HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-28-17 Planning and Development Board Meeting Agenda
REVISED PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD
AGENDA
The regular meeting of the PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD will be held at 6:00 p.m. on NOVEMBER 28TH , 2017 in
COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS, City Hall, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, NY.
AGENDA ITEM Approx. Start Time
1. Agenda Review 6:00
2. Privilege of the Floor (3-minute maximum per person ― if you will be speaking about a project with a scheduled
PUBLIC HEARING below , you are highly encouraged to speak at that time)
6:05
3. Site Plan Review
A. Project: Duplex 6:15
Location: 601 S Aurora Street
Applicant: David Putnam
Actions: Public Hearing Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval
Project Description: The applicant is proposing to construct a duplex on the .186 acre (8,114 SF) vacant lot. Site
development includes parking for two cars, walkways, landscaping, a continuous sidewalk along the property
frontage, drainage improvements and a trash enclosure. The applicant has designed curbing and on-street parking
on Hillview Place in cooperation with the City Engineering Division. The project is in the R -2a Zoning district. This is
a Type II Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”) §176 -5. (C.)(8) and the
State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) § 617.5 (c)(9) and is not subject to environmental review.
B. Project: Brindley Street Bridge Rebuild and Relocation 6:35
Location: Intersection of W State Street and Taughannock Blvd
Applicant: Addisu Gebre for the City of Ithaca
Actions: Consideration of Preliminary & Final Approval
Project Description: The project will relocate current Brindley Street Bridge to align with W. State St./Taughannock
Blvd. intersection through the construction of a new single span extending Taughannock Blvd. over the Cayuga Inlet
to Taber Street. The project will retain existing Brindley Street Bridge and south approach road for pedestrian and
bike use. This is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”) §176-4
B.(1)(k) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) § 617.4 (b)(11) for which the Board of Public
Works, acting as Lead Agency made a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance in 2016.
C. 209 Hudson Street – Subdivision & Site Plan Review – Sketch Plan 7:05
D. 311 College Ave. (The Nines) – Revised Design – Sketch Plan 7:35
4. Old/New Business
A. Collegetown Design Guidelines – Megan Wilson
B. Parks Master Plan – Megan Wilson
8:05
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
JoAnn Cornish, Director
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
Start Times: Start times are approximate only — APPLICANTS are responsible for being available at whatever time(s) their agenda item(s) is actually discussed.
“An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification.” 2
5. Reports
A. Planning Board Chair (verbal)
8:35
B. Director of Planning & Development (verbal)
C. Board of Public Works Liaison (verbal)
6. Approval of Minutes: October 24, 2017 (time permitting) 9:05
7. Adjournment 9:15
ACCESSING MEETING MATERIALS ONLINE
You may access this agenda (including attachments) by going to the “Agenda Center” on the City web site (www.cityofithaca.org/agendacenter), under “Planning &
Development Board.” For ease-of-access, a link to the most recent Planning Board agenda is always accessible on the Planning Board home page:
http://www.cityofithaca.org/354/Planning-Development-Board.
If you have a disability & would like specific
accommodation to participate, please contact the
City Clerk at 274-6570 by 12:00 p.m., 2-3 business
days (not including weekends/holidays) before the
meeting.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION One Duplex
Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval City of Ithaca
601 S. Aurora St
City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board
November 28, 2017
WHEREAS: an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Planning and Development Board for a
construction of a duplex at 601 S. Aurora St. by David Putnam, and
WHEREAS: the applicant is proposing to construct a duplex on the .186 acre (8,114 SF) vacant lot. Site development
includes parking for two cars, walkways, landscaping, a continuous sidewalk along the property frontage, drainage
improvements and a trash enclosure. The applicant has designed curbing and on-street parking on Hillview Place in
cooperation with the City Engineering Division. The project is in the R-2a Zoning district, and
WHEREAS: this is an Type II under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State
Environmental Quality Review Act and does not require Environmental Review, and
WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 B. (4) and 176-12 A.
(2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and
WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required Public Hearing on November 28, 2017, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board has on November 28, 2017 reviewed and accepted as adequate the following
drawings: “Existing Conditions (S1)”, “Layout (S2)”, “Grading Plan (S3)”, “Utility Plan (S4)”, “Landscape Plan
(S5)”, “Demo and Tree Protection Plan (S6)” and “Site Details (S7)” dated 10-20-17 and “Building Elevations (A1)”
dated 9-13-17 and all prepared by SPEC Construction and other application materials, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council, Tompkins County Planning Department, and other
interested parties have been given the opportunity to comment on proposed project and any received comments have
been considered, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the Planning Board does hereby grant Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval to the project,
subject to the following conditions:
i. Submission of project detail including, building materials samples, exterior lighting, trash enclosure, etc., and
ii. Submission of a revised Landscape Plan to include vegetative screening of the trash enclosure and parking and
larger tree protection as per the City Forester’s comments , and
iii. Submission of a revised Layout Plan clearly showing items in the City ROW that the applicant is proposing to
undertake, and
iv. All work in the City Right of Way will require a Street Permit, and
v. Removal of any City trees requires a Tree Permit, and
vi. Bike racks to be installed before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued, and
vii. Written approval by the City Fire Department that all life safety access requirements have been met.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
In favor:
Against:
Abstain:
Absent:
Vacancies:
PROPOSED RESOLUTION Replacement Bridge
Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval City of Ithaca
601 S. Aurora St
City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board
November 28, 2017
WHEREAS: an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Planning and Development Board for a
replacement of the Brindley Street Bridge by Addisu Gebre, Bridge Systems Engineer for the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS: the project will relocate the current Brindley Street Bridge to align with the W. State/MLK St. and
Taughannock Blvd. intersection through the construction of a new single span structure extending Taughannock Blvd.
over the Cayuga Inlet to Taber Street. The project will retain the existing Brindley Street Bridge and south approach
road for pedestrian and bike use, and
WHEREAS: this is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”)
§176-4 B.(1)(k) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) § 617.4 (b)(11) for which the Board of
Public Works, acting as Lead Agency made a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance in 2016, and
WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 B. (4) and 176-12 A.
(2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and
WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required Public Hearing on October 24, 2017, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board has on November 28, 2017 reviewed and accepted as adequate the following
drawings: “Preliminary Plan and Elevations (P-1)”, “Profile (P-2)”, “Typical Bridge and Approach Sections (P-3)”,
“Typical Roadway and Path Sections (P-4)”, “Brindley Street Bridge Replacement (showing site plan)”, “Brindley
Street Bridge Replacement (showing sections)”, “Brindley Street Bridge Replacement (elevation & photos)”, “ Bridge
Railing Details”, “Transition Railing Details” and “Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge Railing” dated November 2017 and
“Rendered Site Plan” and “Basis of Design Materials Palette (three sheets)” both hand-dated 11-20-17 and all prepared
by Delta Engineers and other application materials, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council, Tompkins County Planning Department, and other
interested parties have been given the opportunity to comment on proposed project and any received comments have
been considered, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the Planning Board does hereby grant Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval to the project,
subject to the following conditions:
i. Submission of a revised and updated Planting Plan, and
ii. Submission of revised/updated drawings P-1 and the untitled drawing showing a visualization of the bridge
approach from E State Street, and
iii. Submission in color of drawing titled “Transition Railing Details”, and
Moved by:
Seconded by:
In favor:
Against:
Abstain:
Absent:
Vacancies:
STREAMBED
CAYUGA INLET
APPROXIMATE ORDINARY HIGH WATER
Commissoner
MATTHEW J. DRISCOLL
Governor
ANDREW M. CUOMO
Transportation
Department of
CDEPARTMENTOFTRA
N
SPO
R
T
ATIONUNITE
DSTATES OF AMERIA U.S. Department of Transportation
ITHACA
CITY OF
REPLACEMENT
BRINDLEY STREET BRIDGE
BRIDGE ELEVATION LOOKING WEST
EXAMPLE RAILING PHOTO 1 EXAMPLE RAILING PHOTO 2
Administration
Federal HighwayNOVEMBER 2017
2'-9"1'-9"9"2'-0"
2'-0"3 SPACES @ 2'-0' = 6'-0"4 SPACES @ 2'-0' = 8'-0"6 SPACES @ 3'-0' = 18'-0"
HEAVY POSTS
BEAMS AND THE BLOCKOUTS ON THIS POST.
NO BOLT BETWEEN SECOND AND THIRD BOX
THE BLOCKOUTS ON THIS POST.
NO BOLT BETWEEN THE BOX BEAMS AND
6"xv6"xv‰" GALVANIZED BOX BEAM
S3vxv5.7 STANDARD POSTS
3'-6"
3'-0"
THE TRANSITION ITEM.
INCLUDED IN THE PRICE BID FOR
THE COST OF THIS POST TO BE
RAIL IN HIGHWAY ESTIMATE
PAY LIMIT FOR BOX BEAM GUIDE
(FIRST RAIL)
SPLICE ASSEMBLY
OF EXPANSIONc
PAY LIMIT FOR TRANSITION - BRIDGE RAILING TO BOX BEAM GUIDE RAIL (BRIDGE ESTIMATE)
3 SPACES @ 2'-0' = 6'-0"4 SPACES @ 2'-0' = 8'-0"6 SPACES @ 3'-0' = 18'-0"
HEAVY POST
OF FIRSTc
BRIDGE RAILING
PAY LIMIT FOR
HEAVY POSTS
(HIGHWAY ESTIMATE)
HIGHWAY POST SPACING
2'-3" HIGHWAYMOUNTING HEIGHT(SECOND & THIRD RAIL)
SPLICE ASSEMBLY
OF EXPANSIONc
POST
OF BRIDGE c
(FIRST RAIL)
SPLICE ASSEMBLY
OF EXPANSIONc
ELEVATION
PLAN
OF FIRST BRIDGE POSTc
9'-0"DLK
PIN 3756.11DLKRJTTMDRJT
NONE
TRANSITION RAILING DETAILS 6"xv6"xv‰" GALVANIZED BOX BEAMSPLICE ASSEMBLY
OF EXPANSIONc
S3vxv5.7 STANDARD POSTS
1'-10"1'-0"
30°
TURN BACK BOTTOM RAIL
PLAN
ELEVATION
NE QUADRANT OPP. HAND)
(NW QUADRANT SHOWN,
NE & NW QUADRANTS
ONLY)
(TOP AND MID RAILS
OF FIXED SPLICEc
5"xv3"xv‚"
TURN BACK BOTTOM
SOUTHEAST & SOUTHWEST QUADRANTS
5"xv3"xv‚"DLKDRAWING NO.SCALE
SHEETT:\2013\2013.469.002 Brindley St Bridge over Cayuga Inlet\Drawings\Structure\375611_cpb_dtl_rlg_03_transition_mod.dgn1:24:43 PM11/21/2017rtrebilcockCHECKED BY :DETAILED BY :DESIGNED BY:IN CHARGE OF :CHECKED BY : USER = DATE = FILE NAME =IS ALTERED, THE ALTERING ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OR LAND SURVEYOR SHALL STAMP THE DOCUMENT AND INCLUDE THE NOTATION "ALTERED BY" FOLLOWED BY THEIR SIGNATURE, THE DATE OF SUCH ALTERATION, AND A SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERATION.IT IS A VIOLATION OF LAW FOR ANY PERSON, UNLESS THEY ARE ACTING UNDER THE DIRECTION OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OR LAND SURVEYOR, TO ALTER AN ITEM IN ANY WAY. IF AN ITEM BEARING THE STAMP OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL
OF
PIN 3756.11
REPLACEMENT OF BRINDLEY STREET BRIDGE
OVER CAYUGA INLET, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NY
DATE
CITY OF ITHACA
BIN 2210400
NOV 2017
DLK
AS SHOWN
PRELIMINARY PLAN AND ELEVATION
1
P-1TODLKNKLDLKDLKDRAWING NO.SCALE
SHEETT:\2013\2013.469.002 Brindley St Bridge over Cayuga Inlet\Drawings\Structure\PSP drawings & reference drawings\375611_cpb_gen_PSP.dgn2:41:13 PM11/21/2017rtrebilcockCHECKED BY :DETAILED BY :DESIGNED BY:IN CHARGE OF :CHECKED BY : USER = DATE = FILE NAME =IS ALTERED, THE ALTERING ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OR LAND SURVEYOR SHALL STAMP THE DOCUMENT AND INCLUDE THE NOTATION "ALTERED BY" FOLLOWED BY THEIR SIGNATURE, THE DATE OF SUCH ALTERATION, AND A SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERATION.IT IS A VIOLATION OF LAW FOR ANY PERSON, UNLESS THEY ARE ACTING UNDER THE DIRECTION OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OR LAND SURVEYOR, TO ALTER AN ITEM IN ANY WAY. IF AN ITEM BEARING THE STAMP OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL
OF
PIN 3756.11
REPLACEMENT OF BRINDLEY STREET BRIDGE
OVER CAYUGA INLET, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NY
DATE
CITY OF ITHACA
4
BIN 2210400
NOVEMBER 2017CAYUGA I
NLETG
RI
D
N
O
R
T
H
HYDRAULIC DATA
RECURRENCY INTERVAL
PEAK DISCHARGE
HIGH WATER ELEVATION AT
POINT OF MAX. BACKWATER
EXISTING
PROPOSED
(YEARS)
DRAINAGE AREA X.XX (SQUARE MILES )
(CF/S)
FLOOD
BASIC
100 50
vFLOOD
DESIGN
387.24388.53
387.14388.42
15'0 15'30'
SCALE BAR
PLAN
DATUM ELEV. 365.0
ELEVATION A-A
TO TABER ST.
TO W. STATE ST.W. STATE ST. BLVD.TAUGHANNO
CK
BOUNDARY
HIGHWAY
EXISTING
BRG.c BRG. TO c115'-0"
LANE
12'-0"
LANE
12'-0"
5'-0" SDWLK.
STA. 5+83.50
BEGIN APPROACH SLAB
END BRIDGE
STA. 6+02.75
DEPTH CONSTRUCTION
BEGIN PAVEMENT FULL
END APPROACH SLAB
STA. 6+36.02
DEPTH CONSTRUCTION
END PAVEMENT FULL
STA. 4+63.50
BEGIN BRIDGE
END APPROACH SLAB
CURVE 2
RAIL (TYP.)
FACE OF APPROACH
2
1
5'-0"
4'-0"
BR
IND
LE
Y
S
T
.
R
EL
O
C
A
TE
D
STA. 4+66.00
BRGS,c
STA. 5+81.00
BRGS,c
20'40.6"nAZ. 33
20'40.6"nAZ. 303RAILING, ITEM 568.70 (TYP.)
TRANSITION BRIDGE
SLEEPER SLAB
APPROACH SLAB (TYP.)
(TYP.)
RAILING, ITEM 606.10
BOX BEAM GUIDE
ITEM 568.51
FOUR RAIL (TYP.)
STEEL BRIDGE RAILING
ITEM 620.03
LIGHT STONE FILLING,
ITEM 620.04
MEDIUM STONE FILLING,
FIX.EXP.
5'-0" SDWLK
STA. 4+38.50
BEGIN APPROACH SLAB
STA. 4+36.50
END PAVEMENT FULL DEPTH CONSTRUCTION 48'-2"OUT TO OUTRAIL (TYP.)
