park complex. It contains proposals for the appropriate use of land in each of the constituent areas and for a circulation system to provide suitable access and parking. It suggests a comprehensive program for future landscaping of the park and golf course. It presents a functional, structural and aesthetic analysis of major park buildings and a suggested future use for these buildings. While there are over seventy recommendations for park improvements, it is not intended that this plan should be considered a detailed or final design for any particular aspect or element of the park. Additional design work will be required for most of the proposed modifications at the time these proposals are to be implemented. The master plan contains enough detail, however, to give a clear indication of what is intended by the various proposals and the effect that is to be accomplished. Because there are so many variables and such a large number of independent but interrelated actions which will be necessary to achieve master plan proposals, it is clear that some amount of flexibility is necessary. The master plan is not intended to be a rigid uncompromising document; it would not be b` of much value if this were the case. It must accommodate to changing attitudes, new interests, requirements of funding programs and other var- iables that the passage of time will affect. The plan, therefore, becomes a guideline developed under the conditions and opportunities present in 1984. To the extent the plan is adopted by local government, however, it is a significant document and serious deviation from any of its principles, objectives and concepts could have a detrimental impact on the whole. The report is written in a series of independent parts. Hopefully, this will facilitate updating and thereby reduce the rapid obsolescence that such documents experience. Chapter 2 presents a brief history of the various components of the com- plex and examines how past events are related to present conditions. In Chapter 3 the underlying policy that forms the justification and rationale for many proposals is set forth. These statements of policy are funda- mental and as important to the master planning process as the specific land use proposals themselves. Chapters 4, 5 and 6 contain specific proposals for all of the various elements of the plan. Chapter 4 examines fifteen separate areas of interest and con- cern, and sets the basic framework for the entire plan. Chapter 5 deals with the landscaping components of the plan and sets forth design concepts and 3-dimensional effects to be accomplished through landscaping. Chapter 6 considers the boathouse, bathhouse, picnic pavilion and cen.ral courtyard and suggests a rehabilitation and reuse program for these facilities. In Chapter 7 all of the many development proposals are arranged in an im- plementation time sequence. Because it is unlikely that every proposal will be accomplished (and, in some cases, implementation could be delayed or might never happen) a priority listing has been established and the criteria for setting priorities is explained. Chapter 7 also contains an order-of-magnitude cost estimate for each of the proposals which would require a special allocation of funds. Chapter 8 investigates possible sources of funds based on major funding sources avail- able today. Finally, Chapter 9 outlines the proposals which will most likely require some form of environmental impact assessment. Since some proposals relate to modification of a wetland and more effective use of shallow offshore areas, a more precise evaluation of the environmental impact of these pro- posals will be needed and should be obtained before the project proceeds, 2 CHAPTER 2: DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA AND HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Over the years the Stewart Park complex has been many things to many people. *. Its role as a community recreation facility of more than local significance dates from the beginning of this century. The complex has-changed in character several times since the mid-1890's and, with each change, has grown in impor tance as a major part of the recreation system for Ithaca and the surrounding region. As stated in the Introduction, the complex consists of 180 acres of land and includes a lakeshore park, a nine hole golf course and two natural wetland areas. Despite its size and importance the Stewart Park complex represents only part of the vast and unique open area that the City of Ithaca has managed to preserve for public park use at the head of Cayuga Lake. There are no other recreation areas of this size and scale on other lakes in the Finger Lakes region. The Summer 1984 Newsletter published by the DeWitt Historical Society pointed out that Stewart Park was part of the estate of James Renwick who purchased it in 1790 from its original owner, Revolutionary War soldier Andrew Moody. Fuertes Bird Sanctuary was also part of the Renwick estate. Land lying between Fall Creek and the Inlet, however, where the golf course and Biological Station are now located, was part of the old Parker tract. It was bought by Jared T. Newman in 1906 for $3,540. Newman was then attorney for the Creek, Park and Drainage Commission; he became mayor in 1907. It was Newman who, over a short period of time, was able to assemble the bird sanctuary land, the golf course area and three parcels on the west side of the Inlet which later became the municipal airport, and is now Cass Park. His interest was in "the cleaning up of the swamps and the benefits that might follow."* Title to all of this "swamp" land was ultimately taken over by the City at a nominal cost and has remained public property all these years. Mr. Newman was critized at the time, and accused of benefiting personally at the expense of the City. Apparently these criticisms were unfounded. As we now know, the City was, and continues to be, the beneficiary of the creative vision of this early mayor. Development and major change in the Stewart Park complex occurred primarily during two time periods over the past ninety years. The first period of con- struction activity was limited to the lakeshore park (then called Renwick Park) and took place between 1894 and 1900. * Letter from Jared T. Newman as presented to the Ithaca Board of Public • Works, May 22, 1935, on file in City Clerk's office. 3 In the mid-1890's, according to early newspaper reports, thirteen acres of the old Renwick Tract were purchased by the Cascadilla School and turned into a lakeside athletic facility for the school. Rowing was one of the more .• popular sports at the time. Consequently, the focal point of the Cascadilla School athletic facility was a magnificant boathouse designed in 1893 by local architects Vivian and Gibb.* This building, with its picturesque balcony et and conical towers, was completed in 1896 for a reputed $8,000. and it stands today, in a much diminished form, at the juncture of 'Fall Creek and Cayuga Lake. At the same time the boathouse was being constructed, there was also a flurry of building activity elsewhere in the park. The Ithaca Street Railway Company had previously purchased most of the Renwick Tract and had elaborate plans for a new hillside housing development and cemetery and a trolley-amusement park along the lake. An extension of the North Tioga Street electric trolley line to the lake was completed in 1894 and the Renwick amusement park was constructed shortly thereafter. While the park had its own inherent economic and social value it was constructed primarily to induce additional ridership on the trolley. All of the principal buildings in the amusement park were constructed before 1900 and no structure of significance has been built since. The picnic pavilion and its near look-alike, the dance pavilion, were the centerpieces of Ithaca's summertime social life and recreation pursuits and remained so during much of the first decade of the 1900's. Vaudeville road shows per- formed in the dance pavilion and popular band concerts were regularly held in the courtyard between the two buildings. The lagoon was created as part of the amusement park, as was the long pier stretching almost 900 feet into the lake. The entire complex had broad appeal; excusions from surrounding communities often came to enjoy Ithaca's lakeside attractions. The seemingly solid public interest in Renwick Park and its outdoor pleasures began to decline around 1907 and the Ithaca Street Railway Company also lost interest in the area. The amusement park was sold to a group of local business- men associated as the Renwick Park and Traffic Association. Continued failure to make the park an economically viable operation led to its rental in 1914 to Wharton Incorporated, producers of silent films. Then began the few ex- citing years of film-making in the Ithaca community. The dance pavilion was radically modified into an interior film studio and processing space. It has remained in this altered form since and is now used for park maintenance and storage. By 1923 filming had long ceased and the amusement park operation had ended. The City purchased both Renwick Park and the property owned by Cascadilla School, including the boathouse. Public ownership of the entire south shore of Cayuga * See The Works of Clinton L. Vivian, Architect, of Ithaca. Thesis by David A. Rash, for a Master of Architectural History Degree, Cornell University, 1983. 4 Lake was thus complete. Renwick Park became Stewart Park in honor of Edwin C. Stewart who engineered its purchase by the City and left a large bequest for its continued development and use as a major community recreation fa- ., cility. Thirty years after the amusement park heyday, the second major period of park development took place. This time activity was stimulated by the Federal emergency work relief program designed to lift the country out of the 1932 depression. In 1933 full public attention was turned toward that parcel of land west of Fall Creek that had been purchased for the City by Jared Newman back. in 1906. For twenty years a large portion of this parcel had been used by the City as a garbage and ash dump but plans had been made to convert it into a golf course. When Federal relief funds became available the project moved rapidly ahead. A small triangular piece of land between the dump and Fall Creek was apparently not part of the Newman purchase and was acquired by Cornell University. Since this area was included as part of the original golf course design Cornell ex- changed it in 1934 for a twelve-acre parcel of City owned land farther north, at the point. This Cornell parcel is now known as the Biological Station. In a short span of time the dump site was transformed into a nine-hole course which opened for public use in the Spring of 1935. A wide gravel road encircled the course, low areas were filled, underbrush cleared, grass and trees planted, and drainage tile and water lines laid. Fall Creek was straightened and deepened; it provided much of the topsoil for the fairways and gravel for the road.* Since the original construction the course has been modified substantially but most of the original greens are still in use and the hundreds of young trees and shrubs have matured into the handsome setting that Newman Golf Course presently enjoys. This Master Plan for the future development of the Stewart Park complex is prepared just 90 years after the amusement park era began and 50 years after the golf course was created. The plan represents a major new stage of park development. It builds on the exciting activities and events of the past. It recognizes the needs of the present and expresses high hopes for the future. Through this plan a long-term commitment is being made by the City of Ithaca to preserve, protect and nuture this remarkable public waterfront space. A a * Report of Work Relief Accomplishments, City of Ithaca, N.Y. , Oct. 1, 1934, written by W. A. Boyd, Chairman, Ithaca Works Bureau. 5 CHAPTER 3: USE AND DEVELOPMENT - RECOMMENDED POLICY The Stewart Park recreation complex is a product of evolution and change over 4. the past nine decades. It can be said with some assurance that this area will continue to exist and be used as a major public space and recreation attraction for Ithaca and the surrounding region for as long as can be reasonably imagined. Future change and modification of the park area is also to be expected. This report represents the City's desire to make such change beneficial, coordinated and orderly. At the beginning of a new period of major formation and growth in the park, it is imperative that the community's goals for this invaluable public resource be clearly stated. A long-range development process, expected to last twelve to fifteen years, should be based on an overall plan or program of action. However, since time and circumstance can always be expected to modify the specifics of a long-range plan, it also becomes essential that the process of change be tied to a series of generalized guidelines, or policies, related to park development. Such statements of policy should set forth the City's con- cerns, attitudes and hopes for the future of it's lakeside heritage. Once determined, the policy declaration for Stewart Park establishes a desired role for the park complex as part of the overall development plan for the City. Policy provides rationale, justification and direction for a wide variety of possible public and private actions, for capital investment, and for other management questions and development opportunities that continued evolution of the park will inevitably create. It is recommended that policy be formulated for at least eight major issues related to future development and use of the Stewart Park complex. The state- ments set forth on the following pages are felt to represent the most appropriate development and use policy for this area for the foreseeable future. 1. REGIONAL USE The Stewart Park complex is an open space and recreation attraction which has developed into a facility of regional importance and appeal. Its use is not limited to local residents. The City agrees with this trend. It will support future public and private development which will enhance the opportunity for regional use when such development is compatible with design objectives of the Stewart Park Management Plan. 2. PARK CHARACTER ' The City wishes to increase the informal picnic use and passive character of Stewart Park. Park design and future development will be aimed at enhancing casual use by families and people of all ages for picnicking, fish- ' ing, skating, strolling, viewing and similar unstructured activities. More active sports such as organized ballplaying, soccer and similar group athletic activities will occur at other facilities in the City. 6. 3. PARK EXPANSION Visits to, and use of, Stewart Park are expected to increase dramati- s• cally in the next twenty years. Overcrowding is increasing in serious- ness and frequency. User saturation greatly reduces the value and effec- tiveness of this resource. To overcome this problem, and increase future holding capacity, usefulness and attractiveness, the City intends to work toward expanding the park area by selectively extending the shoreline to the north. Such expansion will be designed and implemented in ways which will improve the natural habitat of shallow water areas. The City in- tends to work with State and Federal officials and natural resources ex- perts to achieve this objective. 4. PUBLIC NATURAL AREAS Natural wetlands, once extensive along Ithaca's lakeshore and along the inlet, have been greatly diminished in size and quality over this century. The City feels that the best remaining natural old-growth lakeshore forest, the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary, should be preserved and designated forever wild. It will be the policy of the City to plan and develop surrounding facilities so as to minimize impact on the Bird Sanctuary. Development and use of other natural areas of the lakeshore will take into account the existing and potential value of such resources in an urban community. Plans for such areas will be designed to enhance their natural functions and mitigate any undesirable impact of human activity. 5. SWIMMING An opportunity to swim safely in the natural surroundings of Cayuga Lake or Fall Creek would greatly increase the appeal of Stewart Park for many park users. The City recognizes that transparency and cleanliness of the waters off Stewart Park, both in the lake and in Fall Creek, are serious deterrents to the reestablishment of natural swimming in this area. Never- theless, the City has every intention of again providing natural swimming opportunities in this area if it can be demonstrated that this can be done safely and in a may that is economically acceptable to the community, responsive to environmental concerns, and compatible with the broad role of this park in the City's recreation system. 6. TRAFFIC AND PARKING In areas of high pedestrian use, conflict with, and potential hazard from, 14 vehicular traffic should be kept to a minimum, Stewart Park is one such area. It is the City's policy to assure the safety of park users by creating a separation between pedestrian and vehicular movement whenever this can be done. Emphasis will be placed on the human aspects of park use; vehicular intrusion into pedestrian spaces will be limited to handi- capped access, service, emergency, maintenance, and delivery functions, J. All other vehicular movement will be restricted by road design. Parking will be concentrated in areas which offer convenient access but do not conflict with normal use and enjoyment of the park. c. 7. HISTORIC RESTORATION Potential for recreating some of the significant historic atmosphere of Stewart Park is compatible with overall design and use objectives of the development plan. The City affirms this unique historic nature, It in- tends to restore existing park structures when feasible and reestablish some of the earlier social and recreational activity and character of the area. Special emphasis will be placed on programs which exhibit and demonstrate Ithaca's contribution to the silent film industry, to early settlement and to the natural history of this region. The moderate tourist- generating potential of this policy is recognized and supported. 8. IMPLEMENTATION Because the development plan for the Stewart Park complex consists of a large number of objectives and proposals, it will only be accomplished over an extended period of time. The City intends to implement the de- velopment plan by the end of this century and to use plan proposals as a starting point for all interim public and private activities and expendi- tures in the complex. Funding will most likely come from many sources. The City intends to use public money to the extent that this can be in- corporated into overall budgets and to supplement local investments with funds from State, Federal and private sources as these may become avail- able. 1 8. CHAPTER 4: LAND USE AND CIRCULATION PLAN PROPOSALS Having established broad policy statements related to long-range park de- velopment, it then becomes necessary to make a plan which translates policy into recommendations for action. It is the role and responsibility of a development plan to set forth general guidelines and proposals which can actually be achieved through the ongoing process of government if there is a wish to do so. In basic terms, the development plan consists of a series of specific written recommendations and a map which shows graphically the various pro- posals. For Stewart Park the plan includes proposals for land use, circulation, landscaping and treatment of principal structures. The map illustrating most of these proposals is located in the back of this report. The Stewart Park complex involves a large number of separate activities, most of which are interrelated and all of which combine to form the whole. For purposes of presentation and explanation the development plan is divided into three main components. Land use and circulation proposals are included in this chapter. This is followed by separate chapters on landscape development and treatment of park structures. Land use and circulation proposals are further subdivided into fifteen com- ponents, each of which deals with one of the important aspects of future park development. To achieve consistence of presentation throughout the chapter, as well as the chapters which follow, a uniform format was felt to be necessary. Each section is written in outline form and begins with pertinent existing conditions and background data related to the subject matter. This is followed by a series of design objectives which are to be achieved in the plan. The third part consists of specific actions which are being recommended for park improvement. It is these actions that, for the most part, are illustrated on the map. The section concludes with a number of general comments which may include explanatory material, alternatives, related but secondary proposals, interesting notes, special concerns, caveats, and so forth. Because many park activities are very closely interrelated a certain amount of repetition in the written material was inevitable. Frequent reference to other sections or other chapters is also made when there is additional related material or a more detailed explanation available. 9. 1. LAND USE RELATIONSHIPS fk,• A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. Four separate elements comprise the Stewart Park complex: Stewart Park proper (the park), the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary, Newman Golf Course and Cornell's Biological Field Station. Use of each of these areas is different in terms of intensity and type of activity. The golf course and field station are divided from the park and bird sanctuary by Fall Creek; the entire Stewart Park complex is separated from the Cass Park recreation complex by Cayuga Inlet. Except for the field station, owned by Cornell, the entire water- front area is under public ownership. 2. Most activity, and use by the greatest number of people, occurs in the park. No specific user count is available but on good- weather weekends, from late May through mid-September, the park is crowded, many times reaching saturation and beyond. 3. Fuertes Bird Sanctuary is adjacent to Stewart Park on its south side. A small but attractive drainageway separates the two. The sanctuary has dense vegetation and occasional wet areas. There are a few natural paths through this area; its use is limited largely to bird watchers, some biology and botany students and those using the sanctuary as a pedestrian or bicycle route to Stewart Park. 4. The golf course and biological station occupy the central portion of the lakefront recreation area. Golf course use is heavy during warmer weather months. Relative inaccessibility and dense vegeta- tion make the field station the least used portion of the complex. 5. A wide variety and range of recreation and social activity occurs in the park, from intimate picnicking to the pervasive experience of the Ithaca Festival. Casual field games take place on occasion but the more active, highly organized sporting events have been consigned to the more spacious and better equipped Cass Park fields. This move to a more passive, family oriented character in Stewart Park is often frustrated to the extent that the large user popu- lation creates a higher density than is desirable in a park of this type. 6. Stewart Park has the character of a large, flat, community park although its use and appeal are definitely regional in scope. There are identifiable activity areas such as the playground, picnic pavilion and zoo but, by and large, use and appearance is 10, essentially homogeneous with one part of the park being much like all other parts. '• 7. There is pedestrian but no internal vehicular connection between the two halves of the Stewart Park complex. There is no con- nection at all between the Stewart Park and Cass Park complexes. St Elaborate plans, designed many years ago, show a wide bridge across Fall Creek connecting Stewart Park to the biological station. Fortunately, this bridge was never built. 8. The group of structures located in the eastern third of the park provides a significant focal point but the various buildings have little visual or functional relationship to each other. The original intent in building these structures was just the opposite; to provide a strong sense of architectural unity. Change of use over the years and the intrusion of paved parking has destroyed the original grand concept. 9. The average park user, particularly one in a car, experiences a stronger visual and physical relationship to Fall Creek than Cayuga Lake. This is due in part to the visual barrier created by parked cars and the formal Willow row on each end of the lake- shore. The roadway is within several feet of Fall Creek but here again parked vehicles present an effective visual intrusion in the space. B. Design Objectives 1. To maintain the discrete separation of waterfront parkland, bird sanctuary and golf course but upgrade pedestrian connections be- tween and within these areas, as appropriate. 2. To accommodate a growing regional demand for waterfront parkland and also reduce overall user density by increasing the amount of land available for family picnicking and passive recreation activity. 3. To protect the buffer and habitat functions of Fuertes Bird Sanctuary and maintain the traditional low user level. (See Proposal 3.) 4. To carefully integrate golf course and field station in a way that will be beneficial to both.. (See Proposal 6.) 5. To establish distinct but related activity areas in the park by land use design and landscaping. More intensive high density uses • should be located nearer the park entrance. 11. 1 trl ' :I.1 (.1. :\: -:.:ZS':^°- pl'ME PLO LAKE / `�des i � D�yE�, C A Y u �, A ~ ` �'TE411�RT FAQ el. 382 /.� Yd, t ,i gYGId flg3E TIVES <: � Oct,. r�. /� ' ' iIP , ^�-^'"• - i: • Ia.:. res4c4t.......;,-/ :, ' . 7. ,f1 ...'' '11:s 4 * I - ' • 506 6:004,,,N, ------r;;e.V.Nes:e4 ..0V.4111111% w_ ., , 1 ,� i' g,�0� �'�' N �, f Pic �ri ` s� s , -\ A.1 / K,4P' 1 ,i/e R''''" `� "Y eat' as " s"1�+ ` \\ c rf• t.a, ;CA C VC 'ir:•�-� is P' '� '9, t i (1.-Mplt�rltl ice ` • - sz -s ore "" 1 • .._, _av �y�CIG �1� `'',�t�asicpt f• y end ' 's . �'�a r. S \�yYovv of f habi a r � �� 67Aj1ON !_�_ • � . \%"---;;::''.---7 -'destrian ,�, T? �, N � oP_ intt•c4!.......■i /! MUN, . "A /K T11ut �►, �1 a ry :71 1.. .�� U1YS= _ .rQlalf•11 Rar +'4 M t ' `\ `; \ ^' g,, ,i� /: 1 and i�.T�Y e `.' 