FACE OF BRIDGE
STA. 4+70, LT 47'
RT 52'
STA. 5+94,
STA. 4+67, RT 50'
ELEV. 387.14
UPSTREAM FASCIA
D.H.W. (50 YEAR) @ ST 6+00T.G.L. AND STATION LINE
cH.C.L., BRINDLEY STREET
AA
ELEV 384.0
ELEV 379.0
ELEV 374.0
EXISTING GROUND 2:1AVG. VELOCITY THRU STRUCTURE @ DESIGN FLOOD = 3.52 (FT/SEC)
3742 2845
LIGHTING (TYP)
ORNAMENTAL BRIDGE
SURVEY BASELINEB 3+43.37PT5'-0" SHLDR./BIKE LANE
5'-0" SHLDR./BIKE LANE
FASCIA = 0.34'
UPSTREAM
MIN. FREEBOARD @
1. FINAL ORNAMENTAL LIGHT LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED BY DESIGNER.
NOTES:
PILES (TYP.)
CONCRETE SEMI-INTEGRAL ABUT. (TYP.)
B 5+00 B 6+0020'
-0"R20'-0"R
FOR HORIZONTAL RAIL TERMINATION DETAILS.
SEE DRAWING TITLED "TRANSITION RAILING DETAILS"
FOR HORIZONTAL RAIL TERMINATION DETAILS.
SEE DRAWING TITLED "TRANSITION RAILING DETAILS"
B
3+00
B 4+00B 3+43.37PTEB 1+00.00PIEQNAHDEB 1+00.00EQNBK00+-0.00B-3
B-2
B-1 " CONCRETE
20+0021+0029+0030+003
7
5375
38038
0
380380
TOE OF FILL (TYP.)
WATER
EDGE OF
385
385
38538
5
385
38
5
LT 43'
STA. 5+57, T 1+00390390390
390
390
390390390T
CURVE 2
E = 18.22'
T = 95.42'
L = 181.70'
R = 240.77'
47'50"nDc = 23
14'24" LT.n = 43q
PT STA. B 3+43.37
PCC STA. B 1+61.66
3MYp4JUh4MYp4MDc2MYp1MYm8RHc12DIk3PRs5JUh2JUh1JUh1MYm3MYp8Dlk12MDc5MYp4RHc6DIk3PRs7COs1JUh8WEf8WEf14WEf6MYp5COs18ArM16ArM10PxA1TA3QB1TA3TA1QB1QB5CsH7BnLLEGENDPROPOSED SHRUB AND/OR PERENNIAL PLANTING++++++++INSETPROPOSED TREE PLANTINGQTKEYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE ROOTNOTESTREES7 BnLBetula nigra 'Little King'Fox Valley River Birch6' - 8'#15 CONT.6 PRsPrunus sargentii ‘JFS-KW58’3LQN)ODLU&KHUU\1.75" - 2" CALB&B5CsHCatalpa speciosa 'Hiawatha 2'Heartland Catalpa2"- 2.25" CALB&B10PxAPlatanus X acerifolia 'Exclamation'London Plain Tree1.5" -1.75"" CAL#15 CONT.5QBQuercus bicolor 'JFS-KW12'American Dream Swamp White Oak1.5" - 1.75" CAL#15 CONT.5TATilia americanaAmerican Linden.5" - 1" CAL #15 CONT.SHRUBS34ArMAronia melanocarpa 'uc165'Lowscape Mound Chokeberry18" - 24"#3 CONT.12COsCornus sericea 'Kelseyi'Kelsey's Dwarf Red-Osier Dogwood24" - 30"#3 CONT.26DIkDiervilla 'G2X88544'.RGLDN2UDQJH%XVK+RQH\VXFNOH18" - 24"#3 CONT.13 JUhJuniperus horizontalis 'Prince of Wales'Prince Of Wales Juniper18" - 24"#3 CONT.16 MDcMicrobiota decussata 'Celtic Pride'Russian Arborvitae3' - 4'#5 CONT.20MYpMyrica pensylvanica 'Morton'6LOYHU6SULWH%D\EHUU\3' - 4'#5 CONT.2 MYmMyrica pensylvanica 'Morton Male'Morton Male Pollinator Bayberry3' - 4'#5 CONT.12RHcRhus copallina ‘Morton’3UDLULH)ODPH6XPDF3' - 4'#5 CONT.30WEfWeigela florida 'Bokrasopea'6RQLF%ORRP3HDUO5HEORRPLQJ:HLJHOD18" - 24"#3 CONT.BULBS260(12 - 14 BULBS EACH)Allium 'Summer Drummer'Summer Drummer Flowering OnionBULB'85,1*)$//3/$17%8/%6Ǝ'((3WITH 8" O.C. SPACING. PLANT INDRIFTS OF 12 - 14 BULBS200(7 - 9 BULBS EACH)Narcissus 'Thalia'Thalia NarcissusBULB'85,1*)$//3/$17%8/%6Ǝ'((3WITH 6" O.C. SPACING. PLANT INDRIFTS OF 7 - 9 BULBSSEED MIX: SHOWY WILDFLOWER MIXSEED MIX: EROSION CONTROL/RESTORATIONSEED MIX: TURF LAWNANNUAL PLANTINGS - TOMPKINS COUNTY COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAMScale: 1" = 10'PLANTING PLAN: LANDSCAPE BEDS AT INTERSECTION2GENERAL SHEET NOTES - PLANTING1. TOPSOIL MUST BE SCREENED AND AMENDED TO MEET PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS.SEE WRITTEN SPECIFICATIONS FOR REQUIREMENTS OF SOIL MIXES.2. ALL PLANTING BEDS TO BE PREPARED AS SPECIFIED: SHRUB BEDS TO BEPREPARED IN THEIR ENTIRETY WITH 24" OF PLANTING SOIL MIX. LAWN AREAS TOBE PREPARED WITH 4" OF PLANTING SOIL MIX PER SPECIFICATIONS.3. AFTER BEDS ARE PREPARED, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR IS TO LOCATESHRUBS AND TREE AS SHOWN ON PLANS. SHRUB AND TREE LOCATIONS ARE TO BEAPPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BEFORE THEY ARE PLANTED.4. ALL DISTURBED AREAS THAT ARE NOT SHOWN AS PAVED OR PLANTED BED ARE TOBE SEEDED AS LAWN. PREPARE LAWN AS PER SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS,UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.5. ALL PLANTS TO COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI 260.1"AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK".6. MAINTAIN AND WARRANTY ALL LIVING PLANT MATERIAL AS PER SPECIFICATIONS.Scale: 1" = 50'PLANTING PLAN: TREES AND SEED MIXES10010'20'0050'100'
TO: Planning and Development Board
FROM: Megan Wilson, Senior Planner
DATE: November 20, 2017
RE: Proposed Collegetown Design Guidelines and Future Amendments to the
Collegetown Area Form Districts
After a detailed review of the Board’s recommended revisions to the proposed Downtown Design
Guidelines, staff has noted that many of the changes would also apply to the proposed Collegetown
Design Guidelines. A detailed list of the requested revisions to the Downtown document is
attached, and a second list of those revisions applicable to the Collegetown document has been
prepared as well. To facilitate the review of the Collegetown document at the November 28th
meeting, please know that the listed changes will be included in the Board’s recommendation to
the Common Council, along with additional revisions discussed at next week’s meeting.
As discussed at previous meetings, staff is working on a proposal to amend the Collegetown Area
Form Districts to address issues identified by Winter & Company, the Planning Board, and staff.
Several of these amendments are related to setback requirements, but there is also a need to address
issues related to aerial access and building height, particularly as it relates to construction on steep
slopes. While it was intended that the proposed amendments would be ready for review at the
November meeting, the issues are very complicated and additional time is needed to analyze and
prepare the proposals. It is anticipated that the proposed zoning amendments will be ready for
review within the next 1-2 months. Staff is recommending that the approval process for the design
guidelines moves forward now and that the zoning amendments be considered in early 2018.
Staff will attend the November 28th Planning Board meeting to discuss the design guidelines and
answer any questions. Please feel free to contact me prior to the meeting with any questions or
concerns.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
JoAnn Cornish, Director
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
1
Planning and Development Board’s Recommended Revisions
to the Downtown Design Guidelines, dated August 2017
~ October 24, 2017 ~
Add client committee to acknowledgements page.
Page 7, Design Review Process: Revise text to read “All recommendations from the design
review process are non-binding unless they are made a condition of site plan approval, or
have been fully incorporated into the approved set of drawings.
Page 15, Tuning Fork: Revise text to read “Because the Tuning Fork likes adjacent to two
historic districts and includes a portion of one of these and is also a gateway to
Downtown, it strongly influences the traditional character of the greater Downtown Area.”
Page 41, SD.24: Make the word “panel” plural in the final bullet.
Page 44, SD.31:
o Change SD.31 to a priority guideline
o Revise the second bullet to read “Shield site lighting to avoid minimize off-site
glare.”
Page 46, Adaptive Reuse and Incorporating Existing Buildings: Revise text to read “These
practices are particularly relevant in locally and nationally designated historic districts
and in the West State Street Character area, where an eclectic mix of buildings is a key
feature.”
Page 46, SD.34: Revise guideline to read “Encourage reuse of an existing building instead of
developing a new building, especially within or adjacent to local or national historic districts
and in the West State Street character area.”
Page 53, BD.5: Revise second bullet to read “Vertically align windows on upper and lower
floors.”
Page 53, BD.9: Change BD.9 to a priority guideline.
Page 54, BD.11: Change BD.11 to a priority guideline.
Page 56, Roof Materials Chart: Change “Asphalt Tile” to “Asphalt Shingle” and revise the
chart to indicate that asphalt shingle is not an appropriate roofing material in the Downtown
Core or Tuning Fork character areas.
Page 61, BD.17: Change BD.17 to a priority guideline.
Page 62, Parking Garages:
o Correct opening narrative to indicate that “Street Level Interest” is on page 65.
o Revise the caption of “Wrap with an active use” to note that this method is the
preferred screen method.
o Move the image of the preferred screen method to be the top photograph.
Page 63, BD.21: Add text to bullets (to be provided by M. Johnston)
Page 65, BD.26:
o Revise first bullet to remove “(MU-1 and MU-2)”.
o Revise third bullet to read “Apply these guidelines to a parking garage that occurs at
the street level. As stated on page 62, the ideal solution is wrapping the garage
with active uses.”
2
Page 70, BD.27: Revise guideline to read “Use a combination of “façade articulation” and
“massing variation” methods as shown in Figure 13 and as specified in more detailed in
items A.-E. on pages 71-75.”
Pages 71-75: Revise the headings as follows:
o A. Maintaining Compatibility with Traditional Scale at the Street
o B. Addressing a Sensitive Edge Condition
o C. Creek Walk
o D. Maintaining Public Views/Increasing Solar Access
o E. Creating Outdoor Space
Page 71, A. Maintaining Compatibility with Traditional Scale at the Street: Under the
“Width” section, reduce the dimension of a long wall in the West State Street character area
to greater than or equal to 60 ft. and reduce the dimension of a short wall to less than 60 ft.
Page 72, B. Addressing a Sensitive Edge Condition: Revise the text of the intent to read
“Use one or more of the following options to address when a potentially incompatible
building is proposed adjacent to a sensitive edge condition.”
Page 74, C. Creek Walk:
o Revise the bullets to read as follows:
“Option One: The building should provide an increased setback (A6) of at
least 5 feet from the required setback line for the first two stories, and an
increased stepback (A&) of at least 10 additional feet for any portion
above two stories.”
“Option Two: Buildings over 2 stories can be completely setback (A6)
fifteen feet from the required setback line.”
o Label the left diagram “Option One” and label the right diagram “Option 2”.
Page 76, Interior Façade Articulation:
o Add a new bullet as the first bullet to read “Any façade visible to the public.”
o Revise the text following the bullets to read “Use minimal articulation methods to
express human scale on an interior façade that is not visible to the public;
additional articulation there is encouraged but not required.” Label this text as
guideline BD.28 and make this a secondary guideline.
Page 88, DC.1: Revise second bullet to read “An additional setback area may be appropriate
to provide an expanded sidewalk, an entry plaza, landscaped area or other outdoor feature
provided that it is still designed to establish a street edge through materials or other features.
Page 90, WSS.1:
o Revise the first bullet to read “Setbacks of zero to fifteen (0-15) feet are appropriate
for all street-facing facades (or as required by zoning).
o Revise second bullet to read “An additional setback area may be appropriate to
provide an expanded sidewalk, an entry plaza, landscaped area or other outdoor
feature provided that it is still designed to establish a street edge through materials or
other features.
Additional editorial revisions throughout (missing punctuation, extra spaces, etc.)
1
Planning and Development Board’s Recommended Revisions
to the Collegetown Design Guidelines, dated August 2017
~ November 28, 2017 ~
Add client committee to acknowledgements page.
Page 7, Design Review Process: Revise text to read “All recommendations from the design
review process are non-binding unless they are made a condition of site plan approval, or
have been fully incorporated into the approved set of drawings.
Page 39, SD.22: Make the word “panel” plural in the final bullet.
Page 42, SD.29:
o Change SD.31 to a priority guideline
o Revise the second bullet to read “Shield site lighting to avoid minimize off-site
glare.”
Page 49, BD.5: Revise second bullet to read “Vertically align windows on upper and lower
floors.”
Page 49, BD.9: Change BD.9 to a priority guideline.
Page 50, BD.11: Change BD.11 to a priority guideline.
Page 52, Roof Materials Chart: Change “Asphalt Tile” to “Asphalt Shingle” and revise the
chart to indicate that asphalt shingle is not an appropriate roofing material in the
Collegetown Core character area.
Page 57, BD.17: Change BD.17 to a priority guideline.
Page 59, BD.19: Add text to bullets (to be provided by M. Johnston)
Page 66, BD.25: Revise guideline to read “Use a combination of “façade articulation” and
“massing variation” methods as shown in Figure 12 and as specified in more detailed in
items A.-D. on pages 67-70.”
Pages 71-75: Revise the headings as follows:
o A. Maintaining Compatibility with Traditional Scale at the Street
o B. Addressing a Sensitive Edge Condition
o C. Maintaining Public Views/Increasing Solar Access
o D. Creating Outdoor Space
Page 68, B. Addressing a Sensitive Edge Condition: Revise the text of the intent to read
“Use one or more of the following options to address when a potentially incompatible
building is proposed adjacent to a sensitive edge condition.”
Page 71, Interior Façade Articulation:
o Add a new bullet as the first bullet to read “Any façade visible to the public.”
o Revise the text following the bullets to read “Use minimal articulation methods to
express human scale on an interior façade that is not visible to the public;
additional articulation there is encouraged but not required.” Label this text as
guideline BD.26 and make this a secondary guideline.
Additional editorial revisions throughout (missing punctuation, extra spaces, etc.)
1
To: Planning and Development Board
From: Megan Wilson, Senior Planner
Date: November 21, 2017
Re: Parks and Recreation Master Plan
Beginning in the Fall of 2016, the City has worked with PROS Consulting to develop a Parks and
Recreation Master Plan that will guide the future of the City’s parkland and recreation
programming. The plan provides a system-wide approach to managing and operating the City’s
nearly 380 acres of parkland and more than three miles of publicly-accessible waterfront. The
plan addresses all City parks, with special attention to Stewart and Cass Parks as regional
destinations on the waterfront. The consultant team worked with stakeholders and City staff to
collect data, conduct site assessments, and gather public input. Community events were held in
January and July 2017 to involve residents of all ages in the planning process. In addition, two
surveys were conducted in early 2017, including a county-wide statistically valid survey. The City
also collaborated with the Town of Ithaca and Tompkins County to consider alternative
governance models for the waterfront parks that would improve the maintenance, management,
and funding of these parks. All of this information was used to shape goals and recommendations
for four topic areas: Governance and Operations; Finance; Recreation Programming; and Land
and Facilities.
The draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan is now available for review. In addition to the plan
itself, there are four technical reports that summarize different analyses and components of the
planning process that inform the plan. The draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the technical
reports are available by going to the “Document Center” on the City web site
(www.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter), under “Planning & Development” > “Parks &
Recreation Master Plan - November 2017”.
The Parks and Recreation Master Plan is proposed for adoption as part of Phase II of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. As you know, the Planning Board is responsible for recommending a plan
to Common Council for adoption as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff will attend the
November 28th Planning Board meeting to present an overview of the draft plan and answer any
questions. The Board will then have time to review and discuss the draft. It would be helpful to
have the Board’s recommendation, including any recommended modifications, at either the
December 2017 or January 2018 meeting. Please contact me at mwilson@cityofithaca.org or 274-
6560 if you have any questions prior to the meeting.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
City of Ithaca, New York
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
November 2017
ii
Acknowledgements
Mayor
Svante L. Myrick
Common Council
Cynthia Brock
George McGonigal
Joseph “Seph” Murtagh
Ducson Nguyen
Donna Fleming
Rob Gearhart
Graham Kerslick
Stephen J. Smith
Michael Decatur
Deborah Mohlenhoff
Parks Commission
Ellen Leventry, Chair
Daniel Krall
Margaret Hobbie
Roberta Moudry
City of Ithaca Staff
Dan Cogan
JoAnn Cornish
Jim D’Alterio
Jeanne Grace
Tim Logue
Elizabeth Vance
Megan Wilson
City of Ithaca Planning
Department Contact
Information
108 E Green Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
(607) 274-6550
Consultant Team
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
iii
1.1 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN ........................................................................................................... 1
1.3 PLANNING PROCESS ............................................................................................................................................... 2
1.4 PARK AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 3
2.1 PARKS & RECREATION ............................................................................................................................................ 5
2.2 OTHER NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................... 8
2.3 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................................... 9
2.4 RECREATION TRENDS ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................... 13
2.5 RECREATION TRENDS IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................................... 15
3.1 PROCESS ................................................................................................................................................................. 16
3.2 KEY THEMES ............................................................................................................................................................ 16
3.3 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 19
4.1 EVALUATING THE CURRENT SYSTEM: INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................................... 21
5.1 EVALUATING THE CURRENT SYSTEM: PROGRAMS ........................................................................................ 24
5.2 CORE PROGRAM AREAS ....................................................................................................................................... 24
5.3 CORE PROGRAM AREA RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 27
5.4 PROGRAM STRATEGY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 28
5.5 PROGRAM STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 36
5.6 MARKETING AND PROMOTION ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................. 37
5.7 MARKETING AND PROMOTION RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................... 38
5.8 VOLUNTEER AND PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................ 38
6.1 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................................ 44
6.2 PER CAPITA “GAPS”................................................................................................................................................ 44
6.3 SERVICE AREA ANALYSIS/EQUITY MAPPING ................................................................................................... 46
6.4 EQUITY MAPPING “GAPS” AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................ 46
7.1 GOVERNANCE ......................................................................................................................................................... 63
7.2 FINANCING AND FUNDING .................................................................................................................................... 65
7.3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) ................................................................................................................... 67
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
1
CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Located at the south end of Cayuga Lake, Ithaca is the governmental seat and lively urban center of Tompkins County
in the Finger Lakes region of upstate New York. The Ithaca area is also home to internationally-renowned educational
institutions including Cornell University, Ithaca College, and Tompkins Cortland Community College. These
educational institutions draw people from around the world to the community and employ a significant portion of
the local workforce. However, these institutions own a substantial amount of land, and this, combined with a strong
not-for-profit sector, results in more than 60% of all property within the City being classified as tax-exempt. The
remaining property owners must shoulder all of the tax burden, which results in funding pressure for the park
system.
It is anticipated that the City of Ithaca will continue to grow in the upcoming years. According to the Comprehensive
Plan (Plan Ithaca: A Vision for Our Future), much of the land within the City of Ithaca is already developed, and
redeveloping underutilized properties will be essential. As the population grows and demographics continue to
change, it will be important for Ithaca to be resilient and foster increasingly compact and well-designed mixed-use
development in suitable locations. By doing so, the City of Ithaca will help reduce tax burden while continuing to
demonstrate sustainability, conservation, and economic development. As this happens, the parks system will
become increasingly important and will continue to provide cherished green spaces and recreational opportunities
for residents and visitors alike.
The City’s existing park system offers a variety of parks and amenities. The city is home to several regional
destinations: Cass Park, Stewart Park, and the Cayuga Waterfront Trail. The success of the park system is highlighted
by these signature parks along Cayuga Lake. Both residents and non-residents take advantage of the shoreline and
scenic vistas afforded to them by the waterfront parks. The City also provides recreation opportunities via its various
neighborhood parks. Located throughout the City, the neighborhood parks provide residents with playgrounds,
fields, and much needed greenspace close to home.
Currently, the park system is not managed by one department. The City of Ithaca Public Works and Forestry Division
maintains most of the system, but there are other entities that manage different aspects of the system including the
Ithaca Youth Bureau (Cass Park and recreational programming), Greater Ithaca Activities Center (recreational
programming), various Friends Groups (capital planning and financing), and the Recreation Partnership (agreement
with surrounding municipalities) – among others.
1.2 PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
This Master Plan provides a system-wide approach to managing and operating the nearly 380 acres of parkland and
more than three miles of publicly-accessible waterfront. This plan establishes recommendations for the City of Ithaca
to achieve the vision the community has for the park and recreation system as well as to achieve greater financial
sustainability without sacrificing the value of the park assets and amenities or reducing the level of experiences and
services available to users. This Master Plan strives to strengthen the existing inventory of parkland, pathways, and
amenities:
378.52 acres of parkland
14.6 miles of trails
22 diamond ball fields
8 multi-purpose fields
8 tennis courts
7 playgrounds
4 picnic shelters
3 basketball courts
2 outdoor pools
1 skate park
1 splash pad
1 ice skating rink
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
2
1.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The City of Ithaca Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update followed an iterative process of data collection, public
input, on-the-ground study, assessment of existing conditions, market research, and open dialogue with local
leadership and key stakeholders, as illustrated by the following:
The community was involved throughout the development of the Master Plan, and the planning process sought
public input to identify their visions and expectations for the future of the City of Ithaca parks system. Stakeholder
interviews and focus group meetings were held early in the process and were followed by public forums. A
statistically-valid community needs survey was distributed to a random sample of both City and County residents,
and an online survey was offered to help prioritize and identify the issues that need to be addressed in the plan and
key recommendations that need to be implemented over the next five to ten years. The information gleaned from
the community engagement process was combined with technical research to produce the final Master Plan.
The Master Plan is not an end product in itself. The plan is rather a means to guide the provision of parks and
recreation and advance the overall mission and vision of the City of Ithaca. The goal is to a guide in the delivery of
excellent parks, trails, public facilities, activities, programs, and services that will contribute to community prosperity
and improve the quality of life for residents and visitors to Ithaca.
The purpose of the Plan is three fold:
First, it puts into place a systematic and ongoing inventory, analysis, and assessment process that help the
City now and in the future.
Second, this effort will determine the context of recreation facilities and programs system-wide.
Third, it will provide guidance in determining the effectiveness of programs and services, marketing
strategies, and land management.
This, ultimately, will guide the City of Ithaca in an appropriate direction for current and future programs and services,
and provide specific means to meet the vision and mission for the City. This is essentially a process of answering,
“Where are we? Where do we want to go? And, how do we get there?”
Review of
Related
Planning
Documents
Demographic
and Trends
Analysis
Stakeholder
Engagement
and
Community
Survey
Parks &
Facilities
Assessment
Recreation
Program
Assessment
Financial,
Governance,
and CIP
Analysis
Action Plan
Figure 1-Master Plan Process
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
3
1.3.1 MASTER PLAN GOALS
The goals of this Master Plan include:
Engage the community, leadership and stakeholders through innovative public input means to build a
shared vision for parks, recreation programs and facilities in Ithaca for the next five to ten years.
Utilize a wide variety of data sources and best practices, including a statistically-valid survey to predict
trends and patterns of use and how to address unmet needs in the City of Ithaca.
Determine unique Level of Service Standards to develop appropriate actions pertaining to parks, recreation
programs and facilities that reflect the City’s strong commitment to providing high quality recreation for
the community.
Shape financial and operational preparedness through innovative and “next” practices to achieve the
strategic objectives and recommended actions.
Develop a dynamic and realistic strategic action plan that creates a road map to ensure long-term success
and financial sustainability for the City’s parks, recreation programs and facilities, as well as action steps to
support the family-oriented community and businesses that call Ithaca home.
1.4 PARK AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
The following sections summarize the high level strategies recommended in this Master Plan. Strategies are
categorized into four topic areas:
Governance and Operations
Finance
Recreation Programming
Land and Facilities
Each topic area presents a “vision” followed by corresponding strategies. All strategies have specific tactics
associated with implementation and can be found in Chapter Six.
1.4.1 GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS
The City of Ithaca will have a unified, formalized, and sustainable parks and recreation system that leverages existing
and future collaborations and partnerships.
STRATEGIES
Develop and formalize a governance model.
Prepare an organizational structure to meet future demand.
Clarify partnership groups’ roles and responsibilities.
Update policies and procedures on an annual basis. Ensure all staff have access to them and that they create
maximum flexibility for staff in the field to do their work in a timely manner.
Develop a stronger volunteer system that builds advocacy and support for the parks system.
Promote financial sustainability through facility management practices.
1.4.2 FINANCE
The City of Ithaca parks and recreation system will be sustainably funded to continue providing enriched services to
residents.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
4
STRATEGIES
Develop a consistent per capita and/or per acre funding strategy.
Develop an earned income strategy for facilities, programs, and operations.
Develop a long term financial plan that is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City of Ithaca and
support the initiatives and strategies as reflected in the City’s adopted plans. The City’s goals and objectives,
which affect operating funds, need to be consistent with fund availability and financial projections.
1.4.3 RECREATION PROGRAMMI NG
The City of Ithaca will continue to provide recreation programming commensurate with community need while
advancing the breadth and scope of opportunity for residents.
STRATEGIES
Implement consistent management principles for all programs to ensure equitable, quality service delivery
and long-term financial sustainability.
Align program offerings with community needs and priorities.
Enhance facility use partnership policies.
Enhance marketing and promotion practices.
Enhance special events capabilities pertaining to: infrastructure and staff support, partnership agreements
(accountability and financially), and investing back into the space/facility.
1.4.4 LAND AND FACILITIES
The City of Ithaca will maintain and operate a diverse system of parkland and facilities that keep pace with the
evolving needs of the community.
STRATEGIES
Ensure the growth of the parks and trails system keeps pace with the needs of the community, but does
not outpace the financial or organizational resources of the City of Ithaca.
Complete a network of open space corridors and trails that connect neighborhoods, schools, commercial
areas, and local destinations to parks and facilities.
Ensure the development of recreation facilities keeps pace with the needs of the community, but does not
outpace the financial or organizational resources of the City of Ithaca.
Establish consistent and comprehensive maintenance and design standards for parks, trails, and facilities
to uphold the quality of the user experience and promote financial sustainability.
Improve key facilities and amenities to address deficiencies and/or meet the changing needs of the
community.
Create a policy for underutilized facilities and parkland.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
5
CHAPTER TWO – COMMUNITY PROFILE
2.1 PARKS & RECREATION
There are currently 22 parks in the City of Ithaca system, including one golf course. Additionally, the City of Ithaca
owns two special use facilities (Ithaca Youth Bureau building and the Greater Ithaca Activities Center). Currently, the
parks system is maintained by the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Ithaca Youth Bureau (IYB). The DPW
has five full-time employees and six seasonal laborers that assist with the operations and maintenance of
neighborhood parks, Stewart Park and the waterfront trail. Additionally, the IYB has 14.5 full-time positions that
contribute to the park system. IYB staff maintain Cass Park; however, the majority of full-time staff are for recreation
services and not maintenance.
The park system is also overseen by a Parks Commission that convenes monthly. The Parks Commission reviews and
makes recommendations on issues affecting the parks, open spaces, and cemeteries to the Board of Public Works,
Common Council, and other City agencies. They make recommendations regarding the use and maintenance of
parks, open spaces, and related facilities. In addition, they review significant new projects or changes involving the
use, design, construction, and management relating to parks and make recommendations for the acquisition or
designation of new parkland.
2.1.1 PARKS AND PARK FACILITIES
AUBURN PARK (AUBURN STREET/26.-4-1)
Auburn Park (.28 acres) is a moderately used neighborhood park that is accessed by public road. The park has a
playground feature, multi-purpose field, benches, and a backstop.
BAKER PARK (ELMIRA ROAD/105.-6-5)
Baker Park (1.03 acres) is a lightly used neighborhood park with little site amenities. Currently, the park contains five
benches and one park sign.
BRINDLEY PARK (WEST BUFFALO STREET/58.-1-1)
Brindley Park (.48 acres) is a lightly used neighborhood park but it can be accessed by the waterfront trail system in
addition to public road access. The park has a boat launch, water access, waterfront trailhead sign, and a bench.
BRYANT PARK (ITHACA ROAD/67.-10-1)
Bryant Park (.73 acres) is a lightly used neighborhood park with little site amenities. Currently, the park contains one
aluminum picnic table and two benches.
CASS PARK (701 TAUGHANNOCK BLVD/MULTIPLE PARCELS)
Cass Park (137.7 acres) is a regional park and is the second largest park in the system. The park is home to the
majority of the City’s “active recreation” opportunities. The site is heavily used throughout every season. Amenities
found on-site include an enclosed ice rink, Olympic swimming pool, wading pool, tennis courts, picnic pavilion,
multiple athletic fields (diamond and rectangular), docks, playgrounds, restrooms, drinking fountains, and water
access with docks.
COLUMBIA STREET PARK (COLUMBIA STREET/81.-7-18.2)
Columbia Street Park (.25 acres) is a rarely used neighborhood park. The site only contains two park benches.
CONLEY PARK (FIRST STREET/25.-3-1.22)
Conley Park (.73 acres) is a moderately used neighborhood park. The park contains one of the City’s “Planet Walk”
markers (Neptune) and also contains permaculture gardens (along with informational signage) and multiple park
benches.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
6
CONWAY PARK (CASCADILLA STREET/44.-7-1)
Conway Park (.57 acres) is a heavily used neighborhood park and contains a playground and basketball court.
DEWITT PARK (NORTH CAYUGA STREET/61.-2-11)
DeWitt Park (1.66 acres) is a heavily used neighborhood park located in the heart of downtown Ithaca. The park is
home to a Farmer’s Market and contains a bike rack, war memorial, multiple benches, and a memorial garden. It
should be noted that DeWitt Park is owned by the Presbyterian Church but is maintained by the City of Ithaca.
DRYDEN PARK (DRYDEN ROAD/63.-5-7)
Dryden Park (.08 acres) is a lightly used neighborhood park, but is one of the only green spaces near Cornell
University that is not owned by the college. The site does not have any active recreation amenities but does include
four benches for park visitors.
HILLVIEW PARK (HILLVIEW PLACE/92.-5-9.1)
Hillview Park (.74 acres) is a lightly used neighborhood park which experiences the most use during the summer and
fall. Currently, there are no site amenities.
ITHACA FALLS NATURAL AREA (LAKE STREET/MULTIPLE PARCELS)
Ithaca Falls (11.31 acres) is a heavily used park that features a spectacular waterfall view. Currently, part of the park
is designated as a natural area with another part designated as a park. Recent improvements have been made to
the site and now the park includes a bike rack, walking trail to the falls, an accessible waterfall overlook area, garden
beds, and benches.