1't t`cwo :. U \\l '4 �1 ct. 'an urae i i�r ; k+ • $off-£ GO _ •, is . ."f O �' i`'tad �?�. �- ` ... - -vi '. -- e E—. .- ,_...__ ( . yer.... c..-- \.chs. rCY7 �eG , * t— 1 GG o` rf�1hR� �� '> - LEEK - wY �•, . fJ gS 4r.RSC • 6. To increase the opportunity for access to, and passive use of, the lake, creek and inlet shoreline. (See Proposals 5, 8 and 12.) 7. To provide segregated parking facilities and restrict the extent of vehicular traffic movement. (See Proposal 2.) * 8. To take full advantage of the social, cultural and economic po- tential which could accrue from the appropriate rehabilitation and upgrading of existing park structures. (See Proposal 10.) C. Proposed Action 1. As shown on the Land Use Relationship Diagram, seven broad land use activities are proposed as the basis for the park development plan: a. High capacity active picnic or play. b. Low capacity active picnic or play. c. Low capacity passive picnic or play. d. Children's concentrated activity center. e. Historic/social/cultural activity center, f. Unique natural resource preservation, g. Shoreline enhancement areas. It can be seen that these land use activities are arranged so as to form a sequence which generally diminishes in user intensity from the park entrance to Fall Creek. 2. A simplified traffic and parking spine is- proposed to replace the current inappropriate system in Stewart Park. Concentrated parking occurs in specific locations where it is most needed. 3. Specific actions are proposed to enhance the use potential and attractiveness of shoreline and water. Such actions relate to all the water bodies impacting the Stewart Park complex: Cayuga Lake, the inlet, Fall Creek and the lagoon. The intent of these pro- posals is to take maximum advantage of a unique waterfront location. 4. Extensive rehabilitation is proposed as the most beneficial way to deal with major existing park structures. While rehabilitation would involve a considerable expense, the economic and social value to be gained by the renewed buildings, and consideration of alterna- tives to rehabilitation, make this action the proper one. 13. • r La • CAYUGA LAKE � . • % '\LAND USE RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM el. 382 -'r') _`\ YOUTH buKEAu / ;r S Us TduR15T INFO. .:%t� , / v ! 1/•••11 ,������� �� ,�� t�: I HIGH CAPACITY .ACTIVE NV iZO' ��a , �i Ih / i r., csitc3,LOW CAPACITY ACTIVE 1 .SAT SOUS ,..., ,,,07,‘,ti i it,Sp'/: 1 "(,----) LOW CAPACITY PASSIVE "'`'� `. � ��i• .'.••. 1 1 '+y, •_ Ai1• rr� ! pi •N, /' . JR. Hi�H SC/1001- r. t •�••) CHILDREN S ACTIVE PLAY • eoN0rtouS -> >f f R I illipirit, ,....... •� / ' :::':::: ::T \sr( < I (1,:: . i., � 'T = �R'°' -�� f -,`\ rtoi,s , _. ,,,_ SHORELINE ENHANCEMENT NEW �`�+ ` - I F "41C 11...A aO1_v (011......• \ A , J • , OUR I•• 140011111 TRAFFIC SPINE ;� INS <4..,� WIF ., . ..v - ,.....-. c, � 'I� ��I I %- lCMOOI; I 111 V j 4 14 t.;', 1 11 `� Frown •r 11� _• . .. ntK ! ' `; ;\ E_aoTYARas _ 1 L i L� -- — ,--r GREEK d 1� '� '` �' — A,- UNOE `N I ,'��,p„V!'c„ ��t►10 co Iy•'� w T,U (� • ` CASs PARK . , i [I]' . . - [1] :: ro•al ...,,/,\ . , / s So cry a � I t...• i D. Related Comments and Notes 1. At first look the development proposals set forth in this report seem to imply major departures from the Stewart Park Complex as it exists today. No doubt some of the proposed actions will have a significant impact on the park and its users. Most, how- ever, are actions which will upgrade, enhance, rearrange or . preserve what is already there. Since change in the park complex - is taking place, with or without a plan, the proposals of this study represent an attempt to channel this change in certain pre- determined directions over the next decade or longer. When viewed in this light the plan is felt to be realistic and highly bene- ficial to the Ithaca community. 2. Specifics and details of the broad recommendations listed above can be found in the fourteen proposals which comprise this Chapter and in Chapters 5 and 6. 15. 2. ROADWAYS AND PARKING A. EXistiug Conditions and Background a. 1. Vehicular circulation in Stewart Park is provided by approx- imately 5,000 feet of paved roadway, 40 percent of which forms it a large one-way loop system through the western half of the park. 2. For about two-thirds of its length the lakeshore is cut off from the rest of Stewart Park by the roadway and parking space. Roads and parking also divide play areas. This creates an undesirable and sometimes hazardous barrier for pedestrians, especially children. 3. Parking areas close to the shoreline provide an opportunity to view the lake from the relative comfort of a vehicle. This is a popular pastime for many park visitors. 4. Service access to all park structures and areas is conveniently provided by existing roads and drives. 5. While automobile parking is concentrated in three sections of the park's road system, it also occurs at the curb along the entire roadway and in the courtyard between the pavilion and bathhouse. Parked and moving vehicles are highly visible throughout the area. About 400 cars can be conveniently parked at present. Overflow, but normally illegal, parking for another 50 to 100 vehicles is available. 6. Casual driving or "cruising" is a popular activity in the park, contributing to the overall sense of traffic congestion and vehicle-pedestrian conflict that is conveyed at periods of high use. At the same time, a casual drive that enables the rider to visually experience nature and human activity in most areas of the park can, in itself, be a pleasant recreation pursuit. 7. The present roadway system provides the setting for tailgate gatherings of groups of younger people who assemble near their automobiles, vans or motorcycles to socialize and picnic. This activity tends to focus on certain sections of the roadway. 8. Some confusion is encountered by the motorist at the park entrance where a turning decision must be made. Those unaware of the park layout do not know which route will get them where they ultimately want to go. 9. A narrow service drive provides access to the parking area be- tween the pavilion and bathhouse. Service access to the community barbecue pit also uses this drive. 16. 10. Pier Road provides access to the golf course, Johnson's Boatyard, Fall Creek and the inlet. ..v 11. The golf course parking area is congested and inadequate. Traffic to Johnson's Boatyard passes through the parking area and creates additional conflict with golfing traffic. At the other end of Pier Road, parking is provided for Fall Creek fishermen but more is needed. B. Design Objectives 1. To minimize conflict between vehicular and pedestrian movement. 2. To develop a lakeshore recreation area which is essentially free of moving and parked vehicles. 3. To concentrate parking in landscaped lots located close to major park functions and eliminate parking along roadways under normal operating conditions. 4. To provide adequate access for service, maintenance and emergency vehicles and for the needs of specialized park activities such as community barbecues and festivals. 5. To provide a major roadway system which is a pleasant visual experience as well as an effective means of access and which, by design, can help to control traffic movement and reduce congestion. 6. To create a distinctive park entrance that symbolizes the unique resource that is to be experienced in Stewart Park. 7. To provide additional hard surface parking along Pier Road for fishermen and reduce vehicular congestion and conflict in the golf course clubhouse area. 8. To remove parking from the area between the pavilion and inter- pretive center but improve vehicular service to this area to accommodate the elderly, handicapped and the operating needs of special park programs. C. Proposed Action 1. Replace the present roadway system in Stewart Park with a single circulation spine running in a curvilinear manner along the southern side of the park where it will be well removed from the lakeshore. This roadway would be two-way from one end of the park to the other and parking would normally not be permitted along it. 17. 2. Construct three new parking lots directly accessible from the spine road and having a combined capacity of 50 percent more spaces than presently available. The largest lot will provide over 300 spaces in the northeast corner of the park where it my will serve the Group Picnic Area. A 180 to 200 car lot near the boathouse will serve the western end of the park and a 44 smaller lot of about 100 spaces will be located near the Children's Play Area and the Lagoon. New parking lots should be located so that it is possible to walk directly from the car to the park area without crossing a road. 3. Design and construct parking lots so that interior landscaping softens the visual impact of multiple vehicles and also provide some shade. Landscaped earth mounds should be constructed on the periphery of the lots to visually screen them from adjacent park- land. 4. Provide a row of parking spaces perpendicular to the lakeshore which would offer valued opportunities to view the lake from within a parked vehicle. Such overlook spaces should be located on the lakeside of the large eastern parking lot. 5. Additional overlook possibilities should be provided in the park- ing lot fronting on Fall Creek. Mounds used to screen this lot on its south side should vary in height so the creek and golf course beyond can be seen from some parked vehicle. 6. Construct a formalized entrance on the east side of the park and a substantial turn-around in front of the boathouse. The entrance should be designed and landscaped to provide a feeling of entry into a public place of great beauty and value. Directions to park functions should be clear. The turn-around at the boathouse should be large enough to accommodate busses and service vehicles. It should be designed for use for formal occasions such as receptions and weddings as well as for the casual driver wishing to turn around at the end of the park road. 7. Build a service loop to the pavilion/interpretive center area. This loop should normally be used as a roadway only to provide service access to the two buildings, the court and the community barbecue pit. Access for the elderly and handicapped could also be provided by the loop. Normally, however, it would be considered a wide walkway circling The Garden and used for pedestrian access to the picnic pavilion, court and the interpretive center. 8. Relocate the golf course parking area and increase the capacity of this facility to 75 to 100 spaces. A location closer to the inlet would enable the new- lot to also serve the eastern terminal of the proposed ferry connection to Cass Park. (See Proposal 4.1 Number 9. green would have been relocated to the east and would not interfer with the construction of this lot. (See Proposal 6.) 18. 9. Create an information plaza south of the Youth Bureau building which would be a bus turnaround as well as a safe pull-off space for visitors to the tourist information booth. Design for this area should be coordinated with the relocation of Route 13 access and the site planning for the Youth Bureau. C. Related Comments and Notes Ok 1. A rebuilt circulation system is one of the key elements of the development plan and, by itself, would make a substantial improve- ment in the park. Parking areas and roadways should be well defined and provided with granite curbs and adequate lighting, Curbs on the south side of the roadway should be sloped at a 30° or 45° angle so that overflow parking on the grass would be possible for special occasions. 2. The plan indicates a new road system which, in some spots, has essentially the same location as the existing road, It is possible that the present road could be upgraded to new road specifications at a cost savings. If detailed investigation shows this to be true it should be done. The intent of the plan is to indicate a two-way, well drained roadway with an alignment that moderates existing sharp turns and long straightaways. 3. Existing roadways and parking areas that would no longer be used should be removed with the rubble being used, in part, for fill and for the mounds around parking lots. 4. Pier Road would be terminated with a paved turnaround in the vacinity of the existing fire tower. The gravel roadway north of this turnaround would be incorporated into the footpath system. (See Proposal 4.) 5. Emergency and maintenance access to all parts of the area is necessary. Instead of using paved roadways for this purpose, footpath should be wide enough to accommodate a small truck, police car, ambulance and similar type vehicles when the need arises. 1 19. 3. FUERTES BIRD SANCTUARY (The Renwick Preserve) A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. The Fuertes sanctuary is an undeveloped triangle of land approximately ik fifty-five acres in area and located to the southeast of Stewart Park between Fall Creek and Route 13. It is one of the last remaining examples of swamp forest to be found along the southern end of Cayuga Lake. 2. This area has been designated a Type I (most important) wetland by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in accordance with Article 24 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law. 3. Being a wooded wetland, the sanctuary also has great value as a birding area. It is a resting and feeding stop for a large variety of transient birds during spring and fall migration periods. It is also a nesting site for an important group of birds that inhabit woodland sites, in- cluding the Fish Crow and Yellow-rumped Warbler, which are unusual species in this area. 4. The Cayuga Bird Club, an active local organization., has established a system of rudimentary trails to provide access through the sanctuary. These trails are currently in the process of being improved to the extent compatible with the bird club's philosophy about the appropriate use of this area. 5. In fast years there have been both public and private activities in this area that have been detrimental to its character as a significant natural wetland habitat. These activities include the dumping of rubble and building materials in places along the banks of Fall Creek and the in- trusion of motorbikes and other vehicles in the sanctuary. 6. The location of Route 13 on the east side of the sanctuary has caused a condition of intense tire and motor noise in this area. Informed opinion is that this high noise level appears to be more of a nuisance to humans visiting the sanctuary than to bird and wildlife inhabitants. 7. In addition to its wetland and wildlife habitat value, this densely wooded area performs the extremely important function of buffering Stewart Park and Newman golf course from the more intensive urban ..� activities east and south of Route 13. To a large extent the pleasant, quite parklike atmosphere in Stewart Park can be attributed to this buffering function of the bird sanctuary. 8. There is considerable pedestrian and bicycle traffic across the extreme western point of the bird sanctuary where picturesque suspension bridges span Fall Creek and the lagoon outlet to connect the golf course area • with Stewart Park. 20. B. Design Objectives 1. To preserve and protect the natural wetland and wildlife habitat of Fuertes Bird Sanctuary to the fullest extent possible. 2. To assess the impact on the sanctuary of any proposed development or 4k use of land adjacent to it. To minimize the potentially negative impact of adjacent land uses on the sanctuary, 3. To continue to provide and 'maintain a rudimentary network of footpaths within and through the sanctuary. 4. To upgrade the pedestrian connection between the suspension bridges in a way that will make the footpath system in this area fully accessible to the handicapped but not be excessively detrimental to the environ- ment of the bird sanctuary. C. Proposed Action 1. Maintain the footpath system essentially as it presently is. Continue to remove brush and deadfalls as necessary to facilitate pedestrian movement, especially on the trail which parallels the eastern boundary of the sanctuary. Trails should be surfaced with nothing more permanent than woodchips or some similar natural material. Hard surface paths are not considered to be compatible with present design objectives for this area. 2. Discontinue any further filling. or disposal of rubble and building materials in any part of the sanctuary, except where this is necessary to stabilize the banks of Fall Creek. (See Proposal 8.) 3. Construct a connection between the ends of the footbridges that is de- signed to facilitate movement by the handicapped. Rather than placing fill of any type in this area, a raised wooden walkway appropriately designed to accommodate wheelchairs and bicycles should be constructed. 4. Develop and install graphic and descriptive information which interprets the evolution and current function of the sanctuary and lists plant and wildlife species to-be found there. Advice on design, the material to be included and the location of such interpretive material should be obtained from the Cayuga Bird Club, the Environmental Management Council and other interested local groups. • D. Related Comments and Notes 1. Early in this study consideration was given to the possibility of en- larging. the golf course to 18 holes by expanding across Fall Creek into the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary, Even though pressure to expand the golf course is great and there is limited land for such expansion, it was 21. • decided that the bird sanctuary should not be encroached upon, even if this were possible, and that its natural state should not be violated. This feeling was based on the buffering qualities of the park as well as its value as a unique natural environment and habitat area. ib 2. Continuing maintenance work in the sanctuary should include efforts to restore the concrete arch at the south entrance which has suffered extensive deterioration over the years. The area of the arch, would also be a suitable location for the placement of additional interpre- tive material. 3. Some consideration was given to planting additional trees in the sanctuary, primarily along its eastern boundary, The purpose of such trees would be to provide more nesting and feeding opportunities and also to give greater buffering from distracting highway noise. It is doubtful that more trees, even evergreens, would do much to reduce the noise level. Since there is much planting to be done in other areas of the park it is felt that additional trees in the sanctuary should have a low priority unless planting is done by a private local group. In any case, species to be used should be natural to the area and in keeping with existing tree growth. 4. Because of the sanctuary's uniqueness and value to the Ithaca community, the City should consider some official action or procedure that would protect it in the future and make significant man-made change in use or character very difficult to implement. In support of this objective a long-range plan for preservation, restoration and use of the bird sanctuary should be prepared by local individuals and groups who are interested in, and knowledgeable about, this area. 22. 4. PATHWAYS AND PROMENADE A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. Stewart Park is part of an extensive network of paths and open spaces established by Circle Greenway, an official City committee organized to create an urban walkway system which strings to- gether many of the natural and man-made features for which Ithaca is famous. 2. There are no established walkways, as such, in Stewark Park. People stroll informally on the grounds or walk along the roads. Pedestrian movement at the lakeshore tends to be more perpendicular than lateral, with people walking between their car and a picnic table or bench rather than strolling the length of the shoreline. 3. The two suspension bridges are important links in the pathway system. They connect Stewart Park to Pier Road which is a designated bicycle route. 4. Limited pedestrian activity occurs along the inlet but people do walk or jog on the lane that is used to service the white light- house. 5. Cayuga Inlet is an effective barrier to pedestrian movement be- tween Stewart and Cass Parks. B. Design Objectives 1. To establish a limited system of hard-surface walkways throughout the park which would facilitate greater use of the area by the elderly and handicapped. 2. To design main walkways so that they are unobtrusive but also wide and heavy enough to accommodate service, emergency and security vehicles. 3. To enhance the experience of walking along the lakeshore. 4. To improve approaches to the suspension bridges. 5. To extend the walkway system so that all of the natural attractions found in the area between Pall Creek and Cayuga Inlet can be experienced. 6. To establish a workable pedestrian connection between Stewart Park and Cass Park. 23.. C. Proposed Action 1. Construct a lighted promenade extending the full sweep of the lakeshore. This walkway should be wide enough to allow couples to pass comfortably and should provide numerous sitting and viewing areas. a 2. Provide a pedestrian path between the shoreline promenade and the suspension bridges. Construct access ramps to the bridges so that wheelchairs, strollers and similar small, wheeled vehicles can use them easily. 3. Create an interpretive trail around the Biological Station. Where Pall Creek extends into the golf course, at the present 7th hole, a small wooden arched bridge should be constructed to connect the two banks. Some protective screening might be re- quired where the trail passes close to a golf course green. Because the shoreline is sometimes flooded and subject to wave action, the interpretive trail should be well back from the water's edge as it passes across the northern side of the Biological Station. Even so, there will be when parts of this path will be under water. Elevating these sections is not felt to be nec- essary or appropriate. 4. Construct a footpath along Cayuga Inlet which would connect the lighthouse pier on the north with Pier Road on the south. 5. Restore the area south of the suspension bridge which has been used by vehicles for many years. This stretch should be con- verted into a footpath and provided with shoreline landscaping. It will connect the bridge with the northern terminus of Pier Road. 6. Establish a connection across the inlet to Cass Park. Because of height restrictions and cost factors a bridge is not considered feasible. A small pontoon boat with an outboard motor could operate effectively as a ferry, to be used pr-mariJ.y during warm- weather months. The ferry should have a flat deck and be suitable for transporting wheelchairs and bicycles. A landing terminal will be needed at each end. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. The ferry connection to Cass Park would most likely involve special licensing and insurance procedures since it would be a transportation facility in a navigable waterway. Also, boat traffic in the inlet is often heavy and the ferry operator would need special instruction on safe boat handling. Even so, the possibility of tying Cass Park to the rest of the waterfront 24. recreation complex in a relatively inexpensive way has value that more than justifies the operational difficulties to be faced. s^ 2. Another limitation of the ferry, as proposed above, would be the need for personnel to run the boat. Schedules and timetables S would have to be worked out and there would be times when the ferry would not be in operation. The possibility of a "do-it- yourself" type ferry, attached to a subsurface cable or some such device, could be considered. Liability and interference with boat traffic would be important problems to be addressed when considering an uncontrolled ferry operation. 3. A new paved and lighted lakeshore promenade would attract many people to the shoreline. The visual quality of the shoreline would, therefore, become a greater concern. Large stones that have been placed along the shore are felt to be visually suitable and in keeping with the desired natural look. The addition of numerous attractive benches along the promenade will do much to increase the appeal and use of the shoreline as a place of quiet and repose. (See Proposal 11.) 4. Two additional footbridges are shown on the plan: one across Fall Creek near the railroad and one across Cascadilla Creek also near the railroad. The Cascadilla Creek bridge would provide additional access to Fuertes Bird Sanctuary and the east bank of the creek. Since one of the development policies of this study is aimed at limiting human impact on the sanctuary, an additional bridge giving access to it could be considered contradictory. In this light, the Cascadilla bridge would be preferable. A suitable location should first be found for the footpath as it progresses southward. 5. Bicycle racks will be needed in the park and should be provided near the parking lots and in other convenient but unobtrustive spots. 25. 5. STEWART PARK SWIMMING ING A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. For many years swimming was a popular activity in Stewart Park. AD An expansive swimming area was located in front of the bathhouse and pavilion but conditions were far from ideal. The water was very shallow and the lake bottom soft and silty as it is today. 2. Bacterial quality of the water is usually within acceptable minimum standards and is not considered one of the major problems of the area. Extreme turbidity is the condition that finally brought an end to lake swimming early in the 1960's. It has never been resumed. 3. Numerous ducks and shorebirds swim and feed along the shore and are the source of some water contamination. The possible effect of this on humans' swimming needs to be more specifically assessed. 4. When the new municipal waste water disposal plant is completed there will be two sewer outfalls offshore at Stewart Park. The Cayuga Heights outfall extends from the east shore and the new city outfall will terminate about 1,300 feet north of the white lighthouse. It is not anticipated that these outfalls will pollute the south end of the lake. 5. Under normal conditions water flows very slowly in Cayuga Inlet and Fall Creek and almost not at all in the lake. Streamflow from the inlet and creek form small currents at their outlets but these currents grow rapidly weaker as water disperses into the lake. 6. When not influenced by wind, creek and inlet currents turn to the right (toward the east) and then proceed northward along the east shore. Surface current is more or less aligned with the wind with a return flow under the surface. 