MACDANIELS PARK (WARREN PLACE/75.-1-23.2)
MacDaniels Park (3.07 acres) is a lightly used neighborhood park but is the only public greenspace in the surrounding
neighborhood. Currently, the site includes two picnic tables, a grill, and a bench.
MAPLEWOOD PARK (DRYDEN ROAD/66.-1-13)
Maplewood Park (.47 acres) is a rarely used neighborhood park located behind adjacent houses. It is a quiet and
private park with no amenities available on-site.
SOUTHWEST NATURAL AREA/NEGUNDO WOODS (ELMIRA ROAD/127.-1-1)
Negundo Woods (59.98 acres) is a rarely used natural area. It is currently utilized as a wetland and there are no
amenities available on-site.
STEWART PARK (STEWART PARK ROAD/2.-2-2)
Stewart Park (177.70 acres) is the system’s largest site and is a heavily used regional park. The park is located
adjacent to Cayuga Lake and has waterfront access along with direct access to the Cayuga Waterfront Trail. As the
City’s oldest park property, the site is supported by the Friends of Stewart Park in addition to City resources. Park
visitors will find picnic shelters, playgrounds, tennis courts, hard surface trails, grills, restrooms, boat racks, splash
pad, bocce ball courts, Newman Golf Course, and a carousel on-site. Additionally, Stewart Park is home to a bird
sanctuary.
STRAWBERRY FIELDS (CORNELL STREET/85.-6-14.1)
Strawberry Fields (9.16 acres) is a lightly used neighborhood park. Access to the site is limited; however, park visitors
will find a multi-use field and a backstop on-site.
THOMPSON PARK (NORTH CAYUGA STREET/45.-3-1)
Thompson Park (.56 acres) is a heavily used neighborhood park. The park contains one of the City’s “Planet Walk”
markers (Uranus), a pavilion, a fire bell monument, a picnic table, and access to a water/creek overlook area.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
7
TITUS FLATS “WOOD STREET ” (WOOD STREET/103.-3-12)
Titus Flats (4.25 acres) is a heavily used regional park. The site is home to the City’s only skate park which receives a
lot of use. Park visitors will also find a playground, basketball courts, hand ball court, bike racks, and bleachers on-
site.
TITUS TRIANGLE (TITUS AVENUE/94.-2-1)
Titus Triangle (.20 acres) is a lightly used neighborhood park. An active volunteer group helps maintain the park and
its garden beds. Park visitors will also find a creek overlook area, benches, and a water access/boat launch area on-
site.
VAN HORN PARK (TAUGHANNOCK BLVD./73.-4-1)
Van Horn Park (.06 acres) is a rarely used neighborhood park that does not currently contain any site amenities.
However, the area is maintained in part by Tompkins County Beautification.
WASHINGTON PARK (WASHINGTON STREET/59.-4-1)
Washington Park (1.85 acres) is a moderately used neighborhood park. As one of the system’s largest “small” parks,
the park is used by foot travelers as the site contains thru-park walkways. Park visitors will also find park benches
and trash cans on-site.
2.1.2 PARK LOCATION MAP
Figure 2-Park System Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
8
2.2 OTHER N ATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
Allen H. Treman State Park – This state park is one of the largest inland marinas in New York. It boasts 370 seasonal,
30 transient, and 30 dry boat slips. Additionally, the park has an 8-lane boat launch ramp. The marina is an excellent
port-of-call off the Barge Canal system at the south end of Cayuga Lake and within easy walking distance to the City
of Ithaca along the Cayuga Waterfront Trail.
Buttermilk Falls State Park – This state park takes its name from the foaming cascade formed by Buttermilk Creek
as it flows down the steep valley side toward Cayuga Lake. The upper park has a small lake, hiking trails through
woodlands and along the gorge and rim, picnic areas, and playing fields. The lower park has a campground, natural
pool, and playing fields.
Taughannock Falls State Park – This state park’s namesake waterfall is one of the outstanding natural attractions of
the Northeast. Taughannock Falls plunges 215 feet past rocky cliffs that tower nearly 400 feet above the gorge.
Gorge and rim trails offer spectacular views from above the falls and from below at the end of the gorge trail.
Campsites and cabins overlook Cayuga Lake, with marina, boat launch, and beach nearby. A multi-use trail winds
past sledding slopes and natural skating ponds. The park offers organized activities including tours through the
Taughannock Gorge and summer concerts along the lakefront.
2.2.1 TRAIL SYSTEM
Ithaca is well-served by an extensive trail system. Although the entire park system is not connected, there is good
connectivity around the waterfront parks and surrounding area. The following list represents Ithaca and the
surrounding area’s trail system:
Black Diamond Trail: keystone of a major trail system in the Ithaca area, and has been planned since the
1970s
Cayuga Waterfront Trail: connects Cass Park (western shore of Cayuga Lake) to Stewart Park (eastern shore)
East Ithaca Recreation Way: commuter trail on East Hill
Jim Schug Trail/Dryden Lake Trail: runs on an abandoned railroad bed (the Southern Central railway for
most of its existence part of the Lehigh Valley)
Lansing Town Trail: loop trail mostly in open fields with magnificent views of the Cayuga Lake Valley
South Hill Recreation Way: runs parallel to (NE of) Coddington Road in the Town of Ithaca
William and Hannah Pew Trail: connects East Ithaca Recreation Way with Tudor Park and the Snyder Hill /
Eastern Heights neighborhood
Additionally, planned trail system enhancements include:
East Shore Trail: extends along the hillside above the eastern shore of Cayuga Lake, connecting the City and
Town of Ithaca with Lansing
East-South Trail: connector trail extends from the terminus of South Hill Recreation Way
Gateway Trail/Buttermilk Falls Corridor: using the former DL&W right-of-way
Varna Trail/Fall Creek Trail: continuous segment on the Lehigh Valley (Elmira Cortland & Northern) railbed
from Varna to the East Ithaca Recreation Way at its northeast terminus
2.2.2 BUILDINGS AND DISTRICTS ON THE NRHP
Ithaca is home to 58 buildings and districts on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). A few, however, are
directly related to the parks system such as:
Cascadilla Boathouse (Stewart Park)
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
9
DeWitt Park Historic District (DeWitt Park)
2.2.3 CULTURE AND SCIENCE
Culture and science play a big role in the fabric of the Ithaca community. There are several local museums and points
of interest that cater to visitors and residents alike. The Ithaca Commons area is a downtown pedestrian only (except
for vehicle deliveries designated at certain times) linear experience that regularly hosts special events and mobile
vendors.
Local culture and science points of interest located in Ithaca include:
Cayuga Nature Center: an independent, private, non-profit educational organization
Cornell Lab of Ornithology: includes a Visitors’ Center and observation areas open to the public
Hangar Theatre: An old airport hangar renovated into a theatre on property adjacent to Cass Park
Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art: houses one of the finest collections of art in upstate New York
Museum of Earth: natural history museum
Sciencenter: a non-profit hands-on science museum
Wharton Studio Museum: Stewart Park is home to a facility that was used for American silent films
2.3 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
The Demographic Analysis provides an understanding of the population within and surrounding Ithaca, Indiana. This
analysis is reflective of the total population, and its key characteristics such as population density, age distribution,
households, gender, ethnicity, and household income.
It is important to note that future projections are all based on historical patterns and unforeseen circumstances
during or after the time of the projections could have a significant bearing on the validity of the final projections.
2.3.1 DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW
The total population of the City has recently experienced an increase of approximately 6.25%; from 30,014 in 2010
to 31,890 in 2016. The current estimated population is projected to continue its moderate growth, increasing to
33,168 individuals in 2021, and 36,100 by 2031.
According to U.S. Census reports, the total number of households in the target area has experienced a coinciding
upward trend, increasing approximately 6.98%, from 10,408 in 2010 to 11,134 in 2016. The City’s total households
are expected to continue to increase to 12,809 households by 2031.
Based on the 2010 Census, the population of the target area is well below the median age of the U.S. The City of
Ithaca’s median age is 23.8 whereas the U.S. median age is 38.0 years old. Projections show that the target area will
remain relatively unchanged in term of age segments through 2031. The City is projected to have a slight decrease
in the percentage of 18-24 year olds; while the 25-35 age segment is project to experience a slight increase.
The estimated 2016 population of the target area is predominantly White Alone (67%), with the Asian population
representing the largest minority (20%). Additionally, those of Hispanic/Latino origin represent just over 7% of the
City’s total current population. Future projections estimate that by 2031 the overall composition of the population
will become more diverse. Forecasts of the target area through 2031 expect a noticeable decrease in the White
Alone population (a decrease to 57%); coinciding with a significant increase amongst the Asian population (an
increase to 28%).
The City’s median household income ($31,169) and per capita income ($21,934) are both below the state and
national averages.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
10
It should be noted that the City of Ithaca’s demographic overview is influenced by the presence of two colleges
within close proximity: Cornell University and Ithaca College. The student populations influence demographic
categories but may affect population age segments and income levels the most.
2.3.2 METHODOLOGY
Demographic data used for the analysis was obtained from U.S. Census Bureau and from Environmental Systems
Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI), the largest research and development organization dedicated to Geographical
Information Systems (GIS) and specializing in population projections and market trends. All data was acquired in
December 2016 and reflects actual numbers as reported in the 2010 Censuses, and estimates for 2016 and 2021 as
obtained by ESRI. Straight line linear regression was utilized for projected 2026 and 2031 demographics. Ithaca’s City
boundaries that were utilized for the demographic analysis are shown below in Figure 1.
Figure 3-Target Area Boundaries
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
11
2.3.3 ITHACA POPULACE
The following implications are derived from a detailed demographic analysis located in the Demographics and
Trends Technical Report. Each implication is organized by the outlined demographic information sections.
POPULATION
The population is increasing and is
projected to experience 13.2%
population growth over the next 15
years. The number of households is
projected to experience a 15.04%
growth rate over the same
timeframe. What this means is that
the population will grow and
recreation services must grow
commensurate to the population.
Additionally, development will
continue over the next 15 years and
the parks and recreation system will
need to strategically invest,
develop, and maintain facilities in
relation to housing development areas. With the increased housing growth projections, this also should be an
indication that population projections may exceed the projections presented in this analysis. As more development
occurs, the parks and recreation system should have a “seat at the table” to discuss the size, type, and specifications
of any gained greenspace due to development.
AGE SEGMENTATION
The service area’s aging trend is largely kept in
check due to the surrounding colleges. However,
there is a component of the population that will
be aging and facilities focused on an actively
adult (55+ population) will assume an even
greater importance as the population changes in
the years to come. Age segments have different
proclivities towards activities. For example,
older adults may enjoy passive recreation
activities more so than active. However, multi-
generational facilities and services will be crucial
to Ithaca because the 18-34 age segment will still
represent 66% of the total population in 2031.
Therefore, an emphasis on the millennial
generation will be important over the next 15
years. Additionally, co-planning with Cornell
University and Ithaca College will need to be an
emphasis.
Figure 4- City of Ithaca Population Growth Projections
Figure 5- City of Ithaca Age Segment Growth Projections
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
12
RACE AND ETHNICITY
A more diverse population will require continued
foresight and planning on Ithaca’s behalf. Traditional
programming and service offerings may not be
appropriate for a population comprised of a large
minority population. For example, the
Hispanic/Latino population may use passive
recreation differently than other user groups and for
different durations. Picnic shelters for large (typically
multi-generational) families is important to the
Hispanic/Latino population whereas it may not be as
high significance to the White Alone population.
Additionally, there are some Asian populations that
utilize public lands for urban agriculture which may
be a non-traditional use depending on the
community/region within the United States. Research also shows that barriers to recreation program/service
participation are different based upon race. For example, Hispanic/Latino and Black Alone populations report lack
of connectivity via sidewalks and transportation are big barriers to recreation participation.
HOUSEHOLDS AND INCOME
Ithaca’s median household income is projected to decrease
by 2031. This trend is probably attributed to the growing
college-age population as incomes tend to be much lower
for these residencies. However, overall per capita income
is projected to increase over the next 15 years. The
dichotomy between median household income and overall
per capita income can refer to the notion of existing
salaries and cost of living will increase even though more
college-age individuals will be taking residency within the
City of Ithaca. Current national trends focus on health,
wellness, and lifestyle activities. As the population
continues to age, increased attention will be made towards
utilization of parks and recreation services and improving
quality of life. However, there will still be a large younger
population segment existing within Ithaca which will also
command more lifestyle activities. Ithaca has an
opportunity to position its system to prepare for 2031 by
identifying programs and services that will be the most
salient to age segments and ethnicities while achieving
alignment with willingness to pay.
Figure 6- City of Ithaca Population by Race Growth Projections
Figure 7- City of Ithaca Comparative Income Characteristics
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
13
2.4 RECREATION TRENDS ANALYSIS
The following charts show sport and leisure market potential data from ESRI. A Market Potential Index (MPI)
measures the probable demand for a product or service in Ithaca, Indiana. The MPI shows the likelihood that an
adult resident of the target area will participate in certain activities when compared to the US National average. The
National average is 100, therefore numbers below 100 would represent a lower than average participation rate, and
numbers above 100 would represent higher than average participation rate.
ESRI’s MPI for a product or service for an area is calculated by the ratio of the local consumption rate for a product
or service for the area to the US consumption rate for the product or service, multiplied by 100. MPIs are derived
from the information integration from four consumer surveys. Each survey respondent is associated with a
“Tapestry” segment and can therefore produce an expected number of consumers.
The target area is compared to the national average in four (4) categories – general sports, fitness, outdoor activity,
and money spent on miscellaneous recreation. Overall, residents of Ithaca demonstrate participation trends that
have above average potential index numbers in all categories. Of particular interest given the estimated number
of participants and MPIs are:
Participation in sports such as soccer, volleyball, basketball, and softball
Fitness related programming in jogging/running, yoga, weight lifting, Pilates, and aerobics
Outdoor activities including backpacking, canoeing/kayaking, horseback riding, and hiking
Money spent on painting/drawing, visiting art galleries, overnight camping, and going dancing
It is recommended that the City of Ithaca examines the MPIs below to gain a sense of local consumption behavior
based upon market research. The MPIs should be one component of an overall demand analysis including
participation rates, market competition, community survey, and other community input information. The MPIs that
equal or are above 100, are identified as being popular consumption activities; however, programming should not
solely center on high MPI activities because service providers often need to provide niche activities. Higher MPI
activities can relate to Ithaca core services but may not be synonymous.
As seen below (Figures 8-11), the following sport and leisure trends are most prevalent for residents within the City
of Ithaca. All figures are sorted by the estimated number of participants in descending order.
Figure 8- General Sports MPIs
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
14
Figure 11- Commercial Recreation MPIs
Figure 9- Fitness MPIs
Figure 10- Outdoor Activity MPIs
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
15
2.4.1 INTEGRATING LOCAL AND NATIONAL TRENDS
The number one general sport activity for Ithaca is basketball. This is measured in terms of estimated number of
participants. Other popular sport activities include soccer, volleyball, softball, football, and golf. All general sports
categories exceed the average USA participation rates in terms of MPI. Fitness activities have high MPIs with
jogging/running, Yoga, weight lifting, and Pilates being the top four. All outdoor activities except for fishing (fresh
water), fishing (salt water), and boating (power) and have an above average MPI. The most popular money spent on
recreation activity is attending movies. Painting/drawing and going to an art gallery have the highest MPI scores for
Ithaca. Of note, Ithaca residents are more apt to spend a lower amount (between $1 and $99) on recreation
equipment compared to higher dollar amount categories ($100-$249 and $250+).