7. Water flows at greater velocity in Fall Creek but more sediment and debris is carried by the inlet. The concrete pier and deeper channel keep inlet sediment confined and carry it farther into the lake before it is dispersed. Bars tend to build up at points } where currents diminish and the sediment can, therefore, begin to settle to the bottom. Shallow conditions are produced all along the lakefront as additional settlement occurs. It is the combination of wind and wave driven debris and settlement of suspended silt which produces the unaesthetic and unsafe water conditions in front of the Stewart Park bathhouse. 26. 8. A broad concrete ramp with curved concrete retaining walls was constructed to more clearly define the designated swimming area and make it easier to enter the water. From the ramp one can wade out for a distance of several hundred feet and still be in waist deep water. Each step on the soft bottom raises a cloud of silt to increase turbidity even more. Q. Masses of aquatic vegetation and floating debris collect at the bottom of the ramp. The condition appears to be much worse here than most other locations along the shoreline. (See Proposal 11.) 10. During periods of heavy runoff large tree trunks and branches are often carried down Fall Creek and the inlet. These trees drift out into the lake and, like silt, are carried by current and wind. They frequently wash ashore in Stewart Park or become anchored offshore on the bottom. 11. Facilities for changing and showering were constructed in one end of the building that was earlier used as a film studio (now referred to as the bathhouse). The toilets have been maintained for general park use. B. Design Objectives 1. To investigate wind and current patterns and assess their impact on offshore water conditions. 2. To consider modifications to the shoreline which might alter water currents and wind effect and thereby improve conditions in the swimming area. 3. To examine other locations which might be more conducive to natural swimming in Stewart Park. C. Proposed Actions 1. Make no attempt to reestablish lake swimming at the ramp in front of the bathhouse. 2. Remove the ramp and fill this area so that the indentation is no longer there. Place riprap and make this area similar to the It rest of the shoreline. 3. Extend the shoreline into the lake north of the duck pond. The shape shown on the plan will tend to maintain the higher velocity flow of Fall Creek for an additional several hundred yards and thereby carry sediment farther into the lake before it begins 27. to disperse and drift eastward. Considerable deposition along the lakeshore is still anticipated, but perhaps at a slower rate. ww 4. Construct a small island in front of the old swimming area and about 300 feet from shore. This would act as an interceptor AD for some of the debris blown by northwest winds. 5. Continue to make measurements of water quality and transparency during and after the construction of the new sewer outfall. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. Because the thought of swimming in the lake at Stewart Park is appealing to many people, considerable attention was given to this aspect of the plan. A special study was made using a computer model to simulate existing water currents under various wind conditions. The purpose of the model was to test the effect of various shoreline modifications on current. If the natural current could be sufficiently altered, perhaps water quality would be improved enough to make swimming a practical consideration. Details of the computer study are included in Appendix A of this report. It is apparent from the study that shoreline modification could ameliorate the turbidity problem but not enough to make swimming pleasant and safe. 2. Wind and wave action remain as additional forces affecting the swimming potential. The island was introduced as a possible way to improve wind and wave impact. Again, this would help but not enough to support a positive recommendation on lake swimming. 3. It was hypothesized that increased water velocity in Fall Creek. might help to keep this area relatively clean and make swimming in the creek a possibility. This possibility is not discarded entirely at this point even though it is visually apparent that lake water and creek water have similar characteristics for some distance upstream from the mouth of the creek. Additional water quality and transparency tests in this area are needed to provide additional data for evaluation. 4. There are additional possibilities for Stewart Park swimming; a. Somewhere along the shoreline an area could be diked to enclose a large pond. Two possible spots would be north of the bath•- . house, where swimming has traditionally occurred, and near the mouth of Fall Creek in the vicinity of the boathouse. The pond would be dredged and deepened to a suitable swimming depth. Water would be pumped from the lake, circulated through 28. the pond and discharged back into the lake. To avoid most of the suspended silt found in shallow offshore water, the source of pumped water would have to be a long distance from shore - perhaps 1,500 feet or more - where greater depths are found. Depending on bottom conditions, some sort of gravel, sand or paved "floor" might be necessary in the pond. Some s basic form of water treatment, such as mild chlorination, might also be necessary at certain times and under certain conditions. b. A more natural but more complicated variation on the above alternative would involve using the south shore of the island as one side of the pond. A deeper swimming area would be dredged in the channel between the island and the mainland. The island would also provide a wind buffer and sunning spot for swimmers. Likely impact of the island on a dredged pool is included in Appendix A. It appears that lake water would not have to be pumped in and treated but water quality would still be in question, This alternative is more complicated in that it presumes that, in addition to the island, the extension north of the duck pond will also be constructed to push Fall Creek silt farther into the lake. While both of these major shoreline changes are possible they are long-range and in- volve many intermediate actions and approvals. More detailed examination of this project, its likihood of being successful and its environmental impact will be needed if the City feels that resumption of lake swimming is important enough to warrant the likely high cost involved. c. An artificial pool could be built. This would be much smaller in area than the diked pond would be and a higher level of water treatment would be required. The best location for such a pool would be near the western parking lot and boathouse. Changing and shower facilities would be installed and would probably replace the rowing club space in the boathouse. In light of the natural, passive atmosphere being sought as the basic future recreation character for Stewart Park, the intrusion of a man-made swimming pool is seen as an incompatible proposal. It would, to a large measure, duplicate the facility at Cass Park. One of the important benefits of the proposed cross-inlet ferry (see Proposal 4) would be to make the Cass 1 Park pool more accessible to people living east of the inlet. This would, hopefully, lessen the need for a second pool in Stewart Park. Conclusion: if Cass pool becomes badly overcrowded, or sentiment for lake swimming grows, the possibility of another facility in Stewart Park is not beyond question. One of the alternatives to 29". permit swimming in the lake, as described above, might become a reasonable consideration for the City. The costs of any of the alternatives would be high, however, and the demand would have to be great to justify the expense. If, and when, the 3i shoreline extension and island are created (see Proposal 11) water quality should be reevaluated and the possibility of swimming in a dredged pool behind the island should be reexamined. , This solution, if it works, would be preferable to construction of a second artificial pool or a diked pond. z • 30. 6. NENMAN GOLF COURSE IMPROVEMENTS A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. The golf course occupies a flat area of approximately seventy-five acres between Fall Creek and Cayuga Inlet. It is bounded on the south by Pier Road and on the north by the Cornell Biological Field Station. 2. Much of this area was used as a municipal garbage and ash dump in the early decades of this century. It was reclaimed and converted into a golf course in 1933 and 1934 as part of a mammoth water front Work Relief project carried out by the City of Ithaca. 3. "Construction of the golf course involved the cleaning and grubbing of about thirty acres of scrub willows and also very intensive clean- ing up and grading of 35 acres of dump area. In this dump grading, high areas were cut down to fill remaining swamps. A small club house was built. Two miles of tile drainage line and a half mile of water mains were laid. Putting greens and tees were graded and drained and fairways carefully prepared. Trees and shrubs were planted. The ash dump was surfaced with top soil in the fairway area and the entire area seeded. The woods were cleaned of underbrush and a persistent growth of poison ivy was removed."* 4. While substantial changes in the original layout have been made over the years, the course still has nine holes, is pleasant but somewhat bland with limited chal]ange for lower handicapped golfers. The setting is visually spectacular. 5. Over the years play has increased steadily at Newman and is now heavy most of the time, but especially on evenings and weekends, The basic nine-hole layout, with few added features, establishes a limit on the number of players who can use the facility at any given time. 6. The original clubhouse located near Fall Creek was vacated when a new building was built in the southwest corner, near Johnson's Boatyard. The old clubhouse is still sound and used for storage. 7. Existing parking is randomly located on both sides of Pier Road near the present clubhouse. Because Pier Road also provides access to Johnson's Boatyard the through traffic often cause a hazardous situation for golfers who must cross the road to reach the clubhouse. At times of heavy play golf course parking is not adequate. • * Report of Work Relief Accomplishments, City of Ithaca, N.Y. , Oct. 1, 1934 by W. A. Boyd, Chairman, Ithaca Work Bureau. • 31, 8. The clubhouse is used primarily for a proshop, a locker room and rest room. There is a small area for relaxing and some food and beverage are available. It is, however, not a facility which can 0. accommodate extensive socializing, dining or entertainment. 9. Limited available land at the Newman site makes the efficient use of Al this land very important. The present layout leaves a few large areas that are not used effectively as part of the actual playing field. One such area has become the location of two story practice building used as a fire control training facility by the Ithaca Fire Department. 10. Golf course watering was originally installed in 1934 as an extension of the City water system. Annual operating costs for the course in- clude a substantial expense for the use of treated City water on greens and tees. Fairways are not watered. 11. The ninth hole is a long par 4 which parallels Cayuga Inlet. For most of its length the west side of the ninth fairway is less than a hundred feet from the shoreline and stray shots often reach the water. Be- tween the edge of the fairway and the shore there is a lane which is used to service to the white navigation lighthouse that marks the inlet's entrance. 12. North and west of the existing eighth fairway there is a triangular piece of land that is approximately twelve acres in area and known as the Biological Field Station. Through past land exchanges the station is now owned by Cornell University. It is used occasionally for field study and is also visited by bird watchers although less frequently than the Fuertes Sanctuary. Most of the plant and wildlife species found in the sanctuary are also found in the Biological Station. 13. The Biological Station area is part of the natural lakeshore wetland and is heavily wooded in some spots. It has been designated a Type I wetland by the State Department of Environmental Conservation. Cutting through the station on its west side is a sixty-six foot right-of-way which contains the service lane for the lighthouse and is the location of a sewer plant outfall line. 14. Because the golf course area is very flat and the water table is shallow (lake level), there is usually standing water at various locations on the course after a prolonged heavy rain. B. Design Objectives 1. To make optimum use of the limited land which is available for golf course purposes. 32. 2. To increase the challenge faced by better golfers while still maintain- ing an enjoyable experience for the average player. 3. To modify the course in a way that will enable most of the existing greens to be used in the revised layout. 41 4. To extend the course into the Biological Station area in a way that will preserve wetland characteristics of the station to the fullest possible extent and enhance existing birdlife habitat. 5. To create an effective practice range for warmup and lessons. 6. To introduce ponds and mounds in strategic locations for visual relief and to provide additional hazards, 7. To relocate fairway nine away from the inlet shoreline so that future water related types of activity along the inlet would not be preempted. (See Proposal 8.) 8. To relocate golf course parking in an area where adequate and safe facilities can be provided. 9. To organize and schedule proposed changes so that the course can con- tinue to be effectively used while the new layout is being achieved. 10. To plant large numbers of new trees and woody plants which will pro- vide diverse food sources for a variety of bird species as well as define new fairways. C. Proposed Action 1. Two new greens will be needed and two existing greens must be regraded to provide a new alignment. A green will be constructed for the new holes 3 and 7. Existing greens 3 and 8 should be regraded so that they can be approached from a different direction in the revised layout. 2. Remove the fire tower and improve the adjacent area to provide a new alignment for the third fairway. The existing drainageway in this area should be cleaned up and incorporated into the new fairway. 3. Construct a practice range by cleaning and grading an area between fairway number one and the new number three fairway. 4. Dig three ponds to help with storm water drainage and introduce a new type of hazard on the course. One pond will be located between exist- ing fairways four and five; one will be an enlargement of the waterbody at the present par-3 seventh hole; and one will be an enlargement of the existing waterbody in the Biological Station at the new seventh hole. These ponds should be aesthetic as well as functional additions to the course, with abrupt edges and not too deep. 33. 5. Construct two new fairways for holes 7 and 8 in the Biological Station. Design, layout and construction of these two holes must be carried out with the advice and assistance of the Cornell Plantations and the State Department of Environmental Conservation so that physical damage to the fragile environment of the station can be minimized. Limited tree cutting, brush clearing, filling, grading and seeding is con- sidered very important in these fairways. The existing dirt lane which now services the lighthouse should become the western edge of fairway eight. 6. Move fairway nine to the east and eliminate the existing ninth green. Existing green number four will become the new ninth. (See Proposal 8.) 7. Construct a new parking lot between the golf clubhouse and the inlet, This lot should ultimately be large enough to accommodate golf course parking and vehicles which will park at the eastern terminal of the cross-inlet ferry. (See Proposal 4.) 8. Construct new pumping facilities which will enable a change in the golf course watering system from treated City water to a natural untreated source. Pumping facilities could be located near Fall Creek or the inlet but should not interfere with future development opportunities. 9. Renovate the original clubhouse near Fall Creek into a summertime shelter and rest room facility serving the golf course and the footpath along Fall Creek. 10. Begin a program of annual planting of trees and low plants in appropriate locations so that new fairways will be defined and separated more clearly as the trees mature. Species chosen should be native to the area if possible and selected to attract a variety of birds. 11. New tee-off locations should be established to give added variety of the nine-hole course. For several holes (numbers 2, 3, 5, 6 and 9) two different tee-off locations should be constructed so that the second 9 holes of an 18-hole round would be different from the first. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. Early in the study serious consideration was given to the possibility of enlarging the golf course to 18 holes by expanding into the Biological Station and across Fall Creek into the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary. While it was found to be physically possible to achieve an 18 hole layout the disruption, economic cost and environmental loss of doing so was deter- mined to be far greater than any benefit gained by nine additional holes. The idea was abandoned. 2. Less extensive refinements proposed for the golf course will upgrade the playing characteristics of the course significantly. Changes suggested 34. can be accomplished in a way that will enable the continuation of play during the renovation process, an important consideration. 3. The most sensitive change involves expansion into the wetland of the Biological Station. If done improperly this would have a detrimental 41 and undesirable impact on the station. Extensive additional study will be necessary to determine the best location and design for these fairways and to accurately assess the immediate and long-range environ- mental impact of golf course use and management on this area. Such study should be initiated immediately and completed before any change is made in the station. New fairways located in the station area will not have traditional form or characteristics. They should have grassed "landing areas" for the well hit ball separated by the natural surroundings of the area, whether this be standing water, wetland grasses, brush or some other condition. They will be difficult holes but, if properly designed, could be ex- citing additions to the course. By opening up the area and providing more wooded edges than presently exist the new fairways can also enhance the Biological Station as a bird habitat. 4. Design and construction of the proposed new water hazards should also be done with advice from wildlife and botanical experts. They could become important artificial wetlands in this area and this potential should be recognized and used to advantage. 5. Need for the access road which provides service to the lighthouse should be reassessed. If some means of vehicular access continues to be needed it should not be located near the edge of the inlet except as a temporary measure. 1 35. 7. YOUTH BUREAU A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. The Ithaca Youth Bureau is presently located in a 3-section building constructed originally for the U.S. Naval Reserve in the 1940's. Because it is largely made of metal it has been dubbed "The Tin Can." It is located to the east of Stewart Park between the railroad and Route 13. 2. While the relationship between Stewart Park, the lake and the Naval Reserve building is not obvious, there is a clear value in having the building's present occupant, the Youth Bureau, located close to one of the City's major waterfront parks. 3. The Tin Can is now obsolete, energy costly, and does not make efficient use of existing space. There is also an asbestos prob- lem which will necessitate an expensive program of removal and cleanup. 4. Access from Route 34B to southbound lanes of Route 13, and to Stewart Park, uses an existing roadway that, prior to Route 13, was the end of North Cayuga Street. Vehicular traffic on this short stretch of road is often heavy and fast. This creates a barrier and a hazard situation for pedestrian and vehicular movement between the Youth Bureau and park. 5. The railroad is also a barrier between the park and Youth Bureau. The slow speed and very low frequency of trains (2 per day) makes this a relatively_ insignificant problem. 6. Heavy summertime use of the Chamber of Commerce information booth, across the road from the Youth Bureau, adds to vehicular congestion in this area. The general location of the information booth is good, however, because it catches the heavy southbound traffic from both Routes 13 and 34B. B. Design Objectives 1. To construct a new facility for the Youth Bureau and strengthen the physical relationship between the Youth Bureau building and Stewart Park. 2. To design and site the Youth Bureau structure so that it can also accommodate the Stewart Park maintenance operation presently • located in the bathhouse. 3, To relocate the Route 13 access road so that it does not form a traffic barrier between the Youth Bureau and the park. 36. 4. To provide a more visible and accessible location for the tourist information bureau and to incorporate this tourist service activity into a redesigned park entrance area. C. Proposed Action 1. Remove the easternmost third of the Tin Can and temporarily seal off the rest of the building so that interim use can continue. 2. Relocate the Route 13 access road to a location east of the Tin Can and remove the existing road. 3. Design and construct a new structure to house the Youth Bureau and the park maintenance operation. This structure should be utili- tarian in nature with simple or no interior finishes except in administrative spaces and bathrooms, Exterior design, materials and colors should be in character with other park buildings; the roof should be a strong architectural element. if a custodian residences is wanted this should also be incorporated into the over- all design for the Youth Bureau structure, 4. Build an information plaza and bus stop south of the Youth Bureau building at the park entrance. Space for short-term parking should be provided as well as pull-off space for city busses. 5. Relocate the tourist information booth to a spot near the plaza. If a new or modified structure is to replace the present booth. it should also reflect the basic architectural statement of other park buildings, although in a very simple way. Underground electric services should be available to this area and it should be well lighted and landscaped. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. The actions listed above are arranged in a time sequence that will enable the Youth Bureau to continue to function in the Tin Can until a new structure is built. 2. A new maintenance facility should be provided whether or not the Youth Bureau building is built. It is important to the long-range development of the park that the maintenance function not be con- tinued in the bathhouse building. A nearby location is needed, however, and this can be best provided at the eastern corner of the park. 3. Order-of-magnitude estimates of construction costs for the Youth 3T-. Bureau, maintenance and information plaza, excluding removal of the Tin Can, are: New Route 13 access road (approx. 650 lin. ft.) Paving $ 48,000. Drainage, earthwork, seeding, etc. 24,000, Granite curbs 28,000. Planting allowance 30,000. $130,000, Construct new maintenance building Building: 4,400 sq. ft.* @ $35.00 $154,000. Concrete apron 16,000. Remove existing road and provide new connection to park 19,000, $189,000. Build new Youth Bureau 12,000 sq. ft.* @ $40.00 $480,000. Site development: parking, lighting, etc. 60,000. $520,000, Rebuild park entrance and information center Paving $ 16,000. Granite curbs 4,600. Drainage 4,000. Entrance emblishment (signs, gates) 10,000. Planting allowance 10,000, $884,600, * No program has been developed for these buildings and spaces. Square footages shown are based on assumptions only. 38. 8. FALL CREEK AND CAYUGA INLET SHORELINE A. Existing Conditions and Background 4 1. The Stewart Park complex contains over 6,300 feet of shoreline along Fall Creek and 2,700 feet of shoreline on Cayuga Inlet. This represents a tremendous natural asset and an opportunity for a variety of land use activities where contact with, or proximity to, water is an important factor. 2. Most of this shoreline area is still in its natural undeveloped state. Only the creek bank in Stewart Park and a stretch of about 800 feet along the west bank of Fall Creek, near the footbridge, have had their natural character altered. 3. Both banks of Fall Creek are used extensively by fishermen who often make fine catches of trout and salmon in the spring and fall. Because of easy vehicular access, the south bank of Fall Creek, adjoining the golf course, is the most popular spot for fishing. 4. The half-mile of Cayuga Inlet shoreline offers fine views across the inlet to the broad expanse of Cass Park. The southern half of this stretch parallels the ninth fairway of Newman golf course; the northern and delimits Cornell's Biological Station and ter- minates in a 1,000 foot concrete pier at the end of which is the white lighthouse. 5. For several years the City has leased rights to use part of the inlet bank for small boat piers. A number of docking spaces have been built perpendicular to the shore, some permanent and some with floating piers that are removed in the winter. Interest in expanding boat docking facilities along the shoreline is strong. Access to these docking spaces is minimal at present. Boaters park near the golf course clubhouse and walk to their boats. 6. An unpaved lane runs along the shoreline and provides access to the lighthouse pier for maintenance vehicles. This road is closed to general vehicular traffic but is used for walking and jogging by those who know of it and enjoy the opportunity to walk along the inlet and experience the wild isolation of the field station. 4 7. During periods of high, fast-flowing water, Fall Creek becomes a dynamic force that erodes the creek banks, particularly along the Bird Sanctuary. Erosion at the piers of the Fall Creek • • suspension bridge is advanced and repairs are needed. 