Information released by Sports & Fitness Industry Association’s (SFIA) 2016 Study of Sports, Fitness, and Leisure
Activities Topline Participation Report reveals that the most popular sport and recreational activities include: fitness
walking, treadmill, running/jogging, free weights, and road bicycling. Most of these activities appeal to both young
and old alike, can be done in most environments, are enjoyed regardless of level of skill, and have minimal economic
barriers to entry. These popular activities also have appeal because of their social application. For example, although
fitness activities are mainly self-directed, people enjoy walking and biking with other individuals because it can offer
a degree of camaraderie.
From a traditional team sport standpoint, basketball ranks highest among all sports, with approximately 23.4 million
people reportedly participating in 2015. In general, nearly every sport with available data experienced an increase
in participation, which is a reversal from the five-year trend of declining participation in sports. Sports that have
experienced significant participation growth are squash, boxing, lacrosse, rugby, roller hockey, and field hockey – all
of which have experienced growth in excess of 30% over the last five years. More recently, roller hockey, racquetball,
indoor soccer, boxing, and flag football were the activities with the most rapid growth during the last year.
2.5 RECREATION TRENDS IMPLICATIONS
City of Ithaca residents exhibit a high interest in recreation activities. Additionally, according to local trends, there is
not one recreation category (e.g., fitness, sports, outdoor recreation) that supersedes another. This is important for
the City of Ithaca to understand because trends indicate a desire for a balanced, well-rounded scope of opportunity.
Where this balance may be difficult is in relation to pricing services. Local trends indicate a lower desire to spend on
recreation equipment (which is only one indicator of purchasing interest), but there is a strong desire to always have
more provided. Additionally, as mentioned before, there is a limited tax base for parks and recreation so generating
earned income by identifying alternative streams of revenue will be paramount.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
16
CHAPTER THREE – COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT
3.1 PROCESS
A comprehensive public engagement process yielded community direction for the City of Ithaca parks system.
Specific engagement opportunities consisted of:
Stakeholder focus groups and interviews
Public meetings
Online survey
Statistically-valid community survey
3.2 KEY THEMES
The public engagement process and technical research review indicates that there is a lot of “ownership” for the
City of Ithaca park system. There are many organizations that collaborate to make the park system what it is today.
It will be important for this Master Plan to identify all the existing and potential partnerships/collaborations and
provide guidance as to a structure that will streamline the park system’s oversight.
As evidenced by on-site observations and personal communication, the Ithaca park system provides water access to
residents that otherwise would be non-existent. Two parks in particular, Cass Park and Stewart Park, are community
icons and should be treated as signature parks. With a diverse mix of parks (including many smaller neighborhood
parks), it will be important to develop a strategy moving forward that will address underutilized spaces and the
equitable distribution of community amenities.
Additionally, funding the system will require out-of-the-box thinking as there are large tax exempt entities within
City limits that do not contribute to funding the system. In terms of ongoing operations and maintenance and capital
expenditures, it will be important to consider alternative approaches to make up for the limited tax base.
There are also several steps necessary for the City of Ithaca to take in order to provide the desired “future” park
system. The planning process provides insight into perceived community barriers to participation, preferred
communication methods, and desired recreation programs and facilities.
Park system around the country continue to wrestle with the principle of “equity.” Equity refers to providing equal
opportunity for participation and engagement regardless of income, race, physical ability, location of residence, etc.
An important first step is to identify what community members perceive as barriers that are preventing them from
engaging more with the park system.
City of Ithaca residents report the following five items as their top barrier:
1) I do not know what is offered
2) I do not know locations of facilities
3) Too far from our residence
4) Program or facility not offered
5) Facilities are not well maintained
The top five list highlights important factors for planning considerations. The top two relate to communication (see
next section) and the remaining three represent distinct challenges: geospatial distribution of programs and
facilities, right balance of recreation program and facility opportunities/availability, and facility maintenance or level
of care.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
17
3.2.1 GEOSPATIAL DISTRIBUT ION
Willingness to travel to a park facility to participate in a given program or to simply enjoy the park vary by community.
Since this perceived barrier is high on the list, it is important to look at the distribution of park land types, program
locations, and connectivity. The park system has a wealth of neighborhood park acres; however, the distribution in
relation to population density will be an indicator of how well the City of Ithaca is serving its residents (see Chapter
Six for a detailed analysis).
An important note for consideration is integrating the recent national movement to adopt a “10-minute walk to a
neighborhood park” as the Trust for Public Land (TPL) and Urban Land Institute (ULI) have brought into mainstream
park planning.
3.2.2 FINDING THE BALANCE BETWEEN T HE EXISTING A ND T HE FUTURE
Community residents report not having their desired recreation program or facility available as a high barrier to their
engagement with the park system. As demographics shift, so do recreation priorities. There is nothing wrong with a
park system that evolves with its community. It is those systems that do not evolved that run the risk of losing touch
with the future park user.
To help identify future need, the consultant team implemented a statistically-valid community survey that solicited
feedback on a variety of issues related to parks and recreation within the City of Ithaca. Respondents were asked to
identify if they have needs for specific facilities and programs. Of note, survey respondents were asked if they have
a need for a program or facility and to what degree their need is currently being met. The results allowed the
consultant team to synthesize needs and importance to understand community service provision.
Taking the analysis a step further, “Priority Rankings” are developed that provides a hierarchal representation of
community desire that the City of Ithaca can use as a foundation in future service decisions. Priority Rankings
combine community need and importance (as learned from the survey) with information gleaned from other public
engagement processes and technical research.
RECREATION PROGRAMS
As denoted by the Priority Rankings below, relative to one
another included in the list, the top tier program priorities (or
focus areas) include:
Special events
Farmers’ market
Adult fitness & wellness programs
Nature programs/environmental education
Adult continuing education programs
Adult sports programs
Adult art, dance, and performing arts
Adult programs for 50 years & older
Water fitness programs
Figure 12- Program Priority Rankings
Program Overall Rank
Special events 1
Farmers' market 2
Adult fitness & wellness programs 3
Nature programs/environmental education 4
Adult continuing education programs 5
Adult sports programs 6
Adult art, dance, and performing arts 7
Adult programs for 50 years & older 8
Water fitness programs 9
Travel programs 10
Youth summer camp programs 11
Programs with your pets 12
Outdoor challenge programs 13
Youth learn to swim programs 14
Before & after school programs 15
Programs for teens 16
Youth art, dance, and performing arts 17
Adult ice sports & activities 18
Tennis lessons & leagues 19
Youth sports programs 20
Programs for people with disabilities 21
Preschool programs 22
Youth fitness & wellness programs 23
Youth ice sports & activities 24
Golf lessons & leagues 25
Mentoring for youth 26
Birthday parties 27
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
18
Based on the priority rankings, it is recommended that the City continue to focus on community special events and
bolstering the existing Farmers’ Market (both in DeWitt Park and at the stand-alone facility on Steamboat Landing).
Additionally, the priority rankings show a desire to focus on adult programming within the community.
RECREATION FACILITIES/AMENITIES
As denoted by the Priority Rankings below, relative to one
another included in the list, the top tier facility priorities (or
focus areas) include:
Walking and biking trails
Outdoor natural swimming areas
Greenspace and natural areas
Sports fields (soccer, football, lacrosse)
Diamond fields (baseball, softball)
Large community parks
Picnic shelters
Small neighborhood parks
Indoor ice arena
3.2.3 COMMUNICATING THE STORY
Creating park advocates (or “champions”) is a feat many park systems take on. After identifying what your
community needs, the mindset must shift to understanding how to best communicate to the public that their needs
are not only identified, but action is being taken to satiate those needs. Community residents report that they rely
on word of mouth from friends and neighbors as the most common way they learn about City of Ithaca parks,
facilities, special event, and activities. It is encouraging that the park system is creating a “buzz” throughout the City.
However, additional communication methods should be enhanced to capitalize on changing demographics,
technological improvements, and the fact the City of Ithaca is proximate to university populations.
Increasing social media and web capabilities will be paramount for the City of Ithaca’s efforts to establish and
articulate its brand. The focus on these areas should not hinder word of mouth recognition; instead, these
communication methods should work in concert to help bolster the park system’s word of mouth reputation.
3.2.4 SYSTEM PRIORITIES
Community residents participated in a scenario in which they were told they had a budget of $100 to spend on
services provided by the City of Ithaca, they were asked to indicate how they would allocate the funds among eight
different categories of funding. The following chart shows how respondents indicated they would allocate the $100
among the eight categories of funding.
Figure 13- Facility Priority Rankings
Facility Overall Rank
Walking & biking trails 1
Outdoor natural swimming areas 2
Greenspace & natural areas 3
Sports fields (soccer, football, lacrosse)4
Diamond fields (baseball, softball)5
Large community parks 6
Picnic shelters 7
Small neighborhood parks 8
Indoor ice arena 9
Outdoor swimming pools/water parks 10
Off-leash dog park 11
Indoor fitness & exercise facilities 12
Indoor swimming pools/leisure pool 13
Indoor running/walking track 14
Indoor lap lanes for exercise swimming 15
Community meeting space 16
Playground equipment 17
Disc golf 18
Indoor sports fields (baseball, soccer, etc.)19
Spray-pad (above ground water play)20
Outdoor tennis courts 21
Nature center 22
Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 23
Mountain bike park 24
Outdoor basketball courts 25
Senior center 26
Golf course 27
Skateboarding park 28
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
19
The public’s top five spending priorities are:
1. Waterfront parks
2. Walking/biking trails
3. Park land & open space
4. Neighborhood/community parks
5. Recreation facilities
The community indicates the waterfront area, with its vast open space and trail system, is a priority area. However,
they also indicated smaller park land and the City’s recreation facilities should be given a priority over more programs
& events, golf courses, and sports fields.
3.2.5 FUNDING THE SYSTEM
Along with identifying system priorities,
the community also indicated support for
a different financial model for the City’s
park system. Jointly contributing public
funding to focus dollars was almost the top
supported source of revenue most
supported by City residents. The
community acknowledges that more than
City residents utilize the parks system and
the park system should be enhanced by
allocating additional funding.
Interestingly, jointly contributing public
funding to focus dollars was the overall
most supported revenue option.
3.3 CONCLUSIONS
The City of Ithaca’s parks and facilities are aging and will require more attention and dollars to keep them safe and
appealing. However, parks are just one of the many priorities for the City to budget for. Respondents were given five
potential sources of funding that could help improve the park system and recreation programs in the City of Ithaca.
For each potential source of funding respondents were asked to indicate if they were either “very supportive”,
“somewhat supportive”, or “not supportive” of each. Based on the sum of “very supportive” and “somewhat
supportive” the following three items received the highest levels of support: The City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, and
Tompkins County should jointly contribute public funding (i.e., tax dollars) to focus dollars on the greatest park and
recreation needs in Greater Ithaca (90%), partner with nonprofits and private entities to financially support park
maintenance and recreation programs (87%), and increase existing fees for using shelters, athletic fields, or other
facilities (63%). It is a positive sign that a most respondents were in favor of a joint public funding effort, however
there is mixed support for a “pay‐to‐play” option as well. Further information is needed to fully understand which
option would be most feasible long‐term. However there was good support for both public and private funding.
Figure 14- Most Supported Revenue Sources
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
20
When analyzing the programs offered by the City of Ithaca the same item was the most important to respondent’s
households and had the highest level of overall need. Focusing on adding farmers’ markets within the community
would provide the greatest benefit for the largest number of residents within the City of Ithaca. Residents also
indicated there was a need within the community for more special events and adult fitness and wellness programs.
Focusing on the programs that residents have a need for and indicate an unmet need for can improve overall
satisfaction in the future. The City of Ithaca is faced with a unique opportunity to explore the feasibility of new facility
or land purchase which can satisfy two facilities which were found to be high priorities based on the Priority
Investment Rating. Both walking and biking trails and greenspace and natural areas would be developed within the
same area within the City or County, developing both of these facilities at the same time would satisfy an immense
need within the community.
It is clear the Ithaca community desires to see a joint effort to maintain and manage the City of Ithaca parks system.
Realizing that the City of Ithaca parks system contains regional attractions, along with smaller local parks, there are
people outside of the City limits that enjoy the parks system. The Ithaca community also realizes that the current
park system is need of infrastructure repair and improvements. Considering the financial resources afforded to the
City of Ithaca, and the fact that the park system serves a wider audience, the time has come to seek collaborative
efforts to rebuild the City of Ithaca park system.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
21
CHAPTER FOUR – PARK AND FACILITY INVENTORY AND ASSESSME NT
4.1 EVALUATING THE CURRENT SYSTEM: INFRASTRUCTURE
The consultant team met with City staff in March 2017 to go over the park assessment process. City staff assisted
the consultant team by visiting each park and filling out an assessment form. In total, 23 park assessments were
completed. The park assessments establish a base-line understanding and “snapshot” of the system’s existing
conditions, amenities, and implications for operations and maintenance. Full site assessment detail can be found in
the Site Assessment Technical Report.
4.1.1 METHODOLOGY
The consultant team used a site assessment form to document each park visited. The form included:
Design and usage
Access and visibility
Community attitudes toward site
Site amenities (quantity and condition)
General site condition
Any identified corrective actions needed
Any planned capital improvements
Strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities
Park conditions were rated using a differential scale of excellent, good, fair, or poor. The table below provides the
condition descriptions utilized in this analysis.
Scale of Conditions
Assessment
Finding
General Description
Excellent Facilities/amenities are in excellent condition and feature little or no maintenance problems noted.
Facilities do not feature any major design issues that contribute to diminished use or maintenance.
Good Facilities/amenities are in good condition and feature only minor maintenance problems. Generally,
most maintenance issues with these facilities appear to be the result of age and/or heavy use.
Facilities may only feature minor design issues that contribute to diminished use or maintenance
(i.e. drainage, structural, utilities, etc.).
Fair Facilities/amenities are in fair condition and indicate ongoing maintenance problems. Generally,
most maintenance issues with these facilities appear to be the result of age and heavy use. Some
maintenance issues may be compounding over time due to being deferred because of budget and/or
resource limitations. Facilities may only feature minor design issues that contribute to diminished
use or maintenance (i.e. drainage, structural, utilities, etc.).
Poor Facilities/amenities are in poor condition and clearly show ongoing maintenance problems that
ultimately may result in suspended use for repair/replacement. Maintenance issues with these
facilities are the result of age and heavy use, and generally are compounding over time due to being
deferred because of budget and/or resource limitations. Facilities may feature major design issues
that contribute to diminished use or maintenance (i.e. drainage, structural, utilities, etc.).
Figure 15- Condition Assessment Grading Scale
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
22
The following established sites were assessed during the tour:
Auburn Park
Baker Park
Brindley Park
Bryant Park
Cass Park
Columbia Street Park
Conley Park
Conway Park
Dewitt Park
Dryden Road Park
Floral Avenue Park
Hillview Park
Ithaca Falls
MacDaniels
Maple Grove Park
Southwest Natural Area (Negundo Woods)
Stewart Park
Strawberry Fields
Thompson Park
Titus Park
Van Horn Park
Washington Park
Wood Street Park
4.1.2 SYSTEM SUMMARY
STRENGTHS
The City has done a great job with connectivity throughout the parks system (especially at the waterfront
areas)
The waterfront parks provide an amazing “signature” asset to the parks system
There are many neighborhood green spaces
Maintenance operations are based out of a central shop
There are Friends Groups that help support some of the parks
WEAKNESSES
There is not a dedicated Parks Department that houses administration, operations, maintenance, and
programming all in one place
Many of the park facilities are “tired” or are in need of an update
They system is in need of better quality outdoor sports fields
Park signage needs updated and improved across the system including identification, rules, wayfinding, and
interpretive
The revenue generated in the parks is not able to be reinvested directly into the park it came from
Many park facilities are nearing or are at the end of their lifecycle
RECOMMENDATIONS
Develop design standards for all parks
Establish written maintenance standards for all parks
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
23
Unify the governance and management of the parks system
Identify the waterfront area as a priority
Create a brand for the park system
Create an equipment replacement schedule
Create a 5-year CIP (acts as an amenity replacement schedule) with identified funding sources
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) standards need to continue to be incorporated
into the existing parks
Develop a project list specific for Eagle Scout and volunteer projects; additionally, post list(s) to City website
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
24
CHAPTER FIVE – RECREATION PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
5.1 EVALUATING THE CURRENT SYSTEM: PROGRAMS
As part of the master planning process, the consulting team performed a Recreation Program Assessment of the
programs and services offered by the Ithaca Youth Bureau (IYB, or Bureau). The assessment offers an in-depth
perspective of program and service offerings and helps identify strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities regarding
programming. The assessment also assists in identifying core programs, program gaps within the community, key
system-wide issues, areas of improvement, and future programs and services for residents.