8. Concrete rubble placed along Fall Creek in Stewart Park has greatly reduced bank erosion in this area. The large- pieces are uneven 39. and dangerous underfoot as well as being aesthetically unattrac- tive. 9. For many years the Fall Creek shoreline near Cascadilla Boathouse was the location of small piers which were rented to boaters for the season. These piers became rickety and ice-damaged and have 4 been removed. The boathouse area is still the location of con- siderable boat rental activity. A large floating dock is tied to the shore at this point to facilitate launching the rowing shells of the Cascadilla Boat Club. B. Design Objectives 1. To stabilize banks and reduce the rate of erosion along Fall Creek. Bank stabilization should be done in a way that will create new habitat for fishlife. 2. To reduce potential hazard from, and improve the visual effect of, riprap treatment along the shoreline. 3. To increase fishing access but reduce the extent of vehicular movement along Pier Road. 4. To maintain favorable conditions for continued commercial boat rental, mooring and private club rowing along Fall Creek and the inlet. 5. To improve the opportunity for achieving the highest and most appropriate use of the inlet shoreline. C. Proposed Action 1. Place riprap along the banks of Fall Creek where serious erosion has occurred, particularly so that abutments of the suspension bridges will be protected. 2. Shoreline treatment in the vicinity of the Cascadilla boathouse should include provisions for the launching and storage of rental boats. As the boathouse becomes a more active community focal point the appearance of its surroundings will be important. 3. Construct new paved parking areas for fishermen along Pier Road It and terminate this road with a turn-around or parking lot north of the fire training facility, 4. Continue the policy that permits shoreline leasing to private interests for boat slips along the inlet. There should be enough land reserved for construction of a cross-inlet ferry terminal, (See Proposal 4.) 40. 5, Shift fairway nine to the east so that there is approximately 350 feet from the edge of the fairway to the inlet. a., 6. Widen the Fall Creek channel north of the boathouse to give variety to the shoreline and provide a more interesting foreground for the renovated boathouse, D. Related Comments and Notes 1. Shoreline repair and stabilization around and upstream from the suspension bridge is a high priority maintenance item. Bring- ing adequate equipment to this area is a problem, however, and care must be taken to protect the bird sanctuary as this project is carried out. Materials used, and placement of the riprap, should be such that fish habitat in Fall Creek would be improved over present conditions. Advice from DEC can be obtained for this project. 2. Small boats, canoes and the very unstable shells of the Cascadilla Boat Club often find wind and water conditions on the lake too rough for safety. The inlet is more sheltered from wave action and, therefore, a safer place for small boats when the lake is rough. The feasibility and implications of creating a narrow "pass through" between Fall Creek and the inlet should be considered. This cut might be constructed at the extreme northern end of the Biological Station, just south of the concrete lighthouse pier. A small bridge would have to be constructed to permit access to the lighthouse pier. 3. The use of Fall Creek can be expected to intensify as Stewart Park becomes even more popular in the future, Land and water uses of the Creek should be in keeping with the general character of the rest of the park. Additional boat rental opportunities are appro- priate as long as an amusement park atmosphere is not created. Onshore facilities needed for a rental operation can quickly become eyesores if careful control is not maintained by the City. Outside refreshments offered in conjunction with use of the boat- house would also be appropriate. Fishing is always suitable and a transient mooring slip or two on this side of the park would also add interest and serve a good purpose, Other possible uses should be evaluated individually. (See Proposal 14.) 4. The highest and most appropriate use of shoreline land is usually a subject of much discussion and difference of opinion. For the most part, use of land adjacent to Fall Creek is already established and is felt to be appropriate and suitable for the long-term future. 41.. Cayuga Inlet is another matter, however, Land between the golf course and inlet is unique and ideally suited for a variety of uses, Long views in all directions, a wide expanse of water, interesting boating activity on the inlet, and the proximity of golf course and boatyard all contribute to the uniqueness of this area and affect its most suitable ultimate use. • While no specific land development proposal for this area is in- cluded in this plan, it is strongly felt that this part of Ithaca's urban shoreline is greatly underused, Future water-related de- velopment potential should be recognized and enhanced if possible; options should be kept open. Market and environmental factors will ultimately determine the most appropriate use of this area. Whether future use involves boating, parkland or something more intensive, it is recommended that owner- ship and control of the land be retained by the City. 5. In this same vein, mention should be made of shoreline land adjacent to the inlet and south of Cascadilla Creek. In this area approx- imately 1,300 feet of valuable shoreline is used by the City and State for public works materials storage and highway maintenance facilities. In long-range development planning for Ithaca's water- ways serious consideration should be given to alternative locations for these governmental maintenance functions. A water-related activity of greater intensity and higher commercial value is felt to be much more suitable than the present use. Again, land owner- ship should remain with the public sector. If any type of revenue-generating use is made of the inlet shore- line it is recommended that such revenue be earmarked in the City budget for park and waterfront improvements. 42. 3.. THE LAGOON A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. The lagoon was created by a man-made widdening and deepening of an existing drainageway south of Stewart Park. It is nearly two acres in area and one to three feet deep. 2. Water in the lagoon comes from two sources. There is a constant but limited flow from a small drainageway beginning near Lake Street. Water also enters the lagoon from Fall Creek during periods of high flow. 3. When the lake level is lowered during the winter months, water in the lagoon also drops to half or less of its normal depth, exposing large unattractive areas of mud bottom around the perimeter. Siltation on the lagoon occurs slowly and deposits must be removed from time to time by the City. 4. The lagoon has been a feature of Stewark Park for many years. It is used extensively for fishing by people of all ages and abilities, and has produced notable catches of northern pike and pan fish in the past. 5. Great northern pike use the lagoon as a spawning area and a small num- ber of pike are included in the year-around resident fish population. Spawning occurs in the spring when pike come in under the last ice to lay and fertilize their eggs. Except for residents most pike leave the lagoon and return to the lake by early summer. 6. When wintertime conditions permit the lagoon is a suitable area for outdoor ice skating and this activity is enjoyed by many members of the community. Cold northwest winds, rough ice, the need to remove snow and the lack of any shelter or rest room facilities are impedi- ments to more extensive wintertime use. B. Design Objectives 1. To increase the use potential of the lagoon as a year-round park feature. 2. To capitalize on summertime fishing and wintertime skating oppor- tunities. 3. To enhance fishing potential for all age groups. 4. To achieve a higher average water level for wintertime use when the lake level is lowered. 43. C. Proposed Action 1. Excavate a number of deeper spots or holes at the bottom of the lagoon. Such holes should be four to five feet deep and randomly spaced. The resulting -unevenness of the bottom improves- the habitat and helps the resident fish population survive winter freeze. 2. Construct a water impoundment structure somewhere between the lagoon and the suspension bridge. This should be a low dam consisting of piers and movable boards similar to those found in local State Parks. Boards would be inserted in early Fall to provide a higher water level for wintertime use. They would be removed before the Spring spawning season of great northern pike. 3. Request assistance from the State Department of Environmental Con- servation to improve fishing opportunities and fishing interests in the lagoon. Such assistance should include dumping quantities of pan fish into the lagoon each Spring and advice on the establishment and funding of an urban fishing program for young people in this area. 4. Construct a small, heated rest room and warming shelter on the west shore of the lagoon. This structure would also provide rest room facilities for the family/group picnic area_which replaces the zoo. (See Proposal 13.) 5. Establish mounds north of the lagoon and plant such mounds to create a wind break to moderate wintertime conditions. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. The lagoon represents the highly underused recreation feature in Stewart Park. Tt has potential for year-round use in a variety of ways for people of all ages. The natural character of the banks should be maintained as use potential is increased. 2. Varying water depth by digging holes in the bottom and adding pan fish would have a highly beneficial effect on fishing. Stocking would have to take place annually since most of the dumped fish would eventually find their way into the lake. A higher winter water level, created by the low-level impoundment structure, would probably tend to keep more fish in the lagoon on a year-round basis. 3. Planting on the mounds, and adjacent to the lagoon, will tend to moderate winter wind effect and thereby help to keep the ice smoother. A water spraying system to produce a smooth ice surface should be in- cluded in the warming shelter design. 44. 10. HISTORIC RENEWAL A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. As Chapter 3 of this report illustrates, Tthaca''s lakefront, in- cluding the Stewart Park complex, represents one of the most interesting, ongoing development stories in the City's history. Much of the physical setting of significant earlier periods of activity in the park are still largely in tact. 2. Present use of the park, its grounds and structures reflects no recognition of important historical events and activities that occurred there. 3. Some existing structures have been substantially modified over the years; the boathouse and pavilion have reached a critical stage of disrepair. Steps must be taken in the near future if these structures are to be saved. 4. General interest in historic development and restoration of significant historical resources is strong in the Ithaca com- munity. A high level of expert advice and research capability, and large amounts of pertinent data, give Ithaca an advantage in historic renewal not available to most small communities. 5. Ithaca's early involvement with silent film-making represents a small but interesting contribution to the movie industry. 6. Silent films were made in Ithaca between 1912 and 1920. The central point of this activity was the Wharton Studio which was located in one of two large pavilions constructed in Stewart Park (then Renwick Park) in the mid 18g0's. Originally, the Wharton Studio pavilion was used for dances.* The structure has gone through a number of use changes over the years. The most signif- icant building modification made to this pavilion involved en- closing its wide surrounding verandas so that it could be used for indoor film-making. This happened in 1912 and since then the structure has looked essentially the same. 7. Prior to its silent film era Stewart Park functioned primarily as a trolley amusement park located at the end of the North Tioga At Street line. The park was, apparently, "developed solely to generate new traffic for the street railway."** Early photos * The Works of Clinton L. Vivian, Architect, of Ithaca. Thesis by David A. Rash, for a Master of Architectural History Degree, Cornell University, 1983. ** Ibid. 45. (1894-1895) show the two large pavilions, a tower and a small pavilion used as an open depot for the street railway. The tower was blown down in 1955; the small pavilion still exists as a picnic shelter near the playground area. There was a formal clipped-hedge garden located south of the two large pavilions. 8. A tall memorial flagpole was dedicated in 1927 in 'memory of Edwin Crowell Stewart, the City of Ithaca's first mayor (1887-1888), and the person for whom Stewart Park was named. The flagpole re- mains but the elaborately landscaped base and surrounding circular walkways are no longer in existence. 9. The large structure at the western extreme of Stewart Park was originally built in 1894 as a boathouse and athletic facility for The Cascadilla School. It was used by Cornell crew for a short period and is now used in a limited way as a park caretaker's residence and a boathouse for the Cascadilla Boat Club (no con- nection with The Cascadilla School). More detail on this structure can be found in the following chapter of this report. B. Design Objectives 1. To emphasize those events of historical interest in Stewart Park which continue to have relevance to the park and the Ithaca community. 2. To rehabilitate park structures and restore the most significant aspects of their historical character and purpose. 3. To provide the physical facilities needed to extensively exhibit and explain the production of silent films in the Ithaca area. 4. To use existing structures in the development of a strong archi- tectural focal point where community events such as concerts and exhibits could take place. 5. To provide a suitable and appropriate environmental setting to complement the restoration and future use of historic park structures. C. Proposed Action 1. Rehabilitate and restore existing major park buildings in a way that will recapture some of their original architectural character and style and capitalize on their historic 'value. More specific rehabilitation proposals for each of the park structures can be found in Chapter 6: 46. 2. Renovate the open space between the pavilion and bathhouse so that its historic role as a community gathering place can again be achieved. As explained in Chapter 6, this will involve the 4. discontinuance of vehicular use, the creation of an attractively designed and landscaped courtyard area, and the construction of unifying architectural elements to define and give shape and ! scale to the space. 3. Remove the maintenance and storage functions from the bathhouse and convert this structure into an exhibit space and interpretive center related to Ithaca''s silent film era. In developing a program for this interpretive center emphasis should be placed on describing and explaining unique events and activities re- lated to the production of films in Ithaca and not on the general history of the silent film. This is already well documented in other larger museums. A more detailed study should be made of the feasibility of this proposal including the content and nature of such a center, its potential as a tourist attraction and the type of display space needed. 4. Recreate a formal garden area south of the pavilions and courtyard. The garden will add color and texture to the park and its central location can be expected to produce maximum visitor appeal. As shown on the plan, the garden, courtyard and municipal pier inter- act as design elements to produce a strong visual orientation to the lake. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. Development of a well designed interpretive center in the former Wharton studio is seen as one of the big opportunities for the City. Fortunately, the studio building is ideally located in the park to accommodate such an activity. Closeness to the park entrance, the large parking lot, the group picnic area, the munic- ipal pier, formal garden and children's playground would make the interpretive center a likely focal point of considerable activity. At the same time, the more quiet and passive atmosphere desired for much of the park could remain unaffected for the entire area west of the playground. An interpretive center would certainly contain exhibits of photo- graphs, equipment and memorabilia of the period, It could also have t a "screening room" for viewing silent films and might well incor- porate live events such as an actual shooting of a scene in the style of the silent film era. If done properly, the silent film interpretive center could create a high level of visitor interest in the lakefront particularly if . 47. coupled with the added attraction of a cruise boat operating from a 'municipal pier. 2. Other possibilities for exhibit and museum activities have been considered in this plan. One opportunity would involve creating a center for Native Americans. This could be an i interesting graphic portrayal of the life and events of native inhabitants of the Cayuga Lake region. Another possibility would be a small natural history 'museum explaining the geological de- velopment of the Finger Lakes with graphic examples from the Ithaca area. If sufficient public and private support for either of these museum possibilities, or any other, can be generated, and funding can be found, the proper location for such an activity would be in the pavilion/courtyard area. The plan allows for modest expansion to the south of both the picnic pavilion and interpretive center. New construction would be involved and it is felt that the existing buildings could be added to without loss of architectural or his- torical integrity. 3. The other major structure, Cascadilla Boathouse on Fall Creek, is the park's most interesting historic structure by virtue of its distinctive shingle-style design. Because of the unique architec- ture of this structure in its original form, and its fine location in the park, it is felt that the boathouse has high reuse potential and that the large cost of rehabilitation will likely be economically justifiable. IL 48. 11. LAKEFRONT MODIFICATION A. Existing Conditions and Background 0 1. There is about 2,800 feet of lake shoreline in Stewart Park, stretching in a shallow arc from the railroad to the mouth of Fall Creek. 2. Over the years fill has been added and the shoreline has been extended into the lake by a number of yards, Early photographs indicate that 80 to 100 feet of additional parkland may have been created in this manner. 3. Large boulders have been placed at the water's edge to reduce erosion from wave action. Concrete walls and a wide ramp were constructed in front of the bathhouse so that swimmers could wade easily into the water. 4. The entire shoreline is a collection point for logs, aquatic plants and miscellaneous waterborne debris deposited there by wind and wave action. Much of the floating material carried down Fall Creek and Cayuga Inlet also ultimately ends up at Stewart Park. 5. In areas where boulders have been placed much of the material washed ashore is dispersed by wave action over the rough and broken surfaces. Weeds and other debris ultimately dries and is generally not offensive. The same is nct true at the con- crete ramp, however. Since the ramp is inset somewhat from the rest of the shoreline, and has a smooth surface, floating material is washed in and quickly builds into an unpleasant and unsightly mass that must be frequently hauled away by truck. 6. A long, regularly spaced row of willows has been planted at the shoreline. This line of trees attractively defines the park's waterfront for someone on Route 13 but becomes a visual barrier for people in the park and, therefore, must be trimmed in a way that is unnatural for willows. 7. Limited use is made of the western end of the shoreline where, until recently, the narrow path around the duck pond was obscured by dense brush and weeds. IL 8. There is a continuous buildup of silt along the entire park waterfront. The water is quite shallow even several hundred feet from shore and wading in this area is an unpleasant experience. This silt and turbidity was the primary reason for ending lake swimming in the early 1960's. (See Proposal 5.) Shallow con- ditions extend farthest into the lake north of the duck pond and the mouth of Fall Creek. 49, V i 2 1 14 14. %I.; \ i 11 •11 II 12 13 11: 11 10 10 9 -' \I 10 {I 17 I 11 0 Front Light 13 13 10. 9461FtR 17 12 8 1 } 9 10 10 ,,.e C1 12 9 11 10 R1ee{' *wpm 9 IC 17 7 ? /Iareur 7 7 7 9 tl, I ,r 10 9 5 li •:9'8�l 8 l ��' 8 f? a--7 10 I) 110 6 5 g 5 s \ 9 IQ 9 7 4 s1 "4 et, 1 N a /A? 8 9 7 ■ .g 6 6 7 7 6 R,•. 3 4 4 12 6 ✓ Q 3 g 3. 9 4 1• 1 6 7 ` 3 S S 6 A \ a ' I 3 12 12 6 6 s Spur Light 6 11481F1 0 4 4 S • .7 S. 4 S 4 121 3 4 4 7 2 114. s S t 2 1? 2 • 6 4 s .Ry. 8 6 Iri:Lvil 12 , 47)i1 W I ,11N 12 k 2 1 9 06 . \\ 17� g�� �gt ighoZ 0 pry o/Ithaca ^ I Reeresnen Ar4 end:Worms © . 12 (\1 (4 :. S\9 // .I \ 12 1 \ .e �� 12 -- \\ Ramp I I \ i2 •. 111111111111111\11glk . •1 1 12 �.•Sp 12 001.1 COURSE I 4 ' !\ 12 , d\ \ . . . 1 1 \ 12 -P it ■u o f 1 °, 11 'raA John // 1 q !on e.qr r • 1 ,. I and 8 6 4 1 3 4 �,49,„ ® / t) AZ.. 5 4 e4 .7% 1 Gb1e Se.+e9e 4 Telptmem ' Hant �, i'' I I) 'fin - 42'27' opi• 1 ) 1 1 11 SOUNDINGS IN FEET — \ I ,1 y/jh 1: )1 \ / 5Q, d'• r, Approximate Scale 1:10,000. 1971 9. Siltation also occurs in the slowly flowing Cayuga Inlet. Because this is a navigable waterway it must be dredged every 10 years or so to maintain a suitable depth for boating. 10. Because of shallow water and heavy silt deposits there is little fish life and no fishing from the lakeshore in Stewart Park. A bit further out into the lake conditions change, however, and bass, pike and pan fish are often found in quantity in some locations, according to local sportsmen and the State DEC. 11. In the wintertime the lake water level is dropped by several feet. This exposes lake bottom out a considerable distance from the normal shoreline. B. Design Objectives 1. To improve the general attractiveness of the lake shoreline and make it more inviting for public use. 2. To provide future relief from serious use pressures being experienced in Stewart Park with increasing frequency. 3. To attempt to reduce the rate of sediment accretion along the lakeshore by allowing creek currents to carry suspended silt farther out into the lake. 4. To improve public accessibility to better fishing sites and also create an improved fish habitat in the shallow offshore water. 5. To make productive use of spoil material that must be dredged periodically from the inlet. C. Proposed Action. 1. Place additional large boulders along the shore to supplement those already there and further reduce waterfront erosion. 2. The indentation produced by the concrete swimming ramp should be done away with and natural riprap treatment of the rest of the shoreline should be applied to this ramp area. A number of aesthetic and maintenance problems created by this small section $ of the waterfront might well be solved by this action. 3. Construct a retention dike encircling an area of 10 to 12 acres and extending into the lake for a distance of about 1,000 feet = north of the duck pond. Fill this diked area with hydraulic spoil dredged from the inlet and reclaim the dried spoil as additional picnic area and parkland. 51. 4. Improve fish habitat by shaping and constructing dikes in a way that will add supportive structure to the bottom of the lake. 5. Encourage increased public fishing from the shoreline by develop- ing an urban fishing program focused on the elderly, children and handicapped. 6. Place additional diking and fill to create a small island approximately 300 feet off the shore. This island should be constructed as part of a larger project including a municipal pier to give access to deeper water. (See Proposal 12.) D. Related Comments and Notes 1. Environmental implications of extending the shoreline as pro- posed are not to be minimized. Shallow' areas in Cayuga Lake are scarce and provide valuable habitat for many species of fish and aquatic vegetation. Extensive sediment deposition in front of Stewart Park have created conditions far from ideal for fish and plant life. It is suggested that extending the shoreline, if done properly, might enhance this habitat and improve the offshore environment. Additional study and advice by experts is needed to determine the likely impact of the proposed fill. 2. Suitable locations for disposal of hydraulic fill dredged. from the inlet are increasingly difficult to find. Much of Cass Park consists of this dredged material but there are limits to how much more can be placed there. A large part of the spoil from the next required dredging could be accommodated in the Stewart Park area. 3. Dike construction around the fill area would be expensive if the spoil was to be properly contained and effective fish habitat created. Much of the dike structure could probably be put in place during the winter when lake water level is low. 4. If lakefront modifications proposed in the plan are not possible to implement due to environmental or cost factors, a less extensive fill project should be considered for the area north and east of 4 the duck pond. This alternative would do little to enhance fish habitat or fishing opportunities but would, at least, enlarge the usable area of the park and help to relieve some of the pressures for increased use. 5. The island is also a proposal that will be affected by future circumstances. To a lesser extent the environmental considerations 52. related to filling shallow areas apply to the island as well as the larger shoreline extension to the west. In addition, the island is seen as a useful midpoint interruption in the proposed municipal pier extending into deeper water. • The island would also have a large impact on lake views from Stewart Park. It would change the character of the park signif- icantly, more so even than the long shoreline extension to the west. Finally, the island without a connecting pier is not felt to be a viable proposal. If the pier was to be shortened and shifted to a location farther to the east (see Proposal 12), the island would no longer be appropriate. i 53. 12. MUNICIPAL PIER A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. From Stewart Park the only use that the great majority of park 40 visitors can make of the tremendous natural asset of Cayuga Lake is to look at it. There is no docking, swimming, wading, fishing or any other water-related activity that occurs at the Stewart Park lakeshore. 2. Conversely, the large number of boaters that use the lake are unable to make use of park facilities or take part in most park activities because of an inability to get to the park by boat. 3. Earlier in this century a long municipal pier extended several hundred feet into the lake from the eastern side of the park. This pier was a popular spot for promenading, watching crew races and boarding one of the steamers which offered popular cruises in those days. 4. Due to the continuous natural siltation process, the lake is extremely shallow at its southern end. Navagation charts indi- cate that, in the vicinity of the picnic pavilion, a water depth of 6 feet is only reached some 600 to 700 feet off the shore. (See Proposal 11.) B. Design Objectives 1. To recapture some of the historic flavor and social importance that can be achieved by developing a stronger land-water relation- ship at the Stewart Park lakeshore. 2. To provide a public docking facility that would accommodate moderate draft boats and promote offshore fishing. C. Proposed Action 1. Construct a municipal pier extending into the lake to a water depth of 6 to 7 feet. This pier should be constructed on piles and be wide and strong enough for use by small service vehicles. 2. The plan shows construction of a three acre island approximately 300 feet off the shore. One purpose of this island is to visually and physically interrupt a municipal pier that would most likely be at least 200 feet longer than the longest Treman Marina pier. Another purpose of the Island is to provide remote picnic and quiet space for those who want to escape the large crowds that will often be found in the park proper. The north side of the island would also be a spot from which lake fishing would be possible although the water would still be somewhat shallow. 54. 3. Tie the shore end of the pier into the lakefront promenade and the courtyard between the buildings. 4. Construct two small picnic shelters, without rest rooms, on the island, one attached to the pier and the other on the island's west end. 4 D. Related Comments and Notes 1. It is realized that construction of an island as shown on the plan would change the traditional visual relationship between Stewart Park and Cayuga Lake. The broad visual sweep of the lake which is now- possible from anywhere along the shore would be interrupted by another land mass and this might be disturbing to some. It can be argued, on the other hand, that the island would add visual interest to offshore views. The broad-sweep view could still be achieved from the large parking lot on the east side of the park and, perhaps even more spectacularly, from the island itself. 2. Consideration has been given to the possibility of extending a pier out from the large parking lot and omitting the island. This location would be better suited to the operational needs of lake cruise and dinner boats which need ease of access and convenient parking for their patrons, particularly in inclement weather. If a feasible lake cruise operation was proposed to the City the excitement and stimulus of this activity occurring once again in Stewart Park outweighs the design considerations incorporated into the more central location of the pier shown on the map. 3. It should be noted that the pier could be shortened considerably at either location by dredging a channel and basin to achieve greater water depth. A shorter pier would eliminate one of the reasons for an island and perhaps even make it undesirable. 4. If dredging takes place care should be given to the size and shape of the basin. It should be large enough to accommodate a number of transient boats in addition to any of the larger cruise boats that might operate from the pier. 5. If the pier-island combination is pursued fill for the island could be obtained from Cayuga Inlet dredging operations. Dikes built to contain this fill should also provide underwater structure suitable for fish habitat; that is, large boulders rather than sheet piling or earth. 55. 13. DUCK POND AND Z00 A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. The duck pond has been in existence for over fifty years as a man-made extension of the Stewart Park shoreline. It is about 13 acres in area, located just north of the boathouse and separated from the lake by a narrow strip of filled land upon which a number of large willows have grown. 2. A feature of the duck pond is a formal stone overlook designed in 1934 by John Vincent Larkin. This overlook has become a popular place for public viewing and profuse feeding of the numerous waterfowl which frequent the area. 3. In addition to ducks, shorebirds and occasional geese, there are several swans who consider the duck pond their home. Two of the swans are memorials donated in memory of former park caretaker Cornelius Edsel. 4. Swans are kept in the pond and away from the public by a low fence. They must be removed from the pond in the winter and are maintained by the park crew in the lower floor of the adjacent boathouse building. The pond often freezes over. Attempts to keep some of the water area open for ducks have been a challenge for the park crew in past years. 5. In the past there have been health problems brought about by the en- closed, stagnant water of the duck pond combined with excessive feeding and duck coliform from the large number of birds which congregate there. In the 1960's an outbreak of avian botulism and fowl salmonella forced the City to take measures to increase water circulation in the pond. A peninsula was extended from the west side to divide the pond into two sections. A large pump was installed to pump water from the lake and force it around the peninsula and back again to the lake through an outfall pipe. This flushing action solved the immediate concern but unsanitary conditions at the pond continue to be a potential health problem. 6. A small area located west of the lagoon has been used for years as a municipal zoo. The zoo consists of a fenced deer pen and a number of wire enclosures which house a variety of pheasants and other colorful birds. 7. In past years the zoo has been home for some unusual animals, such as a llama, and for a short time penguins, but has always been a problem in terms of maintenance, housing, feeding and vandalism. Park crews i and occasional volunteers have done remarkably well over the years to care for the animals and keep up the facility. They are not equipped or funded, however, to do the level of work that proper year-around care and housing of undomesticated animals and birds require. 56. B. Design Objectives s 1. To eliminate the duck pond as a feature of Stewart Park. 2. To discontinue the present zoo and convert this area into a small- group picnic area. C. Proposed Action 1. Relocate swans and zoo birds and animals to suitable new homes where adequate care can be provided, 2. Begin a systematic program of filling the duck pond as suitable fill material becomes available. • 3. Seed and landscape the duck pond area and incorporate it as parkland foreground for the renovated boathouse. If possible, maintain the overlook in the new landscape as an outdoor feature related to future use of the boathouse. 4. Remove all cages and fences, fill low spots, landscape the area and equip it for picnic use. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. Because both zoo and duck pond have been part of the Stewart Park environ- ment for many years, elimination of both these attractions is recognized as a dramatic change. It is felt, however, that considerations of health and humaneness, coupled with the need to more effectively use limited park space, justify this strong measure. 2. Elimination of the duck pond does not mean elimination of ducks and aquatic birds. There are usually as many, if not more, of these fowl swimming and feeding on Fall Creek and along the lakeshore. The land along Fall Creek and the lakeshore has become a favorite sunning spot for numerous ducks. In this sense, only the Stewart Park swans would be lost by removal of the duck pond and much would be gained in the way of usable, well located parkland. 3. Local feelings are varied about the appropriateness and value of the zoo in Stewart Park. Its present location preempts shoreline area that should be put to better use. If it appears that the experience of some form of contact with animals would add to the value and interest of Stewart Park it is recommended that a petting zoo be considered. A small habitat could be created in the park where domesticated farm animals would spend the summer months. In winter the animals would be returned to the farm from which they were "borrowed." 57. A suitable location for the petting zoo would be near the west end of the small parking lot, where it would be close to the Children's Play Area. Careful advanced planning would be needed to assure that a necessary facilities were available, that the animals were given adequate protection and shelter and that the visual character of the # zoo would be in keeping with its surroundings. AO I 58. 14. ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. Park facilities in the City of Ithaca are maintained by crews 00 of the Department of Public Works. Recreation programs are organized and administered by the Youth Bureau. Both of these governmental agencies have independent budgets approved by Common Council. Effective communication and coordination occurs at the top supervisory level and elsewhere in the administrative and operating structure as necessary. 2. The golf course is run by the golf pro who, with a special three person crew, is responsible for general maintenance of the course and operation of the clubhouse. Maintenance of the clubhouse and special repairs or construction activities on the course are the responsibility of the Board of Public Works. 3. Like all public land in the City, the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary is under the general supervision and control of the Board of Public Works. The Cayuga Bird Club, a local volunteer group, has assisted, in an unofficial capacity, in the 'maintenance and upkeep of trails in the sanctuary. The Biological Station is the re- sponsibility of Cornell "University but, by tradition, is available for casual public use. 4. All buildings, bridges, roads, parking areas and walkways are under the jurisdiction and control of the Board of Public Works and are maintained by the Department of Public Works. 5. Shoreline maintenance and cleanup is also the responsibility of the Department of Public Works. Control of activities on the water surface is, to date, limited largely to speed regulations which are enforced by the Sheriff's department. 6. While day-to-day maintenance and operation are well taken care of, there is no City committee or board, other than Public Works, that is specifically charged with the task of providing an ongoing design and quality-control review of park development as plan implementation takes place. B. Design Objectives 1. To achieve a high degree of consistency between long-range plan- ning objectives and day-to-day implementation activities. 2. To achieve an effective level of coordination of the broad range of land and water recreation uses which occur in the park complex and adjacent waterways. 59 C. Proposed Actions 1. Continue with the independent but coordinated operation and a maintenance procedures currently in use. AO 2. Appoint an ad hoc committee or board to oversee the continuing development process, advise on priorities and periodically review and update the park plan. The purpose is not to create another layer of bureaucratic regulation but to maintain quality control, protect the Park Image and assure that the objectives and de- velopment standards of the plan are met. This is especially necessary because of the long implementation period of this plan and the many independent actions required to revitalize the area. 3. Consider the most effective structure and procedure for adminis- tration and management of local, State and Federal funds, and private .contributions, which will be involved in park develop- ment. Since different types of support for this project can be expected from many sources, the City must have a technique by which resources can be used to the best advantage. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. As use of parkland and waterways in the Stewart Park area increases, effective communication and coordination of activities will be- come very important. A multiplicity of interests and concerns will have to be accommodated and coordinated; some form of reg- ulation and procedure will have to be instituted. Casual boaters and marina operators on the inlet should be made aware of Cornell crew needs, for example. For another, increased use of group picnic facilities and restored park buildings will necessitate more extensive scheduling and coordinating than is now necessary. As the Ithaca Commons illustrates, management is as important as design in the continuing success of this type of community fa- cility. A procedure for management of the entire lakefront complex should be planned well in advance of need. 2. Section 7 of this report addresses, in detail, the question of implementation of plan proposals. The implementation schedule which is included in Section 7 is aimed at spreading revitalization costs over a number of years and maintaining substantial park use during the entire construction process. Both these considerations are felt to be extremely important to the success of the project. Even if acceleration of the development becomes financially pos- t sible, this would not be in the best interest of the park user if it meant that substantial portions of the park would have to be closed for a season or two. 60. 15. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS A. Existing Conditions and Background i 1. Four tennis courts occupy an area of prime park value and have for many years. These courts require a moderate to high level of maintenance. They are enclosed by high fencing and create a visual as well as physical obstacle in the concept of free-flowing park space. North winds often cause a problem. 2. A free-standing concession stand has been constructed in recent years in a location very near the center of Stewart Park. Light refreshments are made available in the summer and this is an important service to park users. The concession structure has a flat roof and is made of concrete block. It bears no resemblance to other park buildings. 3. Just west of the concession stand is the park's charming and color- ful carrousel. During summer months when the carrousel is operating it is a popular feature for many children. The carrousel is oper- ated by franchise from the Board of Public Works, 4. Trains of one sort or another have long played a part in the de- velopment and activity of Stewart Park. The park was originally conceived and built by the Ithaca Street Railway Company as a means of increasing ridership. There was an active trolley connection between the park and downtown Ithaca. 5. A miniature train was operated in the park for many years. A small engine, driven by an adult operator, pulled children in model cars around the park on a permanent track. This operation was dis- continued in the late 1950's but interest in it remains. B. Design Objectives 1. To incorporate ancillary features in the park's long-range improve- ment plan when these will enhance the recreation experience and are compatible with the park's character. 2. To place such features in locations which will fit into the overall park land use plan and capitalize on other existing support systems lb such as parking and pathways. C. Proposed Action 1. Relocate the concession stand and incorporate it into the picnic pavilion. This will require an addition to the pavilion. The 61. structure should be added in a way that will contribute to the overall development of the courtyard, as explained in Chapter 6. A 2. The carrousel adds color and interest to the park and should be re- tained as a feature in the children's play area. A revised layout • for the play area should be made and the carrousel more effectively integrated than it is at present. 3. Remove the tennis courts from their present location. Relocate the courts to a less conspicuous and more sheltered portion of the park if it is felt that they are important. Two courts are shown on the plan, located just east of the Lagoon. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. The question of reviving a trolley service to the park was given serious consideration. One possibility would be the construction of a spur track into the park from the Amtrack line near Route 13. A modified, self-propelled railroad car would travel from a lo- cation such as the Greyhound bus station to the park and back. This possibility was rejected because of cost considerations, probable complications with the railroad and the incompatibility of fixed tracks in the park. Motorized "trolleys" are in use in some communities, Canandaigua being one. There is some tourist appeal in these vehicles and one or two could be included in the Ithaca bus fleet if the idea was considered worthwhile. While Stewart Park's origins are clearly tied to trolleys, the presence of these vehicles in the park today is considered of no importance beyond their tourist appeal. 2. Tennis is considered by some to be incompatible with the passive character recommended for the park. Others feel that courts in Stewart Park are traditional and should be kept. There is general agreement that the present courts should not remain where they are. A location east of the Lagoon would be appropriate for this activity and also for a formalized fitness center. One or two backboards in this location could be substituted for full courts if this was felt to be more in keeping with the overall park development. 3. Reviving the miniature train would most likely involve restoration • of the fixed track and, to be worthwhile, the ride would have to be reasonably long and varied. This need for a fixed track makes the idea of a miniature train unsuitable for the park. 62. CHAPTER 5: LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. For landscape development purposes, the Stewart Park complex can be • subdivided into three separate and distinct areas. a. Day Use Area, generally referred to as Stewart Park. b. Fuertes Bird Sanctuary. c. Golf Course Area. 2. The Day Use Area, essentially level, is broken up by paved areas throughout. Basically a fill area, the planting is informal except for the shoreline willow rows. The plant community is comprised of native American trees including Willow, Ash, Sycamore, Silver, Red and Sugar Maple, Box Elders, Honeylocust, Blacklocust, Pin Oak, and Poplar plus exotic trees such as Hawthorn, Flowering Crab, Mulberry, Norway Maple and Ginko. Included are a few evergreens, Northern White Cedars, Mugo Pines and Spruces. Shrubs in the Park include Privet, Lilacs, Barberry, Hazelnut, Rose of Sharon and Viburnum. 3. Presently no particular planting design scheme can be discerned, such as use of plant materials for screening, separation of areas, obvious framing of vistas or views. 4. Fuertes Bird Sanctuary plant community includes scores of woody and herbaceous plants. A list prepared by the Cornell Plantations is of such importance that it is included as Appendix B of this report. 5. The Golf Course, originally a fill area, essentially flat, contains a tree community similar to that in Stewart Park. The north end of this "peninsula" contains a natural area known as the Cornell Biological Station. The Station contains native woody and herbaceous plants, and is a habitat for birds and other small wildlife species. B. Design Objectives 1. Day Use Area 4 a. To save as many existing trees and shrubs as possible within the framework of Park improvements. It is recognized that some trees will, of necessity, be lost due to reorganization, relocation and enlargement of paved areas. 63. b. To provide new planting as a part of basic design improvements to achieve the following: 1. Delineate specific areas of use. * 2. Outline and complement the shoreline promenade. 3. Provide shade and windbreaks. 4. Screen service and parking areas and the adjacent Route 13 to the greatest extent possible. 5. Frame important vistas and views. 6. Reinforce the basic design elements of the scheme, walks, drives and open areas. c. To provide low earth mounds to relieve flatness of the terrain, thereby adding interest to the topography, more effective screen- ing of parking areas and other service facilities, and separating these onpark uses from the basic park amenities. 2. Fuertes Bird Sanctuary Area a. It is imperative that this area be untouched, except for minor path improvements so as to allow plant lovers and bird watchers to enjoy this invaluable and irreplaceable botanical resource. (See also Chapter 4, Proposal 3.) b. To preserve and maintain the visual screening and noise buffering qualities that this area provides the park. 3. Golf Course a. To make maximum effective use of a small site and also enhance the physical layout of the course. b. To improve the course's appeal to the golfing community by creating added challenge and visual diversity. c. To remove existing trees and shrubs sparingly and to provide more water hazards, plant heavily and mound to separate and delineate fairways and separate the course from adjacent roads and other activities. (See also Chapter 4, Proposal 6.) 64. • C. Proposed Action 1. Day Use Area a. Prepare a detailed planting plan and provide an adequate planting ik budget for each phase of the improvement. Planting projects should be given a high priority and become an integral element of the Stewart Park development. Planting funds should become a regular part of the City's capital improvements program. b. Specific planting recommendations include retaining the existing Willow row east of the pavilion, but elimination of the Willow row west of the pavilion area. This will reflect a differentiation of function (overlook vs. family picnic) and allow more informal planting treatment in an area that can be expanded gracefully as the shoreline is extended in the western portion of the park. c. The proposed extended picnic area and the island are envisioned as having a flowing topography and a naturalistic type of planting rather than a 'lined up' shoreline type. The flexibility of a naturalistic approach allows losses by storm or disease and re- placement thereof without undue effect on the total design. The plan shows topographic lines in the new picnic area. These lines indicate the creation of low hills in this area by shaping the fill material. Such man-made hills should not be more than five or six feet high and have discernable but gentle slopes for easy walking and maintenance. d. The area south of the pavilion courtyard is conceived as a formal garden area, high in color. Included in this area could be the relocated memorial rose garden now located just north of the park entrance. This new garden area is on formal axis with the pavilion courtyard and island pier, and is intended to compliment the historical aspects of the pavilion and interpretative center. This portion of the park, including the courtyard and pavilion, can be used for memorial type functions and a variety of larger, more formal community events. e. Heavy planting at the park entrance is intended to screen the park from the traffic activity of Route 13 and provide a quieter and more reposeful park area. The entrance itself should be defined as a gateway to a special community area with a significant entrance design. Planting a combination of higher trees and groups of shrubs at eye level is recommended as a way to separate the group picnic from the 65. east parking area, from the road and from the formal garden area. Similar group plantings are shown throughout the park as separators of functions and creators of visually identifiable spaces. 2. Fuertes Bird Sanctuary A a. Fulfill design objective by leaving this area generally untouched. If additional bird nesting or feeding habitat is needed the initiative should come from local private organizations and individuals interested in this area. 3. Golf Course a. As with the Day Use Area, a more specific planting plan for the golf course would be useful in determining where new trees should be placed. Short of this, trees and shrubs can be planted by City crews on the basis of this master plan. Heavy planting to separate and identify new fairways and the driving range will give the course improved visual appeal and understandability. Choice of plant ma- terial should emphasize species that will provide color, variety habitat and food for the migrant and local bird population. b. Expansion of the golf course in a northerly direction will penetrate the Biological Station with a new green and portions of two new fairways. It is expected that additional woodland edge will be created, which, when added to newly created water edge and pond sur- face, will ecologically compensate for the vegetative cover lost in fairway construction and thus produce an area equally beneficial to man and nature. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. The citizens of the Ithaca region are blessed with. Stewart Park and its assets of lake shoreline, inlet, creeks, picnic land, trees, shrubs, sky, breeze and views. A quality park is comprised of all these. Many similar public areas are not as parklike, as soul restoring, as relaxing, as enjoyable, as successful, because the provision for plant materials has been slighted in the budgeting process. Trees and shrubs, shoreline, and green areas for use by all ages are the reason people visit a park. Plant materials are so basic to the excellence of a park that they cannot be overemphasized. 2. It is recommended that evergreen trees and shrubs be included in all planting plans in appropriate locations. At present, Stewart Park is deficient in evergreens, and inclusion of such in the planting program will put the park in balance. Such evergreens will add to the interest and beauty, particularly during use periods when deciduous trees are leafless. 