The consulting team based these program findings and comments from a review of information provided by the City
including program descriptions, financial data, website content, web survey feedback, demographic information,
and discussions with staff. This report addresses the program offerings from a systems perspective for the entire
portfolio of programs, as well as individual program information.
5.1.1 FRAMEWORK
The mission of IYB is to provide quality inclusive programming for the changing recreation and leisure interests of
the community. The focus is on opportunities for youth and families through expressive arts, sport programs, special
events, lessons, and summer camps.
The Bureau provides a broad range of recreation and leisure programming for youth of all ages. Recreational sports,
lessons, day camps, theater classes, art classes, special events, and Tot Spot are offered year round to youth and
families. Programs provide an opportunity for participants to have fun, learn new skills, and develop friendships and
life-long leisure interests.
Recreation programs are supported in part by the Recreation Partnership - an inter-municipal collaboration between
10 municipalities in Tompkins County, Including City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, Towns of Caroline, Danby, Dryden,
Enfield, Groton, Newfield, Ulysses (including students who attend Trumansburg Schools) or the Village of Lansing.
This unique alliance is one of the largest in the state. The Ithaca Youth Bureau is a major provider of programs.
Tompkins County Youth Services provides planning and financial coordination. The contributions of the county and
the participating municipalities help keep programs affordable and accessible.
The IYB and other providers often utilize city parkland and facilities. Within the City of Ithaca, city parks are
maintained by the Public Works Department. There are 18 full-time staff helping to manage the City of Ithaca
recreation and facilities, and the full-time staff are supplemented by many seasonal and part-time staff.
The IYB and other city providers communicate with the community through the City of Ithaca website, as well as
through flyers and brochures, signage, and various social media accounts. A long-form program guide is published
on-line and in hard copy each season, and includes a comprehensive list of programs and events.
5.2 CORE PROGRAM AREAS
To help achieve the mission, it is important to identify Core Program Areas based on current and future needs to
create a sense of focus around specific program areas of greatest importance to the community. Public recreation
is challenged by the premise of being all things to all people. The philosophy of the Core Program Area assists staff,
policy makers, and the public focus on what is most important. Program areas are considered as Core if they meet a
majority of the following categories:
The program area has been provided for a long period of time (over 4-5 years) and/or is expected by the
community.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
25
The program area consumes a relatively large portion (5% or more) of the agency’s overall budget.
The program area is offered 3-4 seasons per year.
The program area has wide demographic appeal.
There is a tiered level of skill development available within the programs area’s offerings.
There is full-time staff responsible for the program area.
There are facilities designed specifically to support the program area.
The agency controls a significant percentage (20% or more) of the local market.
5.2.1 EXISTING CORE PROGRAM AREAS
In consultation with IYB staff, the planning team identified the following Core Program Areas currently being offered:
SPORTS
The Sports core program area includes traditional sport offerings for individual skill development and league/team
play in baseball, softball, soccer, basketball, and lacrosse. The goal is to provide an opportunity to learn and practice
basic skills, be part of a team, make new friends, and learn about sportsmanship. Examples of Sports programs
include:
Basketball
Lacrosse
Outdoor Recreation/Adventure
Tennis Lessons
Track & Cross Country
Skating Lessons
AQUATICS
The Aquatics core program area includes public swimming opportunities, group swims, and lessons. The goal is to
provide a safe, clean, healthy environment for youth, adults, families, and groups to enjoy the pool leisurely for
fitness, and to provide progressive swim lessons for youth. Examples of Aquatics programs include:
Swim Lessons
Lap Swim
Public Swim
RINK
The Rink core program area includes public skating, lessons, and group skate, with opportunities for broomball
rentals, and hockey practices, games, and tournaments. The goal is to provide a safe, clean, and fun ice skating
experience to the public, and to provide lessons for youth and adults. Examples of Rink programs include:
Skating Lessons
Public/Group Skate
Hockey/Broomball
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
26
ARTS
The Arts core program area provides opportunities for practicing the arts, from pottery and drawing to crafts and
theatre classes. The goal is to provide an opportunity for young people to explore leisure interests outside of
traditional sports, to learn basic skills in different artistic media, and to provide for more advanced opportunities to
explore interests. Examples of Arts programs include:
Pottery Classes
Theatre Classes
Drawing/Painting
Art Spot
Pre-K Music
Parent-Child Pottery
CAMPS & SUMMER PROGRAMS
The Camps & Summer Programs core program area provides opportunities for camps and specialty classes in the
arts, sports, and outdoor recreation, from music lessons to sailing and Tae Kwon Do. The goal is to provide high
quality care for children that offers a traditional camp experience, and to provide opportunities for youth to learn
in-depth skills. Examples of Camps & Summer Programs include:
Cass Park Day Camp
Sailing Camp
Art Camp
Band & Orchestra Program
Tennis
SPECIAL EVENTS
The Special Events core program area provides opportunities for youth and families to experience new things, have
fun, meet new friends, and to be a part of the community. Examples of Special Events programs include:
Junior Olympics
Festival Mile
Tot Spot
Screen Free Week
Fishing Funshop
Ice Cream Bowl Event
RECREATION SUPPORT SERVICES (RSS) - ADULT
The Recreation Support Services for Adults core program area provides leisure opportunities to encourage active
participation, friendship, independence and inclusion within the community for adults over the age of 18. Examples
of Recreation Support Services (Adult) programs include:
Monthly Dances
Exercise Workout Groups
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
27
Art Classes
Movie Club
Board Games
Senior Outings
RECREATION SUPPORT SERVICES (RSS) - YOUTH
The Recreation Support Services for Youth core program area provides leisure opportunities to encourage active
participation, friendship, independence and inclusion within the community for youth under the age of 18. Examples
of Recreation Support Services (Youth) programs include:
Girls’ Club
Boys’ Club
Teen Movie Program
Nature Program
Outdoor Adventure
Play Groups
YOUTH DEVELOPMENT
The Youth Development core program area provides opportunities for young people to engage in new and different
ways to interact with their community and build skills that will help them reach their full potential. The goal is to
accomplish this by building strong relationships between youth and caring adults. This core program area allows
youth to experience belonging, solve problems and meet goals, practice generosity, and take responsibility for
determining their own future. Examples of Youth Development programs include:
Big Brothers/Big Sisters
Paul Schreurs Memorial Program
Academic Mentoring Programs
College Discovery Program
Youth Council
Outings Program
Youth Employment Service
5.3 CORE PROGRAM AREA RECOMMENDATIONS
5.3.1 EVALUATE CORE PROGRAM AREA RELEVANCE REGULARLY
These existing core program areas provide a generally well-rounded and diverse array of programs that serve the
community at present. Based upon the observations of the planning team and demographic and recreation trends
information, City staff should evaluate core program areas and individual programs, ideally on an annual basis, to
ensure offerings are relevant to evolving demographics and trends in the local community. Implementing additional
surveys to program participants and the larger community is a good way to help differentiate between national vs.
local trends and ensure the City’s programs are relevant to the local user.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
28
5.4 PROGRAM STRATEGY ANALYSIS
5.4.1 AGE SEGMENT ANALYSIS
The table below depicts each Core Program Area and the most prominent age segments they serve. Recognizing that
many Core Program Areas serve multiple age segments, Primary (noted with a ‘P’) and Secondary (noted with an ‘S’)
markets are identified.
Core Program Area
Preschool
(5 & under)
Elementary
(6-10)
Middle
School
(11-13)
High School
(14-17)
Adult
(18-64)
Senior
(65+)
All Ages
Sports S P S S
Aquatics S P P S S S
Rink S P P P P S
Arts S P P S S
Camps & Summer Programs S P P S
Special Events P
RSS (Adult) P S
RSS (Youth) S P P P S
Youth Development P P P S
An age Segment Analysis was completed by Core Program Area, exhibiting an over-arching view of the age segments
served by different program areas, and displaying any gaps in segments served. It is also useful to perform an age
segment analysis by individual program, in order to gain a more nuanced view of the data.
Based on the age demographics noted previously in this report, current programs seem to be fairly well-aligned with
the community’s age profile. While the national demographic shift to an older population is not forecast to be as
evident within the City of Ithaca, there will still be a slight shift toward an older population. City staff should continue
to monitor demographic shifts and program offerings to ensure that the needs of the 65+ age group are being met.
Program coordinators/managers should include this information when creating or updating program plans for
individual programs. An Age Segment Analysis can also be incorporated into Mini Business Plans for comprehensive
program planning.
5.4.2 PROGRAM LIFECYCLE
A Program Lifecycle Analysis involves reviewing each program offered by the City of to determine the stage of growth
or decline for each. This provides a way of informing strategic decisions about the overall mix of programs managed
by the agency to ensure that an appropriate number of programs are “fresh” and that relatively few programs, if
Figure 16- Core Program Area Age Segment Analysis
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
29
any, need to be discontinued. This analysis is not based on strict quantitative data but, rather, is based on staff
members’ knowledge of their program areas. The following table shows the percentage distribution of the various
life cycle categories of the City’s programs. These percentages were obtained by comparing the number of programs
in each individual stage with the total number of programs listed by staff members.
Lifecycle
Stage Description Actual Program
Distribution
Recommended
Distribution
Introduction New program; modest participation 0%
26%
total 50-60% total Take-Off Rapid participation growth 11%
Growth Moderate, but consistent population growth 15%
Mature Slow participation growth 52% 52% 40%
Saturation Minimal to no participation growth; extreme competition 8% 22%
total 0-10% total
Decline Declining participation 14%
The total number of programs falling into the Introduction, Take-off, and Growth lifecycle stages is 26%, falling short
of the recommended distribution of 50-60%. It is useful to have a strong percentage in these early stages to make
sure there is innovation in programming and that the agency is responding to changes in community need.
Eventually, programs move into the Mature stage, so having an ample amount of programs in the first three stages
helps to ensure there is a pipeline for fresh programs. Currently, 52% of programs are in the Mature stage. This is
above the recommended level and over time may indicate a lack of responsive design and stagnation in
programming.
About 22% of all programs are in the Decline and Saturation stage, while the recommended distribution is that no
greater than 10% of programs fall into these two stages. This could indicate that underperforming programs are
sustained for too long. If a program is in Saturation stage, it may not necessarily need to be retired – it could be that
it is a legacy program that is beloved by the community. However, it is useful to look at attendance trends – do you
have fewer participants over the last few offerings? If so, the community may be looking for a different type of
program. While there are exceptions, most programs in the Saturation and Decline stages are ready to retire.
Staff should complete a Program Lifecycle Analysis on an annual basis and ensure that the percentage distribution
closely aligns with desired performance. Furthermore, the City could include annual performance measures for each
core program area to track participation growth, customer retention, and percentage of new programs as an
incentive for innovation and alignment with community trends.
5.4.3 PROGRAM CLASSIFICATI ON
Conducting a classification of services informs how each program serves the overall organization mission, the goals
and objectives of each core program area, and how the program should to be funded with regard to tax dollars
Figure 17- Program Lifecycle Distribution
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
30
and/or user fees and charges. How a program is classified can help to determine the most appropriate management,
funding, and marketing strategies.
Program classifications are based on the degree to which the program provides a public benefit versus a private
benefit. Public benefit can be described as everyone receiving the same level of benefit with equal access, whereas
private benefit can be described as the user receiving exclusive benefit above what a general taxpayer receives for
their personal benefit.
PROS uses a classification method based on three indicators: Essential, Important, and Value-Added. Where a
program or service is classified depends upon alignment with the organizational mission, how the public perceives a
program, legal mandates, financial sustainability, personal benefit, competition in the marketplace, and access by
participants. The following table describes each of the three PROS program classifications in these terms.
ESSENTIAL
Programs
IMPORTANT
Programs
VALUE-ADDED
Programs
Public interest;
Legal Mandate;
Mission Alignment
High public
expectation
High public
expectation
High individual
and interest group
expectation
Financial
Sustainability
Free, nominal or
fee tailored to
public needs
Requires public
funding
Fees cover some
direct costs
Requires a
balance of public
funding and a cost
recovery target
Fees cover most
direct and indirect
costs
Some public
funding as
appropriate
Benefits (i.e., health,
safety, protection of
assets).
Substantial public
benefit (negative
consequence if not
provided)
Public and
individual benefit
Primarily
individual benefit
Competition in the
Market
Limited or no
alternative
providers
Alternative
providers unable
to meet demand
or need
Alternative
providers readily
available
Access Open access by all Open access
Limited access to
specific users
Limited access to
specific users
Another way to describe these three classifications is to analyze the degree to which the program provides a
community versus an individual benefit. These categories can then be correlated to the Essential, Important, and
Value-added classifications.
Figure 18- Program Classification Definitions
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
31
Classification Typical CR Notes
I PURE COMMUNITY 0-25% Basic services intended to be accessible and of benefit to
all; supported wholly or significantly by tax subsidies.
II MOSTLY COMMUNITY 25-50% Benefit accrued to both the general public and individual
interests, but to a significant community advantage.
III MIX 50-75% Benefit accrued to both individual and general public
interests, but to a significant individual advantage.
IV MOSTLY INDIVIDUAL 75-100% Nearly all benefit received by individual(s), with benefit
provided to the community only in a narrow sense.
V PURE INDIVIDUAL 100%+ Exclusive benefit received by individual(s) and not the
general public; individual pays at least the full cost of
service provision.
The following table shows how the two classification systems correlate, and includes example programs that fall into
each category.
I II III IV V
Essential Important Value-Added
PURE
COMMUNITY
MOSTLY
COMMUNITY
MIX MOSTLY
INDIVIDUAL
PURE INDIVIDUAL
Basic services
intended to be
accessible and of
benefit to all;
supported wholly
or significantly by
tax subsidies.
Benefit accrued to
both the general
public and individual
interests, but to a
significant
community
advantage.
Benefit accrued to both
individual and general
public interests, but to a
significant individual
advantage.
Nearly all benefit
received by
individual(s), with
benefit provided to
the community only
in a narrow sense.
Exclusive benefit
received by
individual(s) and
not the general
public; individual
pays at least the
full cost of service
provision.
Cass Park Day
Camp
Public Swim Youth Soccer Beginner Tennis Advanced Tennis
Cost Recovery
0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 100%+
With assistance from City staff, a classification of programs and services was conducted for all of the recreation
programs offered by the City of Ithaca.