66. 3. Plant species should include, but not necessarily be limited to the list recommended in Appendix B. In selecting plants, consideration should be given to cost, Spring and Fall color effects, hardiness and overall maintenance. 4. Landscape development in its broadest context includes everything on the land. Most items -- roads, parking, buildings, etc. -- are covered elsewhere in this report. Outside lighting, however, is so linked to planting and the overall aesthetics of the park that it should be included here. Of prime importance is the candlepower level of drives, parking areas and walks. A park does not have to be lit up like a shopping center parking lot to be safe. Particular attention should be given to park walks, especially the shoreline promenade. It is recommended that the promenade, and other walk lights be direct-source lighting, Victorian in style and ten to twelve feet high. Such lighting will be compatible with historic buildings in the park and will visually emphasize the curved shoreline. if fixtures can be provided every 150 feet or so. For the strongest visual impact the waterfront promenade should be lighted for its entire length along both the lake and Fall Creek. Road lights are conceived to be similar to walk lights, again to visually reinforce the road curvature. Parking lot lights would best be indirect-source lighting on poles about twenty-five feet above the ground. 5. Paving materials for the promenade and most walkways should provide a smooth surface for ease of movement. All major paths through the picnic area and park should be seven or eight feet wide so that they can be used by maintenance and emergency vehicles. Construction of eight inches of rolled lA stone and stone dust is preferable to asphalt because of the stone's strength and color. Removable bollards, decorative chains or some similar control device might be necessary to prevent inappropriate vehicular movement on these walkways. Other paths need be no wider than four feet. A hard surface should be provided except where these paths go through the bird sanctuary and biological station. In these areas a natural material such as wood chips is preferred even though this must be replaced every few years. 6. Increasing the amount of picnic area will require additional benches, picnic tables, grilles and "aesthetic" trash containers. A cost" 010 allowance for these items has been included in the estimate provided in Chaper 7. Care should be given to the design and material of these items so that they are compatible with the park character. In addition, • special care should be given to the design and placement of park graphics: identification and direction signs, building signs, park rules and reg- ulations, and so forth. Colors, materials, letter styles, location and method of installation should be consistent with the natural low-key character of the park. (See also Chapter 4, Proposal 14.) 67. CHAPTER 6: ANALYSIS OF PRINCIPAL PARK STRUCTURES 1. THE CASCADILLA BOATHOUSE A. Existing Conditions and Background di 1. The Cascadilla School's boathouse was once Ithaca''s most notable contributions to the Shingle Style of design. Built in 1894, it was a picturesque composition that included conical towers and a cantilevered second story veranda encircling the entire struc- ture. Both walls and roof of the original building were sheathed with wood shingles. The roof has since been changed to asphalt shingles and the walls, although still the original wood shingles, have gone through some modification and will require some repair. The northwest tower, which featured a spiral staircase rising to a third level observation platform, has been removed. Most of the cantilevered veranda has been removed and former window and door openings have long since been shingled over. Time has not been kind to the interior but it is currently in a more or less stable condition. 2. The building is presently used for a caretaker's residence, minor storage of park equipment and the repair and storage of the 60 feet long shells of the Cascadilla Boat Club, a private club re- lated in name only to the school which built the boathouse. 3. The condition of the caretaker's living quarters is marginal at best. Dropped ceilings and additional partition walls were added when the residence was established. The single interior stair to the second floor has been substantially modified. 4. A second floor meeting/gymnasium room remains largely intact but modification of window and door openings on exterior walls has occurred. The existing exposed brick chimney and mantle piece in the gym are an architectural confusion. 5. Small ground level rooms', formerly used as storage for a summer boat rental operation, remain unused. Long, narrow shell rooms facing the boat launch on Fall Creek are well used by the Cascadilla Boat Club. 6. Available mechanical space is adequate. An additional small room on the ground floor is used as a winter home for the park swans which are kept indoors during cold weather. 68. 7. The building is not fully insulated or heated. An antiquated plumbing system will need a complete overhaul. { 8. Existing overhead electrical service is unsightly and should be put underground when this is done throughout the park. The building's electrical system is not adequate and will not meet current codes. 9. Large wooden brackets which once supported the cantilevered veranda were removed when the veranda and its wide overhanging roof were taken down. 10. The remaining part of the veranda, which is now the caretaker's porch, shows signs of major deflection. 11. Most of the windows and doors are in poor condition and a new gutter system is needed. 12. In some places wood shingles are missing or poorly applied in attempts to block former openings. 13. Settlement over the years has caused the bottom row of shingles to come in contact with the ground in many places. To prevent rot this condition will have to be corrected. B. Design Objectives 1. To undertake major interior and exterior rehabilitation of tLe boathouse structure so as to achieve much of its original archi- tectural character. 2. To provide a facility with broad community use potential for a variety of social and passive recreational activities, 3. To maintain most of the ground floor area for uses and activities which are water related or require a waterfront location. C. Proposed Action 1. Restore the exterior facade to its original design. Additional research is needed on the use of columns to help support the veranda. 2. Remove the caretaker's residence and restore these rooms to their former condition. 3. Upgrade the heating, plumbing and electrical systems for the total building; insulate throughout. 69. 4. Install new energy-efficient door and windows throughout. This might entail new openings on the second floor to accommodate the needs of future users. 5. Provide public toilet facilities at ground level for general park use. 6. Carefully study regrading immediately surrounding the building to insure adequate drainage and, if possible, correct those areas where wood is in contact with the ground. 7. Develop a park setting north of the structure where the duck pond is now located. If possible, incorporate the stone obser- vation platform into the landscape design for this area. 8. Paint and stain the building in accordance with a color scheme related to the original design. 9. Provide a new gutter and downspout system which is sensitive to the architectural design of the structure. 10. Develop a program for public use of the second floor which in- cludes an attractive ground-level entryway and handicapped access. 11. Improve ground floor conditions to enhance boat rental opportunities and increase visibility from the park side of the building. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. Because major changes have been made to the boathouse in past years, efforts to rehabilitate it to somewhere near its former glory will be expensive. An estimate of rehabilitation costs will depend on the type of new uses to which the building will be put. Order-of-magnitude costs, based on no building program, is as follows: Rehabilitate front wing first and second floor 3,200 sq. ft. at $50/sf $ 160,000 Rehabilitate former gymnasium area 2,600 sq. ft. at $25/sf 65,000 0 Rehabilitate exterior - add porches and tower* 100,000 $ 325,000 s * When roof replacement is necessary, consideration should be given to using brown wood shingles which were used on the original building. (See also Chapter 7.) 7G. 2. More extensive use of the large second floor room with attached balconies is envisioned. This could be a formal restaurant or a facility for light refreshment which could be enjoyed on the 0. balcony overlooking the lake. The space would also be very suitable for public and private receptions, weddings, parties, reunions and similar social events which would benefit from a 0 lovely park atmosphere. 3. A good opportunity exists for commercial development and use of the boathouse structure. One can imagine that a private in- vestor might be interested in leasing, rehabilitating and using the facility. If this route is followed the City should protect its interests by developing strict guidelines for rehabilitation and use. Maintaining design integrity should be a legally binding part of any agreement. 4. A conservator should be retained to investigate in more detail the original design of the structure and to assist in the proper accomplishment of needed adaptions to accommodate new users. ■ . y_ _ S z4 al; A±� :R a} C. S L r ' 4-''{J{: ;':,..ii 4,.,, r ...+, - , } e� vS4' \ +- t'' • • �L," 'ci`;; '.'+. . :r� -;f ' `=t5 ``'..x ism_..a-kOn + .?.. Fes'. 4 _ _ ve--_ .�..a.- . •...,, _-• ` ; ,:a..,, , . '�= =. .Y..:;a.....44a3s • • i i1� � i i .,ten-# � x ` :� r •3341r • . ' 'r Lti ° 44 t� ti P `Int'' 'At IA:l',t,..."‘ 11,.''i', '-. .' 'rip...SA ., *A * iiro,•..;'VI'-**.*+°-“' -.':/k-• ''..-'.. ,-4 ''' ..A.*A:ip3/4;;;4.*.; , iri. 4j, * • ..0 '11■••• I', - ' . • ' :� 1 h :!9"`S +�1M > \ S ',,_ Mr ,-N }eye.,.:. , .. t- *pa tis - t M* .x '—° Z a' - ss -,- . _ ♦ a 4 -, . w .,l• 4 AAA. A 71. 2. EXHIBIT AND INTERPRETIVE CENTER (Bathhouse) A. Existing Conditions and Background ,O 1. . Built as the western half of the original Renwick Park main pavilion complex this structure was completed in 1895 and was originally used for dances. It was altered in 1896 by the addition of a stage at its west side and became Ithaca's first vaudeville theater. About 1890, the construction of a projection booth allowed the Renwick playhouse to be the first theater in Ithaca. In 1906 the pavilion was used for several winters as a roller skating rink and reverted to theater during the summer. When Wharton, Inc. , a motion picture production company, leased the park this structure became the primary interior studio. Wharton modified the building by replacing the colonnade with stuccoed walls and raising a portion of the west wall/roof to a two story height. Later the building was used as a bathouse related to lake swimming. Today its function is a park maintenance storage facility and bath- house with some minor additional activities such as an arts and craft classroom for summer youth camp. 2. The stucco exterior is in fairly good condition with a few minor cracks. The west wall remains exposed cinder block. The raised roof and large door of the west facade destroyed the symmetry of the original design but was necessary for the operation of the film studio. 3. The roof shingle is of a recent vintage and should last another ten years. However, previous roof leakage has led to deterioration of some of the overhangs and they will require replacement. The gutter and downspout system is beyond repair and needs to be re- placed. This will help reduce the surface drainage problem surround, ing the building especially if downspouts are connected to a storm drain. 4. Within the building, the park's shop facility has been fitted with. new electrical service, propane space heaters, a wood burning stove and new toilet. The approximately 1,500 square feet of shop space occupies the area that was originally the pavilion's south veranda. Some of the original columns still remain as does the low porch ceiling. The wall separating the shop from the former film studio is relatively new and of wood construction. 5. Men's and women's toilet facilities now occupy the original pavilion's east veranda, facing the court. These facilities need to be updated. 72. 6. On either end of the toilet rooms there are remnants of showers used when there was swimming in the lake, For the most part the showers have been dismantled; only some plumbing and floor con- struction remains. 7. The original north veranda now consists of storage rooms. A few columns remain along with the original wood shingle exterior wall which faced the porch. This wall has been modified numerous times and is not a good candidate for restoration. Two small rooms adjacent to the north entrance have been used at times for arts and crafts programs of the Youth Bureau. 8. The former film studio which occupied the center of the building is a large clear span room that lends itself nicely to functions that require an unobstructed area two stories high. The original wood ceiling is intact along with a series of tracks, probably used to support lighting during the studio era. A series of holes approx- imately twenty inches in diameter have been cut into the ceiling, probably to improve circulation. 9. All floors are rough-screed exposed concrete. 10. Visually, the large grey structure seems out of place in its commanding location in the park. It is a convenient location for park maintenance and storage. B. Design Objectives 1. To move the park maintenance and storage function to a less central location and use the vacated space for a more suitable activity. 2. To convert the building into a facility and function which reflects its period of greatest historical significance the silent film era. 3. To improve appearance generally and make the exterior of the build- ing more of a visual and architectural unity with the Picnic Pavilion across the courtyard. C. Proposed Action 1. Undertake a detailed study of the feasibility and space needs of an interpretive center based on Ithaca's film industry. This should include a broad programmatic concept and an evaluation of support. 2. Rehabilitate the structure to provide interpretive, exhibit and administrative spaces identified in the program analysis above. 73. 3. Locate current openings in the facade and provide new openings as required. Repair and seal all cracks in the existing facade and reface entire building with wood shingles. 4. Repair all wood overhangs and replace gutter and downspout system. 5. Upon developing the final space allocations for the interpretive center, new electrical circuitry will have to be extended to ser- vice new functions. This will include all new lighting and a complete electrical update for the areas that are now used for storage. 6. Eliminate public toilet facilities as they can be more adequately provided in the picnic pavilion. 7. Provide sloping grade away from the building for proper site drainage. 8. Establish a new color scheme for the entire pavilion complex and repaint in accordance with this scheme. 9. When the existing asphalt shingles need to be replaced it is recommended that the new roof be wood shingles. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. This structure has the potential of housing a major regional attraction if an exciting silent film interpretive center can be established. (See Chapter 4, Proposal 10.) The enclosed space would appear to be large enough to accommodate a variety of exhibits, performing areas, work rooms and support services. Outdoor space in the courtyard and elsewhere could also be used as part of the depiction of the silent film industry since it actually was so used seventy years ago. 2. There should be no attempt to restore this structure to its original 1894 dance pavilion appearance. While this is undoubtedly much more in keeping with the park atmosphere of Stewart Park, an additional pavilion would add little to the present-day visitor potential that the park possesses. • 3. In the absence of a more definitive architectural program, the cost estimate for rehabilitating this structure must be speculative. Because spaces would most likely be relatively large and would not need a high level of finish, it is felt that an order-of-magnitude cost would be: New partitions, lighting, plumbing and exterior improvement (ex- cluding roof) 6,600 sq. ft. at $30/sf $198,000 (See also Chapter 7.) 74. 3. THE PICNIC PAVILION v. A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. This structure was also completed in 1894. It originally housed • a restaurant and consisted of main block two bays deep and three bays wide. Each bay features large semi-circular arches set into the shingle walls. The arched openings are glazed with small panes of fixed glass and have a center pair of doors similarly glazed. A wide veranda surrounds three sides and focuses on the lake view. The hip roof continues over the veranda and is supported by a colonnade of coupled Tuscan columns. The lower wing on the south, with a hip roof and shingle walls, originally housed the restaurant's kitchen and now contains men's and women's toilets and storage rooms. The interior walls and ceilings are covered with beaded wood panel- ing. The original fireplace which was located in the center of the pavilion was removed less than a year after its construction. The original veranda floor was wood but has since been replaced by a concrete floor approached by a series of concrete steps. The original wood shingle roof has also succumbed to a newer technology - green asphalt shingles have an anticipated life of at least another ten years. 2. The existing interior wood floor has considerable settlement in some areas indicating the need for subfloor structural repairs. The south elevation entrance to a storage room has had foundation settle- ment. 3. Toilet facilities require upgrading and lack positive mechanical ventilation and new low maintenance finishes; the electrical system has recently been brought up to code. 4. Some interior structural change to extend the large picnic chamber on the south employed steel beam and pipe columns which are not in character with the original architecture. 5. Fluorescent lighting fixtures have to be used to light the picnic area. They are harsh and out of character with the interior archi- tecture. 6. Existing doors and windows show the effects of vandalism and limited upkeep. Window and door openings in the south wing do not nec- t essarily relate to present day functions. Some could be shingled over and others may be needed in different locations. 75. 7. The existing wood shingle siding needs repair in some areas. 8. A concrete ramp to provide handicapped access has been added on the east side of the building. 4 9. Two steps from the picnic area to the concrete veranda, and another down to ground level„present a potential hazard to pavilion users. 10. The building is unheated and uninsulated and is closed during winter months. B. Design Objectives 1. To undertake necessary structural improvements and prevent further deterioration and settlement of structural elements. 2. To keep rehabilitation efforts to a minimum but attempt to achieve greater consistency with the original interior and exterior archi- tectural character. 3. To continue to use the facility primarily as a covered but open picnic facility with strong orientation to the group picnic area on the east and the courtyard to the west. 4. To achieve a greater visual and architectural unity with the Interpretive Center across the courtyard. C. Proposed Action 1. Repair uneven floors by correcting the structural support system. Keep wood floors, at least in the main picnic area. 2. Upgrade toilet facilities by providing new fixtures, positive ventilation and low maintenance surfaces. 3. Remove settling entry on south elevation, repair and replace, as required, all wood shingle siding. Reshingle over any existing openings not required for current functions. 4. Replace deteriorated columns around the veranda with new columns 41 that match the original design. 5. Raise veranda level to remove at least one of the steps into the pavilion. Make the building handicapped accessible from all sides. 6. Paint and stain interior and exterior in accordance with an overall color scheme for both pavilion and interpretive center. 76. 7. Replace lighting with fixtures more in keeping with the archi- tectural character of the structure, and more pleasant to the senses. 8. Generally clean up and simplify the south elevation; relocate service access to the barbecue pit. 9. When the existing roof needs to be replaced it is recommended that the new roof be wood shingle. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. The picnic pavilion is already heavily used and increased use is predicted. Hard use, poor drainage of surrounding land and a low level of building maintenance have adversely affected the visual quality of this facility. Preventive maintenance and minimal restoration seems to be the appropriate action to take. 2. Because folk dancing groups often use the facility it would not be suitable to replace the interior wood floor with a harder fa- cility. A plywood surface might, however, simplify maintenance and help give structural rigidity. 3. Repair and limited restoration of this facility should involve an order-of-magnitude cost as follows: Stabilize floor system and foundation, upgrade public toilets, repair columns, repaint, improve access and lighting, etc. 4,500 sq. ft. at $35/sf $157,500 4. Some additional thought should be given to a seemingly simple matter - the placement of picnic tables. Long parallel rows stretching from wall to wall inhibit socializing and reduce the value of the group picnic experience. AI i 77. 4. PAVILION COURTYARD A. Existing Conditions and Background 1. The original pavilion complex, designed in 1894 by the firm of • Vivian and Gibb, consisted-of two large pavilions, a bandstand, and water tower. A gracefully curved colonnade was designed to connect the tower and two pavilions but was never built. It was clearly intended, however, that the space between the pavilions should be a formal community gathering place centered on the bandstand. 7-.. - .. _ ...1. _. ___ .--1 i—mss • •..- : 5. —s — - r- � t . . r 2. �' 1 1. I q i ': i + t T ---- • i 6. "l .� 4. t ru GROUND PLAN OF RENWICK PARK BUILDINGS.* Vivian and Gibb, main pavilions complex, Renwick Park, .Ithaca, New York, 1894-95, ground floor lan and north elevation (Ithaca Daily Journal, 3 August 189 5. 1, Dance Pavilion 4, Water Tower 2, Picnic Pavilion 5. Bandshell 3. Fireplace 6. Colonnade 2. The area between the picnic pavilion and bathhouse is approximately 120 feet across and 100 feet deep. Most of it is paved and used as a parking lot. Service access to the barbecue pit and the mainte- nance building is obtained from the courtyard area. 0 3. There is considerable pedestrian movement through this parking lot, going between the pavilion or lakefront and the concession stand or children's play area. Pedestrian-vehicular conflict is high. 1 f. * From The Works of Clinton L, 'V1i°vian, Architect, of Ithaca , a thesis written by David A. Rash. 78. B. Design Objectives 1. To eliminate vehicular traffic and parking between the two pavilions. 2. To restore some sense of the architectural unity that was present in the original Vivian and Gibb design. 3. To provide a formal area for concerts, dancing, public gathering and similar large scale events and, at the same time, create a suitable forecourt and entrance for the proposed interpretive center and existing picnic pavilion. C. Proposed Action 1. Eliminate parking and raise the level of the courtyard so that the steps into the adjacent buildings can be reduced to a minimum or eliminated entirely. 2. Pave the courtyard with pavers or scored concrete designed to produce a formal surface pattern. 3. Construct a covered colonnade along the east facade of the inter- pretive center, and another attached to the west veranda of the picnic pavilion. These colonnades should be extended to the south and then turned to form a sense of enclosure to the courtyard. Ideally, the double Tuscan columns of the pavilion would be repeated in the colonnade. 4. Join the north facades of the two structures with a wide pergola which would pick up the design and rhythm of the colonnade and act as a visual terminus to the courtyard. The center of the pergola would be extended in a semi-circular fashion toward the lake and could be used as a bandstand or speaker's platform. .5. Construct a low wall along the north side of the pergola to create a formal line of demarcation between the courthard and the lakeshore. 6. Paint the colonnade and pergola in accordance with the overall color scheme for the entire complex. D. Related Comments and Notes 1. The pavilion courtyard is seen as a major public gathering place in the City of Ithaca, comparable to the Cammons but with a recreational rather than commercial atmosphere. To make this space work well it will be important to recreate the visual cohensiveness that the two pavilions originally had. This can be done by- archi- tectural details of the colonnade and by landscaping the surround ing area. 79. 2. No planting is shown on the rehabilitation-plan. This was done to emphasize the formal, axial character of the courtyard. Plant material in the courtyard is not considered to be incon- gruous if it is carefully chosen and located.. i 3. The plan indicates future expansion areas attached to both the picnic pavilion and interpretive center. While it is impossible to predict at this time the need for additional enclosed space this possibility should not be ignored. Ideally, the existing con- cession stand would ultimately be relocated and attached to the south side of the picnic pavilion. Expansion of the silent film interpretive center, or establishment of another related type of museum, should be accommodated by attaching to the south side of the bathhouse building. (See Chapter 4, Proposal 10.) Short of either of these expansions happening, the colonnade can stand on its on as a visual entrance to the courtyard. 4. The courtyard can be constructed and finished in a variety of ways depending on final design and material used. Assuming the most basic design, order-of-magnitude cost estimates envision $100,000 for the courtyard proper and $20,000 for the colonnade and pergola. • 80. a' til, . it' C • ----- • ..1.4 4A _ •' • •� -- ---- 1 1 I^ r -.