Figure 19- Program Cost Recovery by Classification Definitions
Figure 20- Program Cost Recovery by Classifications
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
32
Essential Important Value-Added
PURE COMMUNITY MOSTLY
COMMUNITY
MIX MOSTLY INDIVIDUAL PURE INDIVIDUAL
Cass Park Day
Camp
Stewart Park Day
Camp
Counselor in
training program
Tin Can (Theatre
Troupe)
Festival Mile
Junior Olympics
Pitch Hit and Run
Punt Pass and
Kick
Rollerskating
Screen Free
Week
Public swim
Swim Lessons
Ice Cream Bowl
Event
Youth Council
Public Skating
Skating Lessons
Pottery classes (school age)
Theatre classes (school
age)
Art Camp
Band & Orchestra Program
Sailing Camp
Theatre Camp
Theatre classes
Play Groups
Tot Spot
Baseball/softball
Basketball
Boys/Girls Lacrosse
Football - flag and tackle
Running - track, cross
Country
Soccer
1-to-1 Big Brother Big
Sisters
College Discovery Program
Outings Program
Paul Schreurs Memorial
Program
Youth Employment Service
Art Spot (Pre-K)
Drawing/painting
Parent Child Pottery
Pre-K Music
Art classes
Board Games
Bowling
Exercise/workout
groups
Lunch/dinner club
Monthly Dances
Movie Club
Senior Outings
Boys Club
Girls Club
Nature Program
Outdoor Adventure
Teen Movie Club
Group Skates (incl
Homeschool & PTA
Enrichment)
Fishing Funshop
Golf Lessons
Outdoor
Recreations/adventure
Tae Kwon Do
Tennis Lessons
Lap Swim
Cheerleading
Fencing
Tennis Lessons
(advanced)
Tae Kwon Do
(intermed. /
adult)
Figure 21- Program Classification Distribution
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
33
5.4.4 COST OF SERVICE & COST RECOVERY
Cost recovery targets should be identified for each Core Program Area, at minimum, and for specific programs or
events where possible. The previously identified Core Program Areas would serve as an effective breakdown for
tracking cost recovery metrics, which would theoretically group programs with similar cost recovery and subsidy
goals. Determining cost recovery performance and using it to inform pricing decisions involves a three-step process:
1. Classify all programs and services based on the public or private benefit they provide (as completed in the
previous section).
2. Conduct a Cost of Service Analysis to calculate the full cost of each program.
3. Establish a cost recovery percentage, through City policy, for each program or program type based on the
outcomes of the previous two steps, and adjust program prices accordingly.
The following provides more detail on steps 2 & 3.
UNDERSTANDING THE FULL COST OF SERVICE
To develop specific cost recovery targets, full cost of accounting needs to be created on each class or program that
accurately calculates direct and indirect costs. Cost recovery goals are established once these numbers are in place,
and program staff should be trained on this process.
A Cost of Service Analysis should be conducted on each program, or program type, that accurately calculates direct
(i.e., program-specific) and indirect (i.e., comprehensive, including administrative overhead) costs. Completing a
Cost of Service Analysis not only helps determine the true and full cost of offering a program, but provides
information that can be used to price programs based upon accurate delivery costs. The figure below illustrates the
common types of costs that must be accounted for in a Cost of Service Analysis.
TOTAL
COSTS FOR
ACTIVITY
Personnel
Costs Indirect
Costs
Admin.
Cost
Allocation
Debt
Service
Costs
Supply and
Material
Costs
Equipment
Costs
Contracted
Services
Vehicle
Costs
Building
Costs
Figure 22- Program Cost Recovery Model
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
34
The methodology for determining the total Cost of Service involves calculating the total cost for the activity,
program, or service, then calculating the total revenue earned for that activity. Costs (and revenue) can also be
derived on a per unit basis. Program or activity units may include:
Number of participants
Number of tasks performed
Number of consumable units
Number of service calls
Number of events
Required time for offering program/service.
Agencies use Cost of Service Analyses to determine what financial resources are required to provide specific
programs at specific levels of service. Results are used to determine and track cost recovery as well as to benchmark
different programs provided by the City between one another. Cost recovery goals are established once Cost of
Service totals have been calculated. Program staff should be trained on the process of conducting a Cost of Service
Analysis, and the process should be undertaken on a regular basis.
CURRENT COST RECOVERY
With regard to City programs, services, and events, methods to measure and track cost recovery are tracked well in
some areas, and not as well in others. For example, although staff track and price programs based on cost recovery
goals for Arts programs, cost recovery goals are only sometimes used in pricing for Sports, Aquatics, and Rink core
program areas. The below table shows current cost recovery goals for those core program areas that have a goal in
place. The table also presents recommended cost recovery goals, based on best-practice, that are in-line with parks
and recreation systems of a similar size. Setting, tracking, and reaching cost recovery goals for every core program
area will help the City justify program expense and make a case for additional offerings in the future.
Cost Recovery Goals by Core Program Area
Core Program Area Current Cost Recovery
Goal (%)
Recommended Cost
Recovery Goal (%)
Sports -- 50-100%
Aquatics -- 50-75%
Rink -- 75-100%
Arts 50% 50-100%
Camp & Summer -- 50-100%
Special Events -- 25-75%
RSS (Adult) -- 0-25%
RSS (Youth) -- 0-25%
Youth Development -- 0-25%
Figure 23- Program Cost Recovery Goals
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
35
As shown in the previous table, cost recovery targets can vary based on the core program area, and even at the
program level within a core program area. Several variables can influence the cost recovery target, including lifecycle
stage, demographic served, and perhaps most important, program classification.
COST RECOVERY BEST PRACTICE
Cost recovery targets should reflect the degree to which a program provides a public versus private good. Programs
providing public benefits (i.e. Essential programs) should be subsidized more by the City; programs providing private
benefits (i.e., Value-Added programs) should seek to recover costs and/or generate revenue for other services. To
help plan and implement cost recovery policies, the consulting team has developed the following definitions to help
classify specific programs within program areas.
ESSENTIAL
Programs
IMPORTANT
Programs
VALUE-ADDED
Programs
Description Part of the
organizational mission
Serves a majority of the
community
“We must offer this
program”
Important to the
community
Serves large portions of
the community
“We should offer this
program”
Enhanced community
offerings
Serves niche groups
“It is nice to offer this
program”
Desired Cost Recovery None to Moderate Moderate High to Complete
Desired Subsidy High to Complete Moderate Little to None
Programs in the Essential category are critical to achieving the organizational mission and providing community-
wide benefits and, therefore, generally receive priority for tax-dollar subsidization. Programs falling into the
Important or Value-Added classifications generally represent programs that receive lower priority for subsidization.
Important programs contribute to the organizational mission but are not essential to it; therefore, cost recovery for
these programs should be high (i.e., at least 80% overall). Value Added programs are not critical to the mission and
should be prevented from drawing upon limited public funding, so overall cost recovery for these programs should
be near or in excess of 100%.
5.4.5 PRICING
The pricing of programs should be established based on the Cost of Service Analysis, overlaid onto programs areas
or specific events, and strategically adjusted according to market factors and/or policy goals.
Overall, the degree to which pricing strategies are used currently is fairly robust. Current pricing tactics include age,
family/household status, resident/nonresident rates, group discounts, competitor benchmarks or market rates, cost
recovery goals, and ability to pay.
The few pricing strategies not currently in use are weekday/weekend rates, prime/non-prime time rates, and
different pricing for different locations. These strategies are useful to help stabilize usage patterns and help with
cost recovery for higher quality amenities and services.
Figure 24- Cost Recovery Best Practices
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
36
Additionally, some of pricing strategies used for one core program area may be useful in another area as well. For
example, family/household pricing may be useful for Special Events or Camps & Summer Programs. Other example
pricing strategies from peer agencies include military, emergency responder personnel and police, or teacher
discounts. Finally, the consulting team recommends that all core program areas use cost recovery goals as a factor
in determining pricing.
Staff should continue to monitor the effectiveness of the various pricing strategies they employ and make
adjustments as necessary within the policy frameworks that guide the overall pricing philosophies. It is also
important to continue monitoring for yearly competitor and other service providers benchmarking. The table on
the following page details pricing methods currently in place by the core program area and additional
recommendations for strategies to implement over time.
5.5 PROGRAM STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS
In general, the City’s program staff should begin a cycle of evaluating programs on both individual merit as well as
the program mix as a whole. This can be completed at one time on an annual basis, or in batches at key seasonal
points of the year, as long as each program is checked once per year. The following tools and strategies can help
facilitate this evaluation process:
5.5.1 MINI BUSINESS PLANS
The planning team recommends that Mini Business Plans (2-3 pages) for each Core Program Area be updated on a
yearly basis. These plans should evaluate the Core Program Area based on meeting the outcomes desired for
participants, cost recovery, percentage of the market and business controls, cost of service, pricing strategy for the
next year, and marketing strategies that are to be implemented. If developed regularly and consistently, they can be
effective tools for budget construction and justification processes in addition to marketing and communication tools.
5.5.2 PROGRAM EVALUATION CYCLE
Using the Age Segment and Lifecycle analysis, and other established criteria, program staff should evaluate programs
on an annual basis to determine program mix. This can be incorporated into the Mini Business Plan process. A
diagram of the program evaluation cycle can be found below:
5.5.3 PROGRAM DECISION-MAKING MATRIX
When developing program plans and strategies, it is useful to consider all of the Core Program Area and individual
program analysis discussed in this Program Assessment. Lifecycle, Age Segment, Classification, and Cost Recovery
Goals should all be tracked, and this information along with the latest demographic trends and community input
should be factors that lead to program decision-making. A simple, easy-to-use tool similar to the table below will
help compare programs and prioritize resources using multiple data points, rather than relying solely on cost
Figure 25- Program Evaluation Cycle
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
37
recovery. In addition, this analysis will help staff make an informed, objective case to the public when a program in
decline, but beloved by a few, is retired.
Program Core Program
Area
Age Segment Lifecycle Classification Cost
Recovery
Other
Factors
5.6 MARKETING AND PROMOTION ASSESSMENT
5.6.1 CURRENT RECREATION MARKETING AND PROMOTI ON
The City of Ithaca currently communicates with residents through the use of media such as seasonal program guides
(print and online), the City website, flyers and brochures, newsletters, email lists, signage, and verbal communication
with staff, advertisements, some public service announcements, and through social media such as Facebook,
Twitter, and YouTube.
5.6.2 BEST PRACTICES IN MARKETING AND PROMOTION
Effective communication strategies require striking an appropriate balance between the content with the volume of
messaging while utilizing the “right” methods of delivery. The City has several areas of focus that need to be
addressed in communications. There needs to be a reliance upon multiple types of media to deliver those messages.
Similarly, the community must perceive the interconnectedness of the whole messaging process. It is recommended
that the City develop a strategic marketing plan specifically for parks, recreation, and events that complement the
City’s marketing strategy.
A strategic marketing plan should address the following:
Target audiences/markets identification
Key messages for each target market
Communication channels/media for each target market
Graphic identity and use protocols
Style handbook for all marketing material
Social media strategies and tactics
Communication schedule
Marketing roles and responsibilities
Staffing requirements
The strategic marketing plan for the City’s parks, recreation, programs, services, and events should integrate with
and complement the City of Ithaca marketing plan. An effective marketing plan must build upon and integrate with
supporting plans, such as this master plan, and directly coordinate with organization priorities. The plan will also
provide specific guidance as to how the City’s identity and brand is to be consistently portrayed across the multiple
methods and deliverables used for communication.
Figure 26- Program Decision-Making Matrix
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
38
5.7 MARKETING AND PROMOTION RECOMMENDATIONS
Develop a strategic marketing plan specifically for the City’s parks, recreation, and events.
Assign one staff member as a point person to coordinate marketing efforts; incorporate this into the job
description or consider hiring a part-time marketing coordinator.
Establish priority segments to target in terms of new program/service development and communication
tactics.
Build volunteerism to serve marketing and communication efforts. Recruit new volunteers with new skills
as the marketing program grows.
Establish and review regularly performance measures for marketing; performance measures can be tracked
through increased use of customer surveys as well as some web-based metrics.
Leverage relationships with partners to enhance marketing efforts through cross-promotion.
5.8 VOLUNTEER AND PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT
Today’s realities require most public park and recreation systems to seek productive and meaningful partnerships
with both community organizations and individuals to deliver quality and seamless services to their residents. These
relationships should be mutually beneficial to each party to better meet overall community needs and expand the
positive impact of the agency’s mission. Effective partnerships and meaningful volunteerism are key strategy areas
for the City to meet the needs of the community in the years to come.
5.8.1 CURRENT VOLUNTEER MANAGEMENT
When managed with respect and used strategically, volunteers can serve as the primary advocates for the City and
its offerings. Currently, the City does, sometimes, regularly track individual volunteers. However, the City does not
track volunteer hours, nor does the City have a formally adopted volunteer policy. Tracking volunteer hours can be
used in budget discussions showing how well the City is able to leverage limited resources. Engaging and rewarding
volunteers will enhance community ownership and pride in the recreation programs and facilities the City of Ithaca
provides.
5.8.2 BEST PRACTICES IN VOLUNTEER MANAGEMENT
In developing the policy, some best practices that the City should be aware of in managing volunteers include:
Involve volunteers in cross-training to expose them to various organizational functions and increase their
skill. This can also increase their utility, allowing for more flexibility in making work assignments, and can
increase their appreciation and understanding of the City.
Ensure a Volunteer Coordinator (a designated program staff member with volunteer management
responsibility) and associated staff stay fully informed about the strategic direction of the agency overall,
including strategic initiatives for all divisions. Periodically identify, evaluate, or revise specific tactics the
volunteer services program should undertake to support the larger organizational mission.
A key part of maintaining the desirability of volunteerism in the agency is developing a good reward and
recognition system. The consultant team recommends using tactics similar to those found in frequent flier
programs, wherein volunteers can use their volunteer hours to obtain early registration at programs, or
discounted pricing at certain programs, rentals or events, or any other City function. Identify and summarize
volunteer recognition policies in a Volunteer Policy document.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
39
Regularly update volunteer position descriptions. Include an overview of the volunteer position lifecycle in
the Volunteer Policy, including the procedure for creating a new position.
Add end-of-lifecycle process steps to the Volunteer Policy to ensure that there is formal documentation of
resignation or termination of volunteers. Also include ways to monitor and track reasons for
resignation/termination and perform exit interviews with outgoing volunteers when able.
In addition to number of volunteers and volunteer hours, categorize and track volunteerism by type and
extent of work, such as:
o Regular volunteers: Those volunteers whose work is considered to be continuous, provided their
work performance is satisfactory and there is a continuing need for their services.
o Special event volunteers: Volunteers who help out with a particular event with no expectation that
they will return after the event is complete.
o Episodic volunteers: Volunteers who help out with a particular project type on a recurring or
irregular basis with no expectation that they will return for other duties.
o Volunteer interns: Volunteers who have committed to work for the agency to fulfill a specific
higher-level educational learning requirement.
o Community service volunteers: Volunteers who are volunteering over a specified period of time to
fulfill a community service requirement.
Encourage employees to volunteer themselves in the community. Exposure of staff to the community in different
roles (including those not related to parks and recreation) will raise awareness of the agency and its volunteer
program. It also helps staff understand the role and expectations of a volunteer if they can experience it for
themselves
5.8.3 RECREATION PROGRAM PARTNERSHIPS
The City currently works closely with several different types of partners throughout the community. While a
database is used to track partnerships at Cass Park, a complete, city- or agency-wide database should be developed
to track all partners and partnerships. As with tracking of volunteer hours, tracking partnerships helps show
leadership making budget decisions how well the staff are able to leverage resources.
Many times partnerships are inequitable to the public agency and do not produce reasonable shared benefits
between parties. To mitigate this, it is recommended that the City adopt a formal partnership policy, identifying a
few major partnership types and ideal, measurable outcomes for each type of partnership.