-1 I '1 1 -I i •. I • .'I 11 I i i i•I I i I PERGOLA. ' 1 ! I I•1 • • • • 1 i . - • 1 ( 1111 ; I II I r ay.f, , . ,f J x+ 1+1 J-1 Ll TERPRETIVE CENTE X, -.a. yr' „� •• , f'. co % %r'Y f /y • ' s' 1 . n ..! plc : /` * -•-f, L----------- ----�. . •I 1 I 1•. ,; ---+ r 1 - I. I i 4 1 1 � • " ' •. --• — •--- • 10 — • -- •-- • ' •' ' I I . • I I-`-$ i- FUTURE EXPANSION_ s FUTURE CONCESSION a 1111111 • PROPOSED ARCHITECTURAL REHABILITATION PLAN - /r Scale: 1"=40' • CHAPTER 7: IMPLEMENTATION - TIMETABLE AND COST ESTIMATE Carrying out the Stewart Park Development and Management Plan will be a major undertaking for the City of Ithaca, involving a large expenditure of money over a number of years. The City's objectives with regard to this major rec- reation facility must, of course, be viewed by decision makers in the broadest terms of the overall community welfare and need. Tax dollars spent on improve- meats to the Stewart Park complex must compete successfully with other demands on those same dollars for roads, bridges, utilities, parking, public safety and similar types of concerns reflected in annual operating budgets and six-year capital expenditure programs. Completion of the park as planned will involve at least the seventy-five inde- pendent projects listed in the following table. In addition, some of the major items will, most certainly, have to be broken down into several different steps. Construction of a new parking lot, for example, implies detailed layout and design, working drawings and the preparation of bid documents, all of which must precede the actual construction. In an effort to separate the overall plan down into a series of related but independent pieces an Implementation Sequence table was prepared. This table lists a series of actions which would ultimately produce on the ground the various plan proposals. As part of this implementation sequence a construction calendar is presented which suggests the year, and time of year, in which each action should be taken. Some actions can occur within the same general time frame, others must occur seriatim if construction is to occur with a maximum of visible progress and a minimum of physical disruption in the project area. A look at the column titled Estimated Cost shows clearly the large costs associated with many of the proposed improvements. What if the City finds such a level of expenditure impossible or unacceptable, even if spread over a period of twelve or fifteen years? In anticipation of this possibility a priority listing has been incorporated into the Implementation Sequence. Each proposal is rated as being in the high, middle or low range relative to other park pro- posals. A high rating is given to a proposal which: 1. Is crucial to the aesthetic character and appeal of the park or to the continuing development sequence; or 2. Will enable the park to function in the most effective way; or 3. Has long-range benefit potential which greatly outweighs immediate cost, even if high; or 4. Involves repairs or maintenance which should not be deferred; or 5. Is desirable and could be accomplished relatively inexpensively by City staff. 82 Conversely, a low rating is given to a proposal which.: 1. Is relatively incidental to the attractiveness or effective functioning of the park; or 2. Might easily be deferred to a later date or, in some cases, dropped from the project entirely without significant impact; or 3. Costs enough to cast serious doubt on its feasibility. Proposals which do not clearly fall into the high or low priority, which would be desirable but are not crucial to park development or function, or which might well be deferred for a few years, are designated as middle priority activities. It should be pointed out that a priority rating can be expected to change over time. Community or government interests, funding from new public and private sources and competition from. other nonpark projects for available dollars will cause a continuous shift in many of the priorities which have been set forth in this report as a starting point for implementation and management. Some items have no cost estimate listed for them. This does not mean that there is no cost associated with them. Rather, such items involve things such as applications, engineering, feasibility evaluations and similar studies that would probably be done by City staff in the normal course of their work. It should be noted that cost estimates indicated for those items involsring construction are magnitude-of-cost estimates only. That is, they do not in- clude professional fees, overhead and profit, legal and administrative expenses, testing, financing costs and similar items. These "soft:' costs were omitted because they are affected by many variables which cannot be forseen at this time. Also, estimates do not take inflation into account. Figures listed in the table reflect the basic cost of the work if done in 1984 by a private contractor. It is important to recognize this because, in many cases, the work could, and most likely will be done by City forces, sometimes in the off-season. By doing this, a savings could be realized on some projects and the final cost could be substantially less than the estimates shown in the table. Total budgets for each project stage or annual program can best be determined at the end of the preliminary design period when most of the variables of materials and design have been eliminated. 83 e ir I> IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN F = Fall S = Spring W = Winter Sm = Summer Priority: II High Range In Middle Range 0 Low Range Item or Action Implementation EstimateC st*d Comments 1. Conduct tests of water quality in Fall Creek and Sm 1984 -- Sampling to be done as part ■ nearshore area of Cayuga Lake to further to of the sewage disposal evaluate swimming potential. F 1988 before-and-after study of water quality. 2. Install sewer line from Cascadilla Boathouse F,W 1984-85 150,000 Work by City forces. ® to the Tin Can, to serve present and future park buildings. 3. Prepare topographic survey of Stewart Park and F 1984 10,000 agolf course/field station areas. or S 1985 4. Do necessary studies to determine the most effec- F 1984 -- Study by City personnel with ative way to capitalize on the historic value of assistance from Historic Cascadilla Boathouse. Ithaca and other interested persons. 5. Do necessary studies to determine the feasi- F 1984 -- Study by City personnel a bility of a relocated Route 13 access in the coordinating with Town and Tin Can area. State. 6. Prepare generic environmental impact statement W,S 1984-85 -- Prepared by City personnel. ® of park plan. with consultant services as --_— _ -- -- -- —necessary= -- 7. Repair foundation and do basic restoration of W,S 1984-85 160,000 apicnic pavilion. 8. Remove easternmost wing of the Tin Can and W,S 1984-85 40,000 City Capital Improvement ® attached office space. Enclose exposed part of Project. the remaining structure. . . v, ., IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN F = Fall S = Spring W = Winter Sm = Summer Priority: III.High Range D Middle Range 0 Low Range Implementation Estimated Item or Action Comments Period Cost 9, Prepare plans and specs. for new maintenance W,S 1984-85 59,000 8.25% of estimated construc- ■ building and Youth Bureau. - tion cost. 10. Prepare application to NYSCA for funding to W 1984-85 -- Application for about $30,000 ® undertake feasibility and program development prepared by City staff with study for an Ithaca Silent Film Interpretive support letters from Eastman Center. House, Ithaca College, Tompkins County Arts Council, etc. 11. Clear and restore existing waterway north of the W 1984-85 5,000 Work by City forces. 00 Ui II fire tower in the golf course area. 12. Clear trees and other vegetative growth and W 1984-85 8,000 Work by City forces. o level tee area for driving range. 13. Clear trees and stumps to establish first portion S 1985 2,000 Work by City forces. ■ of new fairway #3. 14. Improve trails and interpretive features in bird S 1985 Work by interested volunteers. ® sanctuary. to F 1988 15. Construct new access between Route 34 and Route S 1985 130,000 Some assistance from State a 13 on right-of-way east of Tin Can. might be possible. 16. Prepare detailed landscaping and planting plan Sm 1985 8,000 Other areas to be designed as ® for each area of the complex. (Existing the various major projects golf course are undertaken. only.) 17. Install the Gamefield fitness course in turn- Sm 1985. 10,000 Grant of $2,500 available 0 around area east of lagoon. (An alternative for (1988 (50,000 from Wells Fargo Foundation this area is the construction of tennis courts or for for for fitness center, backboards.) tennis tennis courts.) courts_) ,, . • c IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN F = Fall S = Spring W = Winter Sm = Summer Priority: III High Range o Middle Range 0 Low Range ` Item or Action Implementation Estimated Comments Period Cost* 18. Arrange for relocation of zoo birds and animals W 1985-86 2,000 Work by City forces. ® and remove fencing, buildings, and foundations. 19. Dig pond between existing fairways #4 and 5. F 1985 26,000 Work by City forces. ® Use spoil to create mounds. 20. Construction of new Maintenance Building and Sm 1985 710,000 City Capital Improvement ® Youth Bureau in area east of railroad. thru Project. S _.. 1986 21. Construct large parking lot and observation area F 1986 264,000 City Capital Improvement 01 on east side of park. Project. 00 C7' 22. Repair abutments of footbridges and stabilize S 1986 80,000 Use existing material such as ■ adjacent banks along Fall Creek. to concrete curbing, rock, etc. Sm _ 1988 as available. 23. Prepare restoration plans for Ithaca Silent Film S 1986 27,500 14% of estimated construction al Interpretive Center based on NYSCA feasibility cost, study. 24. Improve handicapped access to footbridges and Sm 1986 6,000 Work by City forces and ■ construct connecting walkway and interpretive interested volunteers. display in Fuertes Bird Sanctuary. 25. Prepare plans and specs. for changing the golf Sm 1986 -- Prepared by City personnel. ig course watering system from City water to lake water. 26, Clear trees and stumps to establish new fairway F 1986 3,000 Work by City forces. ® #4. 27. Construction of new green #3. F 1986 40,000 Work by City forces, In * if IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN F = Fall S = Spring W = Winter Sm = Summer Priority: ®,High Range d Middle Range ❑ Low Range Item or Action Implementation Estimated Comments Period Cost* 28. Remove existing pavement from roadway east of W 1986-87 6,000 Work by City forces. apicnic pavilion. Grade and seed. 29. Remove fire tower next to golf course. W 1986-87 15,000 Work by City forces. 30. Remove fence and overlook and fill in duck pond W 1986-87 30,000 Use fill from work in other rarea in Stewart Park. Relocate swans. thru areas as this becomes avail- S 1988 able. 31. Construct medium size parking lot adjacent to F 1987 285,000 Work by City forces. 03 ■ Cascadilla Boathouse. 32. Grade and landscape large group picnic area F 1987 23,000 __ — Q between picnic pavilion and large parking lot. 33. Remove existing roadway and parking from main W 1987-88 30,000 Work by City forces. Upicnic area east of Boathouse; remove existing pavement and enclosure at tennis courts. Grade and seed temporarily. 34. Change watering system at golf course from City W 1986-87 -- ® water to lake water. 35. Prepare detailed plans and specifications for W 1986-87 9,600 City staff and others to ® extending golf course into biological field work with golf course archi- station. Identify specific trees and other tect. Cornell Planations, vegetation to be removed; specify new planting DEC, EMC, Cayuga Bird Club areas. and others to be involved. 36. Underground existing overhead electric service S 1987 Cost to be determined in imbetween Tin Can and Boathouse. consultation with NYSEG. 37. Restore old clubhouse behind 4th green into a Sm 1987 20,000 Work by City forces, in rest room and shelter for golfers and hikers. • 4, ir fS IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN F = Fall S = Spring W = Winter Sm = Summer Priority: II High Range o Middle Range 0 Low Range Item or Action Implementation Estimated Period Cost* Comments 38. Build additional parking areas along Fall Creek Sm 1987 20,000 Work by City forces. for fishermen and terminate Pier Road with a turnaround. Rehabilitate footpath and bike trail to footbridge. 39. Restoration of facility for Ithaca Silent Film S 1987 198,000 aInterpretive Center. to S 1988 40. Restoration of historic formal garden area in Sm,F 1987 30,000 Might be done by local ® the vicinity of the flagpole, south of pavilion. S 1988 interest groups. a 41. Construct footpath adjacent to fairway #5; F 1987 6,000 Work by City forces. ■ install culvert and reshape pond in this area. 42. Establish footpath loop around biological field W 1987-88 5,000 Work by City forces with ■ station. advice from Cornell Planta- tions. 43. Relocate memorial rose garden and incorporate S 1988 5,000 • it as a special feature of the formal garden Construct new fairways 7 and 8, green #7 and Sm,F,W 1988-89 130,000 D tee #8 in biological field station. 45. Construct new warming shelter and rest rooms F 1988 45,000 Work by City forces. ® adjacent to lagoon. 46. Construction of new green and tee for hole #6. F 1988 46,000 Regrade green #8 for new orientation. 47. Prepare detailed plans and specifications for F,W,S 1988-89 42,000 13% of construction cost. wrestoration of boathouse. IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMEN2 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN F = Fall S = Spring W = Winter Sm = Summer Priority: III.Bigh Range o Middle Range 0 Low Range - Item or Action Implementation Estimated Comments Period Cost* 48. Construct small parking lot in middle of the F,W,S 1988,89 199,000 park and improve existing roadway connecting small and medium parking lots. 49. Grade and landscape main picnic area between F,S 1988,89 40,000 Work by City forces. Silent Film Center (bathhouse) and boathouse. 50. Prepare plans and specifications for recon- W 1988-89 14,000 12% of estimated construction struction of court area between pavilion and cost. film center. ac 51. Redevelop and reorganize children's play area S 1989 50,000 Could be a community group El west of the bathhouse; install new equipment. project. 52. Rebuild park entrance and incorporate an ex- S 1989 44,600 panded information center with more parking. 53. Landscape small group picnic area which has S 1989 25,000 El replaced zoo. 54. Restoration of Cascadilla Boathouse and Sm 1989 325,000 Might be feasible as an in- n' surrounding area. thru vestment by private interests. Sm 1990 55. Rebuild court area between pavilion and film F 1989 120,000 ® center, including approach to lakeshore. — 56. Build water containment structure on stream S 1990 20,000 ® between lagoon and Fall Creek. 57. Relocate fairway #9, construct new tee #9 and S 1990 6,000 reshape new green #9 as necessary. 4' #9 Al IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN F = Fall S = Spring W = Winter Sm = Summer Priority: II,High Range o Middle Range 0 Low Range Item or Action Implementation Estimated Comments Period Cost* 58. Construct parking lot for golf course and ferry S 1990 73,000 r terminal at Inlet. 59. Secure equipment and initiate the ferry con- S 1990 24,000 Jnection across Cayuga Inlet between footpath systems in golf course (Stewart Park) and Cass Park. 60. Grade and seed area between fairway #9 and the Sm 1990 5,000 ® h Inlet; connect footpath along Inlet between Pier Road, ferry terminal and biological field g station. c 61. Construct last section of new park road from F 1990 143,000 EN entrance to the small parking lot. 62. Remove existing road pavement near park W 1990-91 16,000 II entrance and plant buffer area. 63. Construct new footbridge near Route 13 over W 1990-91 50,000 ign Fall Creek. 64. Construct shoreline promenade with low-level Sm 1991 98,000 ri lighting. 65. Develop detailed planning for diking and filling Sm 1991 -- To be prepared by City staff ■ of park extension and island; prepare plans to in collaboration with State and specifications for municipal pier. Sm 1992 DEC, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and others. 66. Construction of dikes around: F,W,S 1992-93 ■ a. Park extension area 520,000 . ❑ b, Island 350,000 IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN Fall S = Spring W = Winter Sm = Summer Priority: III.High Range o Middle Range 0 Low Range Item or Action Implementation Estimated Comments Period Cost* 67. Undertake filling and draining operation for: Sm,F,W 1993-94 Use material dredged by a. Park extension area NYSDOT from Cayuga Inlet. Placement of fill would be ❑ b. Island. -- part of the dredging project. 68. Construct new pavilion; install water and sewer Sm,F 1994 70,000 ✓ to serve new pavilion and rest rooms on extension area. 69. Grade and seed extension area; landscape ex- F 1994 120,000 ■ tension area. ■o 70. Build new municipal pier, .first stage. F,W 1994-95 135,000 Project could be advanced in the schedule by necessity. 71. Grade and seed island. F,W 1994-95 11,000 .❑ 72. Landscape island; construct new pavilions. Sm,F 1995 30,000 ❑ 73. Extend municipal pier to the north; W,S 1995-96 180,000 Pier might be built as one ✓ install water and electricity. project. See Section 5, Proposal 12. 74. Planting of golf course and park area to take S,F 1985 10,000/yr. Establish a planting reserve ® place on an annual basis throughout project. thru for this project in City's 1995 capital improvements program, 75. PROJECT COMPLETED. - Sm 1996 5,464,700 * For construction items, figures shown are order- of-magnitude costs only. • • DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECTS BY YEAR - STEWART PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN ITEM* 1984 P** 1985 1986 1987 1988 2. 150,000 H 13, 2,000 H 21. 264,000 H 31. 285,000 H 43. 5,000 L 3. 10,000 H 15. 130,000 H 22. 80,000 H 32. 23,000 M 44, 130,000 14 7. 160,000 H 16. 8,000 H 23. 27,500 H 33, 30,000 H 45, 45,000 M 8. 40,000 H 17. 10,000 L 24. 6,000 H 35. 9,600 H 46. 46,000 M 9. 59,000. H 18. 2,000 M 26. 3,000 M 37, 20,000 M 47. 42,000 H 41 11. 5,000 H 19. 26,00024 27. 40,000 M 38. 20,00014 48. 199,000 H 12. 8,000 H 20. 710,000 H 28. 6,000M 39. 198,000 H 49. 40,000 H 29. 15,000 L 40. 30,000 H 50. 14,000 M 30. 30,000 M 41. 6,000 H 42. 5,000 H 432,000 H 850,000 H 377,500 H 563,600 H 281,000 H -- M 28,000 M 79,000 M 63,000 M 235,00014 L 10,000 L 15,000 L -- L 5,000 L 1989. 1990 1991 1992 1993 51. 50,000 L 56. 20,000 M 64, 98,000 M 66a. 520,000 H (No projects 52. 44,600 M 57. 6,000 H 66b. 350,0)0 L scheduled to begin in 1993.) 53. 25,000 L 58. 73,000 M 54. 325,000 H 59. 24,00024 55. 120,000 14 60. 5,000 M 61. 143,000 H 62, 16,000 H 63. 50,000 M 325,000 H 165,000 H -- H 520,000 H 164,000 24 172,000X 98,00014 -- M 75,000 L L L 350,000 L 1924 1995 68. 70,000 24 72. 180,000 14 69. 120,000 H 73. 30,000 L TOTALS: 3,634,100 HIGH PRIORITY 70. 135,000 M 1,224,600 MEDIUM " 71. 11,000 L 496,000 LOW If 120,000 H H 5,354,700 (excludes• an annual 205,000M 180,000M allowance of $10,000 for planting.) 11,000 L 30,000 L * See IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE for list of items. ** Priority: H = High M = Medium L = Low 92 • CHAPTER 8: FUNDING CONCERNS Finding adequate sources of money to finance the improvement plan will be a 4 major challenge for the City in years to come. The grand total cost for all proposals is estimated to be almost $5.5 million as shown in Chapter 7. This, of course, represents over 70 different proposed actions spread over a period 11 of at least ten years. When viewed in this light, the overall cost of the park is much less awesome. Included in the implementation sequence and the $5.5 million estimate are a small number of high cost items. Projects directly related to construction of the new Youth Bureau, for example, account for almost $750,000, including partial removal of the present building,* relocating the Route 13 access road and various professional fees. Creating the fifteen acre shoreline extension area and the island account for another $870,000. Rehabilitation of the Cascadilla boathouse represents an estimated expenditure of $325,000. It can be seen that these three projects alone cost close to $2 million or over thirty-five percent of the total estimated cost of the plan. Even so, there remains significant expenses involved in such basis recommen- dations as the proposed parking lots and road system and sources of funds for these projects will have to be found. Because of the variety of projects involved in the plan it is likely that capital funding will be generated from a number of sources. Old techniques and programs need to be supplemented by new approaches and creative concepts. Like park development itself, financing of capital improvements will be an ongoing process. One advantage of a long-range plan is that when financing opportunities come along the City will be ready to take advantage of them. In this chapter a number of possible funding techniques and sources of money are examined. 1. Tax-dollar funding of capital improvements is a well established method of building infrastructure and community facilities. Funds for certain projects can be included in the City's annual capital budget where all capital projects for the entire City are evaluated, given priority and spread over a six year period. Projects are funded either through the general fund for smaller amounts or bonding for higher cost items. Re- lated to this is the capital reserve technique by which smaller amounts of money are allocated annually as a "savings plan" for specific projects - landscaping, for example. The theory is that sufficient funds will have been accumulated by the time the project is undertaken but annual costs will be relatively low. * An additional $60,000 needed for complete removal of the old building was not included in the park cost estimate. 93 When use of tax dollars is being considered as a source of funds for Stewart Park it is important to remember that this area is rapidly be- coming a regional facility of significance. Park users are certainly not limited to the City of Ithaca residents, Some form of County involvement in development and maintenance is, therefore, a reasonable consideration which should be pursued. 2. Community Development and Revenue Sharing are two Federal programs currently available to the City and both could be applied to some park projects. Emphasis in the past has been on funding social programs benefiting low and moderate income people. Recreation facilities certainly benefit these income groups, especially since there are no general user or parking fees charged. Some improvements such as the children's play area, the promenade, the warming shelter or possibly the municipal pier could well be eligible for partial funding from these sources. Special emphasis should be given to projects which improve access for the handicapped. Improved connection between the suspension bridges would be an ideal target for this funding support. 3. The Heritage, Conservation and Recreation Service (HCRS) is a Federal Pro- gram administered through the State Parks Department by the U.S. Department of the Interior. This service, formerly known as the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, was a major contributor of matching funding for the Cass Park area. The municipal pier, hiking trails and some golf course improvements might be eligible HCRS projects. City and State funds and private donations could become a source of matching dollars. 4. New York State is another source of financing that bears investigation although funds have been limited in recent years. The Environmental Quality Bond Act of 1979 was aimed at large-scale environmental projects. It is currently used only for State sponsored projects but could, conceivably, be used on a project such as the municipal pier or the dike-and-fill work needed to extend the shoreline or build the island. Another possibility would be a supplemental funding program, for a specific project, enacted directly by the State legislature. This approach should most likely be aimed at finding a large-scale project rather than a small piece of the whole. Shoreline improvements and creation of the silent film interpretive center and court might be actions worthy of State legislative support. 5. Many of the proposals require considerable preconstruction planning and design. One such proposal is the Interpretive Center related to Ithaca's film era. A detailed feasibility study is needed for this project. Funding for such a study might be obtained from the New York State Council on the Arts. Preparation of interpretive material itself might also be funded • in part by NYSCA. The American Film Institute has, in the past, offered matching grants of up to $50,000 for projects aimed at restoring, preserving and cataloging 94 films of artistic or cultural value. An existing archival film collection is a prerequisite for this particular program but the Institute would be a good source of advice and, perhaps, would have other more relevant fund- ing programs. 6. An excellent funding possibility in the Ithaca community would involve some form of public-private financing partnership. Private or corporate con- di could be channeled into a Stewart Park Rehabilitation Fund to be used for general or specific purposes; the park fund, or a particular project, could be supported by a will bequest or a memorial donation. Finally, the pledge of in-kind services can be used to provide part of any local match needed for a Federal or State program. One of the recommendations in the plan is to establish some structure, such as a foundation or nonprofit organization, which could solicit and receive private or corporate donations and apply them to park development or main- tenance. 7. Another form of public-private partnership might be used to rehabilitate the Cascadilla boathouse. The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 offers private investors substantial Federal tax incentives for the approved renovation of certified historic structures. The historic structure could qualify for a twenty-five percent investment tax credit on approved renovation costs. Such tax incentives are the major force behind historic revitalization efforts in the country today. Presumably the City would maintain control of the land but come to an agreement with a developer which would permit the tax incentive program to work. Another agreement with private investors cc-.ild bring about the municipal pier and support facilities needed for a cruise-dinner boat operation. Collaboration on construction, maintenance and provision of water and shore facilities and services might be a key to facilitating this important park proposal. 8., There are, perhaps, other financing opportunities available for Stewart Park. DEC could, for example, provide technical and other support for an urban fishing program aimed at improvements in the lagoon, Fall Creek and the nearshore area of Cayuga Lake. Resource Conservation and Development projects receive financial and tech, nical assistance through the Soil Conservation Service, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Funding might be available for rip-rapping, bank stabilization, shoreline access enhancement, planting and similar projects where fish, wildlife and recreation benefits will be achieved. As park development unfolds over the coming decade, additional financing oppor- * tunities will no doubt arise. This master plan can form the basis for City action to apply for and use any funds that may become available. The overall cost is high when viewed as one lump-sum number. Breaking the plan into its constituent parts, and employing creative financing techniques as the opportunity arises, should produce remarkable results and greatly simplify the funding challenge. 95 CHAPTER 9: ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Proposed changes and improvements in the Stewart Park Complex will, in many cases, trigger an environmental assessment as required by Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act of 1975 (SEQR) . In some cases a full- 4 fledged environmental impact statement will be needed before a proposed project should proceed. Environmental assessments and impact statements are required by both the City of Ithaca, the State of New York and the Federal government. Their purpose is to include consideration of environmental factors into the early planning stages of various actions that are undertaken, funded or approved by governmental agencies. Projects are often substantially modified when there are serious adverse environmental effects identified in the environmental impact statement (EIS). When suitable mitigation measures are not possible by any reasonable modification of the design, the action can be denied if environ- mental costs are felt to be excessive. Environmental assessments are not included as part of this master plan docu- ment. They can be quite complicated and costly, depending on the action being assessed, and often involve a high level of scientific investigation, measure- ment and analysis. At the master plan stage of the Stewart Park study those proposals which will likely require some level of additional environmental study are identified and the nature of the environmental concern is outlined. As each project is subsequently being considered for implementation a more detailed scope of investigation will be set forth as part of the environmental impact process. 1. GENERAL IMPACT Because the Stewart Park plan includes a large number of related actions, the cumulative impact of the entire project will have to be assessed in broad, general terms. This is dealt with in the SEQR law by what is known as a Generic Environmental Impact Statement. The need for a Generic EIS is identified as Item 6 in the Implementation Sequence found in Chapter 7. Generic means simply that all of the related actions are considered as a group. The most obvious adverse and beneficial impacts are identified in general, nonscientific terms and reasonable alternative ways of achieving the objectives of the project are evaluated. Those actions which would require a site-specific EIS at some later time would be specified. 2. GOLF COURSE Proposed changes in the golf course area would have a significant impact • on the environment, particularly as those changes affected Cornell's Biological Station. Additional impacts, although of less importance, would come from the proposed new ponds at various locations on the course. 96 Basic to the golf course design in this area would be a thorough assess- ment of the ecological importance of the Biological Station. At what state in its evolution is this wetland and how does it relate as a habitat to the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary? What species of bird and animal life reg ularly inhabit, or occasionally visit, the station and does Fuertes offer the same attractions? Finally, what changes would the introduction of golf course development and operation bring about in the station and could • any detrimental impacts be reduced to an acceptable level? Before any work could be done in the station an Article 24 permit (fresh- water wetlands) would be needed from the State Department of Environmental Conservation. The Article 24 permit would have to demonstrate the need for the proposed use and examine alternatives to using the wetland area. Because the area is adjacent to navigable waters a 404 permit might also be required from the Army Corps of Engineers. Substantial concerns of the Cornell Plantations would have to be satisfactorily addressed. New ponds introduced to improve surface drainage and add water hazards should be investigated to determine subsoil conditions and the most suitable design. Potential wildlife value of such ponds should be a factor in their design and landscaping. 3. SHORELINE EXTENSION AND THE ISLAND Adding land to the park as shown on the plan would have several signifi- cant impacts, all of which would need investigation. Environmental con- cerns would relate directly to the impact of filling a portion of the shallow offshore area on the fish and plant life there. The present nature and ecological value of this habitat would have rl be assessed; the type of rip- rap used for a dike could actually improve fish habitat and offshore fish- ing and this should be investigated; the need for a liner or some similar method to control seepage of the deposited spoil should be studied. Similar attention would be needed for the proposed island. In addition, the impact of both shoreline extension and the island on lake views and the visual character of the park should be considered. These two additions would radically alter present aesthetic characteristics of the lakefront and some thought should be given to this aspect of the plan as part of the overall environmental impact study. 4. THE LAGOON More specific investigation should be made of the proposed impoundment structure at the lagoon. Of particular interest is the timing of a damming operation and the most appropriate water depth. Digging deeper holes in the bottom of the lagoon is suggested as a way to improve the habitat for resident fish species. More information is needed on the impact of this action on fish, animal and plant life in the lagoon. 97 5. SWIMMING Natural conditions of wind and water currents strongly indicate that lake or creek swimming is not a reasonable consideration. Even so, additional environmental studies of water quality are warranted as various parts of the park are completed. Data on transparency is an essential minimum. Bacterial counts before and after the new sewer outfall is constructed 4 should also be used to further evaluate the prospects of swimming in this area. 6. STREAM BANK STABILIZATION Proposed actions recommended to prevent further stream bank erosion in some areas will require additional study. Material used to stabilize banks could enhance the already important Fall Creek fishery. The questions of how, and to what extent, creek banks along the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary should be protected, and how this protection can best be provided, need careful investigation. If heavy equipment is required in any stabilization operation the impact of such'equipment on the sanctuary, and alternative procedures for placing the rip-rap material, should be examined well in advance of the project. ft 98 APPENDIX A WATER CIRCULATION IN SOUTHERN CAYUGA LAKE 3 There is strong interest in reviving natural swimming opportunities in Stewart Park. That means swimming in Cayuga Lake, as occurred until the early 1960's, or possibly swimming in Tall Creek. Offshore water conditions are not now conducive to safe or pleasant swim- ming in the lake; turbidity is the principal obstacle. Silt and suspended vegetation is carried by natural currents and either deposited on the bottom of the lake or blown on shore. As part of the Stewart Park Master Plan project a special study was made of the impact of water current and wind in the southern part of Cayuga Lake.* The intent of this study was to establish a model of existing cir- culation patterns and evaluate the possible effects of shoreline modifi- cation on those patterns. In other words, could shoreline changes alter existing water circulation patterns in a way that would improve water quality enough to permit swimming. The number of possible shoreline variations is endless. The twelve designs actually considered fell into three basic categories of change: extending the shoreline on the west side of the park, (Scheme 4); creating an embayment adjacent to the lakefront (Scheme 9); and, building an island. Existing conditions were studied using a computer model which simulates circulation patterns under various wind conditions and/or streamflow. The model obtains the steady state, three dimensional velocities at any depth. Examples of graphic output in the form of horizontal velocity vectors show- ing direction and relative magnitude of currents are presented in several charts included in this Appendix. Three primary cases have been studied. They are: 1. A baseline study with the present shoreline configuration. 2. Shoreline alteration represented by Scheme 4. 3. Shoreline alteration represented by Scheme 9. 0 * Prepared by James A. Liggett, Professor of Environmental Engineering, Cornell University; assisted by Charles H. Trautmann, Geotechnical Engineer. 99 These three configurations were studied under the conditions of: A. A southwest wind. 4 B. A northwest wind. Al C. No wind but using the streamflow of Fall Creek and Cayuga Lake as the driving forces. The arrow plots show the velocity at the surface, the velocity at mid- depth, and the average velocity. In general the average velocity is much smaller than the point velocities and has been magnified in the plots so that it can readily be seen. The wind direction in the Ithaca area is uncertain at any time of the year but generally varies from northwest to southwest. The summer wind is more often from the northwest in fair weather but summer storms, when the wind is likely to attain its maximum velicity, is more often from the southwest. Since the Cayuga Lake currents are driven primarily by the wind, the magnitude and direction of the currents are almost as variable as the wind. The plots show, however, that the dominant current is from the west along the southern boundary of the lake, that is, the Stewart Park shoreline. In viewing the arrow plots, especially in the baseline study, there are some cases which appear to be anomalous due to sudden changes in bottom topography. This phenomenon is local and should not be given weight in the overall consideration of the pattern. In some of the studies the bottom topography has been smoothed, which is more consistent with the resolution of the computer model, and thus the currents appear to be more continuous. Several arrow plot print-outs are included in this Appendix as an illustra- tion of the findings of the computer model. Baseline plots The baseline plots are in general agreement with what one would expect in the shallow parts of the lake. The surface current is more or less in alignment with the wind with a return flow under the surface. In the ab- sence of streamflow, and with a northwest wind the average current in the southern part of the lake is a bit confused and very light although a weak gyre (rotating counterclockwise) appears in the southeast part of the lake. With a southwest wind the average current is better defined, flowing from west to east and subsequently northward along the east shore. A 100 CAYUGA LAKE \ Ns / r f ..e \ \ ► ti . 9\ \ ' t $ 1 c . -. - 1 , ..- r t BASELINE CASE .1_ • // •. ��e`�a�� Northwest Wind `;, 0 Average Current ,e4 w * White Lighthouse e� l0 o North The streamflow into the lake from Cayuga Inlet and Fall Creek form currents at their outlets, but these currents grow rapidly weaker as the water spreads out into the lake. In the absence of wind these currents turn toward the right (as might be expected from the weak Coriolis forces which result from the earth's rotation) and proceed up the east shore. CAYUGA LAKE ' . I • • • • ' • A 2 • . 1 1 .► • , // 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . ■1 \ / . - . . . 4a:C:4 t \t t Nf ' - a�c BASELINE CASE 0 \ $ce Streamflow Only aQ Average Current 4' 0 se * White Lighthouse et 0va. North 101 Modification Scheme 4 Placing a jetty of land into the lake on the west side of Stewart Park, it along the east side of Fall Creek, has a surprisingly large effect under northwest wind conditions. The average velocity becomes much stronger from west to east and the gyre that appeared under the baseline con- dition has moved further offshore. These changes are not so apparent under the southwest wind. Under the no-wind condition the currents from Cayuga Inlet and Fall Creek prevail somewhat further out into the lake, as might be expected since the flow is more confined. The no-wind flow is still from the west to the east in the southern part on the lake and tends to stay along the shoreline more than in the baseline case. CAYUGA LAKE t t 1 ? ' a . . `► .. i i I t i • / / ' • • + 4. - 1 • A . • • - y _ �"— �••----+— .• •� • II 0 c, t 2`'2' < t 5�' l % SCHEME 4 �, "" cSe' ft:Z7145.1‘: \ Northwest Wind and Stream W y Average Current j o� a,11 a *,White Lighthouse ire Nk North dP 102 CAYUGA LAKE 4 . o • . . , • . • • , • I • • ► 1 1 w • . • .... .'.. . .... '. ....:: ... ... ... ... ... i II \ 5',e SCHEME 4 0 \ Stream Only an 0 Average Current * White Lighthouse • ��` all C',.0 North Modification Scheme 9 Like the baseline case the shoreline configuration of Scheme 9 presents a somewhat confused average velocity in the southern part of the lake. illi The gyre that was present in the baseline case (although it was very weak) has broken into two parts, both very weak, under the northwest wind condition. The embayments and lagoon that have been created with this MO configuration have very small velocities under any wind condition and dissipate the streamflow velocities more rapidly than with the present shoreline. The general pattern of west to east flow is unchanged. 103 CAYUGA LAKE S f w t r �w ... I / I y ■' -. \\ 1• , , . . A .• • 7. • ...'"P 11 \ I ' ‘.... ....... ...... '.... • • ` t 1 ` , l`t�tt Mitt f'. v , %, 1 . 1 . • ,`,` .t ` ' ' Qa�� SCHEME 9 t w 4■0"C,L Northwest Wind and Stream n $ce Average Current 1,j sw CI * White Lighthouse 1 ('))4 o North Comparison Under each of the shoreline configurations and under most wind conditions the average flow in the southern part of Cayuga Lake is from the west to the east. Thus the major part of the sediment load from Cayuga Inlet and Fall Creek is going to be deposited in the southeast corner of the lake. The shore of Stewart Park will continue to receive Fall Creek water pre- . daminately. In Scheme 4 some of the sediment from the creeks would be carried further out into the lake and some deposition would take place away from the shore of Stewart Park. On the other hand the embayment created by the landfill would continue to receive sediment and would tend to fill, making the southern shore of the lake more linear than in the initial design. If the shore is to retain the original design configuration it would have to be 104 dredged periodically. Periods between required dredging are difficult to determine; however, the accretion of sediment along the southern shore would be slow, probably at a rate less than at present. Floating material would tend to accumulate along the embayment east of the landfill under north wind conditions. This floating material would present a problem in aesthetics and in sanitation. It would tend to be carried away in the case of a south wind, but the near shore surface currents for the south wind are weak and might not remove the material, especially if it was anchored on the bottom. Scheme 9 probably creates less deposition of sediment along the north shore of Stewart Park for two reasons. First, the shoreline currents are stronger and would tend to carry the sediment out into the lake or further along the shoreline. Second, the weak velocities at the outlet of Fall Creek (and to a lesser extent the Inlet) would encourage early deposition. In that respect a bar of sediment would build across the mouth of Fall Creek which would have to be removed periodically in order to maintain navigation and an adequate exit for flood water. Although the area is not large, the fre- quency of maintenance would increase considerably from the present con- figuration. The lagoon created by Scheme 9 would be separate from Fall Creek. The water exchange would probably be slow so that there would be a buildup of algae and aquatic weeds in the summer months. The lagoon would fill with sediment, but rather slowly. In general any of the possible changes in shoreline configuration would have only a local effect. Even for the southeast shore the affects would not be great, although they might be perceived to be strong due to the redirection of some floating material. THE ISLAND The figure below shows projected surface currents under a northwest wind in the neighborhood of the proposed island off Stewart Park. The island would screen the mainland from some, but not all, of the floating material carried by surface currents. Middepth velocities under island conditions would normally be very light. Without a deeper channel (about six feet) between the island and the main- land, the current in that area would be almost zero. These currents could provide some flushing action, but probably could not remove debris from the vicinity of the shoreline. They would bring in small amounts of suspended sediment that would be deposited and would have to be removed periodically • in order to maintain the depth between the island and the mainland. 105 CAYUGA LAKE * ‘4► ISLAND CASE d a4 Northwest Wind d Surface Current * White Lighthouse ez. e4C North The island would also serve to screen the area from wave action which would stir the bottom and make the water murky. Under the dredged condition the water quality in the area would probably be about the same as the lake water. The very weak current would be sufficient so that swimming could be maintained in normal lake water. Some cleaning would be necessary on an annual basis and dredging to maintain the depth would be necessary less often. 4 AP 106 CORNELL PLANTATIONS The ARBORETUM, BOTANICAL GARDEN, and NATURAL AREAS of CORNELL UNIVERSITY ONE PLANTATIONS ROAD ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 APPENDIX B 607-256-3020 February 20, 1984 i Mr. Thomas Niederkorn Consultant, City of Ithaca 310 West State Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Mr. Niederkorn, tAs you requested at our meeting of December 14, 1983, I am sending you a woody plant list for the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary at Stewart Park. I think it is quite complete. In addition, I am enclosing a partial species list for herbs. As I noted earlier, we regard the Bird Sanctuary as the parcel of significant floristic interest in the Stewart Park vicinity. The forest is an excellent example of a flood plain community on rich bottomland soil. All evidence supports the contention that the forest is primeval; it has never been timbered. The somewhat disturbed appearance of the site is partially due to the recent demise of American elm, but also characteristic of a community of this type on very rich soil. The sanctuary is used regularly by botanists and ecologists, not only birders. The site is visited by classes because of its floristic interest. It has been used for a number of research projects. Examples include a study of species replacement following the death of elms, and a study of swamp white oak and burr oak hybrids. The sanctuary is also visited recreationally by local plant lovers. Rare species found on the site include Cephalanthus occidentalis, buttonbush; Arisaema dracontium, green dragon; and Lithospermum latifolium, Gromwell. Campanula americana, American bellflower, is reported to be our-77—H11 he forest, but has not been identified recently. In this region Celtis occidentalis, hackberry, is at the northern edge of its range. It is found only on a very few sites at the southern end of Cayuga Lake along creek bottoms. Nowhere else in the region is there an example of silver maple forest with specimens of this size and age on bottomland. In conclusion, we of the Natural Areas Subcommittee and Plantations find the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary to be an invaluable and irreplaceable botanical resource. The sanctuary represents a unique and remarkably intact example of the former bottomland forest found at the southern end of Cayuga Lake. It would be a great loss if future development of Stewart Park were to disturb this single remnant. a Thank you for this opportunity to make suggestions for the park development. We continue to be interested in your development plan and would appreciate the opportunity to make comments and suggestions in the future. • Sincerely, Nancy Ostman NO:cc cc: John Dougherty, Assistant to the Superintendent of Public Works Milo Richmond, Chairman, Natural Areas Subcommittee Robert Cook, Director, Cornell Plantations 107 • Fuertes Bird Sanctuary at Stewart Park Ithaca, NY 1/27/84 Woody Plant List Acer negundo Box elder A. saccharinum Silver maple Celtis occidentalis Hackberry Cephalanthus occidentalis Buttonbush Cornus racemosa Grey dogwood C. stolonifera Red dosier dogwood Fraxinus americana White ash F. nigra Black ash F. pennsylvanica Red ash Juglans cinerea Butternut Ligustrum obtusifolium Privit Lindera benzoin Spicebush Lonicera tatarica Honeysuckles L. xylosteum L. Maackii Morus alba White mulberry Morus rubra Red mulberry Parthenocissies quinquefolia Virginia creeper Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Populus deltoides Cottonwood f ' Prunus avium Bird cherry Prunus serotina Black cherry Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak Q. bicolor x macrocarpa hybrid populations Rhamnus cathartica Buckthorn Rhamnus frangula Alder buckthorn Rhus toxicodendron Poison ivy R. typhina Staghorn sumac Ribes rubrum, americanum, Gooseberry, Currant cynosbati Robinia pseudocacia Black locust Rubus strigosus Raspberry, blackberry R. allegheniensis R. occidentalis Salix alba White willow S. bebbiana Bebb willow S. fragilis Crack willow S. nigra Black willow S. rigida Sambucus canadensis Black elder Tilia americana Basswood • Viburnum opulus High bush cranberry native var. trilobum Vitis Grape 108 Herbs Agrimonia striata, gryposepala Agrimony Amphicarpa bracteata Apios americana Arisaema dracontium A. triphyllum Jack-in-the-pulpit Boehmeria cylindrica False nettle C Campanula americana Circaea quadrisulcata Enchanters nightshade Convolulus sepium Hedge bendweed Cuscuta gronovii Dodder Duchesnea indica Indian strawberry Fragaria vesca Strawberry Geum canadense, white avens G. strictum yellow avens Glecoma hederacea Gill-over-the-ground Hesperis matronalis Dames rocket Impatiens capensis Spotted touch-me-not I. pallida Pale touch-me-not Laportea canadensis Wood nettle Lithospermum latifolium Gromwell Lysimachia nummularia Moneywort L. cilliata Fringed loosestrife Matteuccia struthiopteris Ostrich fern Oenothera biennis Evening primrose Onoclea sensibilis Sensitive fern Phytolacca americana Pokeweed Polygonum virginianum Jumpseed scandens Potentilla Cinquefoil Saururus cernuus Lizard's tail S. altissima Tall goldenrod S. caesia Blue stemmed goldenrod Solidago juncea Early golden rod Solidago latifolia Broad leaved goldenrod Symplocarpus foetida Skunk cabbage Urtica dioica L. Stinging nettle Xanthium chinense Clotbur i 0 10g CORNELL PLANTATIONS The ARBORETUM, BOTANICAL GARDEN, and NATURAL AREAS of CORNELL UNIVERSITY ONE PLANTATIONS ROAD ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 607-256-3020 a APPENDIX B (cont.) is June 28, 1984 Mr. Thomas Niederkorn 310 West State Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Tom, You asked us to provide suggestions for plant species appropriate for use at Stewart Park. Enclosed is a list of native woody plants which are typically found on rich bottomland sites in this area, and should do well at Stewart Park. We have marked those which are both good bird food and non-invasive with a star. We stress that these native species are among the best choices for Stewart Park plantings. Other, non-native plants may also be favorite bird food. However, close or abundant seed sources of non-native plants, when c.,. carried back to the bird sanctuary, may easily become established there, disturbing the native flora. It is extremely important to preserve the unique example of old growth, undisturbed bottomland forest found at the Fuertes Bird Sanctuary. It is necessary to maintain diversity of food sources on the site while providing auxilliary food sources if the full diversity of birds is to be maintained. Sincerely, "nalitar C,d4raAt, Nancy Ostman j. � �; � r / , F. Robert Wesley NO/cc ill cc: Milo Richmond Carl Gortzig Robert Cook • 110- Suggested Species for Plantings Witch hazel *Kentucky Coffee tree *Silver bell *Hackberry Sycamore * Bur Oak Swamp White Oak Sweet pepper-bush *Yellowwood (Cladrastis lutea) Persimmon *Highbush cranberry Blue beech (Carpinus cardiniana) Shadbushes (Amelanchier arborea ac laevis) Buckeye *Nannyberry Silver maple *Black berried elder *Red berried elder *Elms: especially new Siberian-American cross Bladdernut (Staphylea trifoliata) Basswood (Tilia americana) Maleberry bush(Lyonia ligustrina) Staggerbush *Buttonbush American Hazelnut (Corylus americana) Silky dogwood Pagoda dogwood American bittersweet Leatherwood Paw-Paw Black Gum Black Walnut Butternut Bayberry White Spruce Bald-cypress Goat willow Sassafras Sorbus decora (Mountain ash) *Hemlock * Species which are good bird food and non-itnyasiye 111