The recommended policies will promote fairness and equity within the existing and future partnerships while helping
staff to manage against potential internal and external conflicts. Certain partnership principles must be adopted by
the City for existing and future partnerships to work effectively. These partnership principles are as follows:
All partnerships require a working agreement with measurable outcomes and will be evaluated on a regular
basis. This should include reports to the agency on the performance and outcomes of the partnership.
All partnerships should track costs associated with the partnership investment to demonstrate the shared
level of equity.
All partnerships should maintain a culture that focuses on collaborative planning on a regular basis, regular
communications, and annual reporting on performance and outcomes.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
40
Additional partnerships can be pursued and developed with other public entities such as neighboring cities, colleges,
state or federal agencies; nonprofit organizations; as well as with private, for-profit organizations. There are
recommended standard policies and practices that will apply to any partnership, and those that are unique to
relationships with private, for-profit entities.
POLICY BEST PRACTICE FOR ALL PARTNERSHIPS
All partnerships developed and maintained by the City should adhere to common policy requirements. These
include:
Each partner will meet with or report to City staff on a regular basis to plan and share activity-based costs
and equity invested.
Partners will establish measurable outcomes and work through key issues to focus on for the coming year
to meet the desired outcomes.
Each partner will focus on meeting a balance of equity agreed to and track investment costs accordingly.
Measurable outcomes will be reviewed quarterly and shared with each partner, with adjustments made as
needed.
A working partnership agreement will be developed and monitored together on a quarterly or as-needed
basis.
Each partner will assign a liaison to serve each partnership agency for communication and planning
purposes.
If conflicts arise between partners, the City-appointed lead, along with the other partner’s highest ranking
officer assigned to the agreement, will meet to resolve the issue(s) in a timely manner. Any exchange of
money or traded resources will be made based on the terms of the partnership agreement.
Each partner will meet with the other partner’s respective board or managing representatives annually, to share
updates and outcomes of the partnership agreement
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS
The recommended policies and practices for public/private partnerships that may include businesses, private
groups, private associations, or individuals who desire to make a profit from use of City facilities or programs are
detailed below. These can also apply to partnerships where a private party wishes to develop a facility on park
property, to provide a service on publically-owned property, or who has a contract with the agency to provide a task
or service on the agency’s behalf at public facilities. These unique partnership principles are as follows:
Upon entering into an agreement with a private business, group, association or individual, City staff and
political leadership must recognize that they must allow the private entity to meet their financial objectives
within reasonable parameters that protect the mission, goals and integrity of the City.
As an outcome of the partnership, the City of Ithaca must receive a designated fee that may include a
percentage of gross revenue dollars less sales tax on a regular basis, as outlined in the contract agreement.
The working agreement of the partnership must establish a set of measurable outcomes to be achieved, as
well as the tracking method of how those outcomes will be monitored by the agency. The outcomes will
include standards of quality, financial reports, customer satisfaction, payments to the agency, and overall
coordination with the City for the services rendered.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
41
Depending on the level of investment made by the private contractor, the partnership agreement can be
limited to months, a year or multiple years.
If applicable, the private contractor will provide a working management plan annually they will follow to
ensure the outcomes desired by the City. The management plan can and will be negotiated, if necessary.
Monitoring of the management plan will be the responsibility of both partners. The agency must allow the
contractor to operate freely in their best interest, as long as the outcomes are achieved and the terms of
the partnership agreement are adhered to.
The private contractor cannot lobby agency advisory or governing boards for renewal of a contract. Any
such action will be cause for termination. All negotiations must be with the Recreation Director or their
designee.
The agency has the right to advertise for private contracted partnership services, or negotiate on an
individual basis with a bid process based on the professional level of the service to be provided.
If conflicts arise between both partners, the highest-ranking officers from both sides will try to resolve the issue
before going to each partner’s legal counsels. If none can be achieved, the partnership shall be dissolved.
PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES
The City of Ithaca currently had a strong network of recreation program partners. These recommendations are both
an overview of existing partnership opportunities available to the City of Ithaca, as well as a suggested approach to
organizing partnership pursuits. This is not an exhaustive list of all potential partnerships that can be developed, but
can be used as a tool of reference for the agency to develop its own priorities in partnership development. The
following five areas of focus are recommended:
1. Operational Partners: Other entities and organizations that can support the efforts of the City to maintain
facilities and assets, promote amenities and park usage, support site needs, provide programs and events,
and/or maintain the integrity of natural/cultural resources through in-kind labor, equipment, or materials.
2. Vendor Partners: Service providers and/or contractors that can gain brand association and notoriety as a
preferred vendor or supporter of the City or IYB in exchange for reduced rates, services, or some other
agreed upon benefit.
3. Service Partners: Nonprofit organizations and/or friends groups that support the efforts of the agency to
provide programs and events, and/or serve specific constituents in the community collaboratively.
4. Co-Branding Partners: Private, for-profit organizations that can gain brand association and notoriety as a
supporter of the City in exchange for sponsorship or co-branded programs, events, marketing and
promotional campaigns, and/or advertising opportunities.
5. Resource Development Partners: A private, nonprofit organization with the primary purpose to leverage
private sector resources, grants, other public funding opportunities, and resources from individuals and
groups within the community to support the goals and objectives of the agency on mutually agreed strategic
initiatives.
VOLUNTEER AND PARTNERSHIP RECOMMENDATIONS
The planning team recommends the following regarding volunteers and partnerships:
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
42
TRACK VOLUNTEERS, VOLUNTEER HOURS, AND PARTNERS
Establish a database that tracks all volunteers, volunteer hours, partners, and partner resources leveraged (dollar
value of partnering, if possible). Assign volunteer and partner tracking responsibility to one staff person; include this
in the job description.
ESTABLISH FORMAL VOLUNTEER AND PARTNERSHIP POLICIES AND AGREEMENTS
Following the best practice listed in the previous section, establish volunteer and partner policies and agreements
that are tailored to the different types of volunteers and partnerships the City encounters. Assign management of
the policies and agreements to one staff person and include this in his or her job description.
5.8.4 PROGRAM STANDARDS AND PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
The relationship between meeting the needs of the community, achieving the agency mission, and executing service
delivery is of critical importance. With an understanding of this important dynamic, the following section provides
an analysis of the service system and includes building on the service foundation that already exists within the City’s
recreation programs and events. Based on the consulting team’s observations, the City’s program offerings are solid
for a system of its size, but enhancements to performance management practices would yield overall improvements
to the services provided to the community. This section is intended to provide resources and insight to move the
City to a higher level of sophistication in quality management.
The practice of using program standards is essential for agencies desiring to perform at high levels and that aspire
to be community and industry leaders. One of the most significant issues in managing a recreation program system
includes the challenges faced with the complexity associated with thousands of service transactions, in-person and
online, from multiple staff members, within the agency and with outside partners, and dealing with a diverse
audience at a variety of locations within the system.
Currently, the City measures participation numbers and participant to staff ratios, as well as customer retention rate.
Additional metrics to consider include program cancellation rate and customer retention rate, which can be captured
at registration or on the program survey.
Surveys can be very useful indicators of success if used in the right way – keeping the number of questions to a
minimum and avoiding survey fatigue. The City currently conducts post-program surveys and in-park surveys.
Additional ways to collect customer feedback include a pre-program survey (used with a post-program survey to
measure change), recurring user surveys, lost customer surveys, non-customer surveys, and focus groups. Digital
technology also provides for using crowdsourcing intelligence tools such as Peak Democracy, Chaordix, and Mind
Mixer to collect customer feedback. While this information is useful in tracking satisfaction throughout the year, it
is also a good idea to regularly conduct a statistically valid survey that will serve to substantiate the more informal
surveys to use with leadership and key decision-makers.
QUALITY MANAGEMENT METHODS
In addition to measuring satisfaction, it is useful to have procedures in place to ensure that core program standards
are being met across the spectrum of program offerings. This is particularly important when managing part-time,
contractor, seasonal, and, where applicable, partnership staff. While all staff should be trained to perform to a core
set of standards, it is useful to have extra training and checks in place for staff who are not as regularly exposed to
the standards as full-time staff are. For staff who are delivering programs that require an extra layer of health and
safety knowledge or training, such as vehicle drivers, training and quality checks should be extra rigorous.
Currently, the City has systems in place to:
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
43
Check on the quality of instructors
Develop lesson plans (or, for some programs, curriculum plans)
Train staff on customer service skills
Train staff on basic and enhanced life safety
Provide specialty skill training
Encourage and support continuing education
Provide diversity training
Complete performance reviews for all full-time and part-time staff
The City has the following systems, but needs to do a better job of:
Regularly and consistently updating policies and procedures
Updating performance evaluation system
Updating qualifications of front office staff in basic life safety
The City needs or should consider implementing the following performance/quality standards:
Marketing training
Training on calculating total cost of facility operations and cost of service
Performance reviews for all seasonal staff
PROGRAM STANDARDS RECOMMENDATIONS
IMPLEMENT ADDITIONAL SURVEY METHODS
Identify performance metrics and goals. Use additional survey methods to track performance against goals;
incorporate this information into the Mini Business Plan process.
PROVIDE GREATER CONSISTENCY AND BREADTH OF QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Ensure that policies and procedures and performance evaluation processes are updated on a consistent basis, and
that all staff are trained in basic life safety. Implement performance reviews for seasonal staff. Provide marketing
training to 1-2 staff members, and cost of facility/service training to all staff members. Assess training needs to help
fulfill recommendations in the program assessment and master plan process and implement additional training of
staff to meet those needs.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
44
CHAPTER SIX – LEVEL OF SERVICE AND EQUITY MAPPING
6.1 OVERVIEW
Level of Service (LOS) standards are guidelines that define service areas based on population that support investment
decisions related to parks, facilities, and amenities. LOS standards can and will change over time as industry trends
change and demographics of a community change.
The consulting team evaluated park facility standards using a combination of resources. These resources included
market trends, demographic data, recreation activity participation rates, community and stakeholder input, NRPA
PRORAGIS data, the statistically valid community survey, and general observations. This information allowed
standards to be customized to the City of Ithaca.
It is important to note that these LOS standards should be viewed as a guide. The standards are to be coupled with
conventional wisdom and judgment related to the particular situation and needs of the community. By applying
these standards to the population of Ithaca, gaps or surpluses in park and facility types are revealed.
6.2 PER CAPITA “GAPS”
According to the LOS, there are multiple needs to be met in Ithaca to properly serve the community today and in
the future. The existing level of service meets and exceeds best practices and recommended service levels for many
items; however, there are several areas that do not meet recommended standards. Although the City of Ithaca meets
the standards for total park acres, there is a deficit for neighborhood park acreage. The City does have a large number
of neighborhood parks; however, many of them are small in size (less than 1 acre) which equates to a lower LOS.
For outdoor amenities, the City of Ithaca shows a shortage of trail mileage, picnic shelters, adult baseball fields,
basketball courts, sand volleyball, and splash pads (or interactive water play features). It should be noted, however,
that as of the writing of this document, there are many trails planned for the surrounding area that are yet to be
developed. In terms of indoor space, the City of Ithaca has a shortage of approximately 8,600 ft.2 of indoor recreation
space which will increase to approximately 11,100 ft.2 by 2022.
It should be noted, however, that many non-residents use City of Ithaca parks (especially Cass Park and Stewart
Park). Since the large regional parks are more of a destination facility, the park serves people outside the City limits
and sometimes outside of Tompkins County. Consideration for the increased demand on regional park acres should
be kept in mind as the City continues to work toward meeting its LOS standards.
The standards that follow are based upon population figures for 2017 and 2022, the latest estimates available at the
time of analysis.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
45
Figure 27- City of Ithaca Level of Service City of Ithaca - Level of Service Standards Anticipated Future Park Development 2017 - 2022ItemCity of IthacaSchool DistrictCollegesState ParksOtherTotal InventoryMeet Standard/Need ExistsConstruction ProjectsTotal 2017-2022Meet Standard/Need ExistsPARKLANDNeighborhood Parks26.17 3.00 - - 1.90 31.07 0.97 acres per 1,000 1.30 acres per 1,000 Need Exists10 Acre(s)- - Need Exists12 Acre(s)Regional Parks281.06 - - 824.00 - 1,105.06 34.65 acres per 1,000 10.00 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard- Acre(s)- - Meets Standard- Acre(s)Natural Areas71.29 - 30.00 824.00 - 925.29 29.02 acres per 1,000 4.00 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard- Acre(s)- - Meets Standard- Acre(s)Undeveloped Areas- - - - - - - acres per 1,000 0.00 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard- Acre(s)- - Meets Standard- Acre(s)Total Park Acres378.52 3.00 30.00 1,648.00 1.90 2,061.42 64.64 acres per 1,000 60.00 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard- Acre(s)- - Meets Standard- Acre(s)TRAILSPaved Trails14.60 - 1.50 10.75 3.40 30.25 0.95 miles per 1,000 1.00 miles per 1,000 Need Exists2 Mile(s)- - Need Exists3 Mile(s)Unpaved Trails- - - - - - - miles per 1,000 0.00 miles per 1,000 Meets Standard- Mile(s)- - Meets Standard- Mile(s)Total Trail Miles14.60 - 1.50 10.75 3.40 30.25 0.95 miles per 1,000 1.00 miles per 1,000 Need Exists2 Mile(s)- - Need Exists3 Mile(s)OUTDOOR FACILITIESPicnic Shelters4.00 - - 3.00 - 7.00 1.00 site per 4,556 1.00 site per 4,000 Need Exists1 Sites(s)- - Need Exists1 Sites(s)Adult Baseball Field- 1.00 - 2.00 - 3.00 1.00 field per 10,630 1.00 field per 8,000 Need Exists1 Field(s)- - Need Exists1 Field(s)Youth Baseball Field13.00 - - - - 13.00 1.00 field per 2,453 1.00 field per 3,000 Meets Standard- Field(s)- - Meets Standard- Field(s)Softball Field9.00 2.00 - - - 11.00 1.00 field per 2,899 1.00 field per 3,000 Meets Standard- Field(s)- - Need Exists0 Field(s)Multi-Purpose Field (Soccer, Lacrosse, Rugby, Football)8.00 2.00 - 1.00 - 11.00 1.00 field per 2,899 1.00 field per 3,000 Meets Standard- Field(s)- - Need Exists0 Field(s)Basketball Courts3.00 0.75 - - - 3.75 1.00 court per 8,504 1.00 court per 7,000 Need Exists1 Court(s)- - Need Exists1 Court(s)Tennis Courts 8.00 - 1.50 - - 9.50 1.00 court per 3,357 1.00 court per 4,000 Meets Standard- Court(s)- - Meets Standard- Court(s)Playgrounds7.00 3.50 - 2.00 0.50 13.00 1.00 site per 2,453 1.00 site per 2,500 Meets Standard- Site(s) New housing development 1.00 Meets Standard- Site(s)Dog Parks- - - 1.00 - 1.00 1.00 site per 31,890 1.00 site per 40,000 Meets Standard- Site(s)- - Meets Standard- Site(s)Skate Park1.00 - - - - 1.00 1.00 site per 31,890 1.00 site per 40,000 Meets Standard- Site(s)- - Meets Standard- Site(s)Sand Volleyball- - - - - - 1.00 site per N/A 1.00 site per 15,000 Need Exists2 Site(s)- Need Exists2 Site(s)Splash Pad1.00 - - - - 1.00 1.00 site per 31,890 1.00 site per 20,000 Need Exists1 Site(s)- Need Exists1 Site(s)Outdoor Pool2.00 - - - - 2.00 1.00 site per 15,945 1.00 site per 40,000 Meets Standard- Site(s)- Meets Standard- Site(s)INDOOR FACILITIES Recreation/Gymnasium (Square Feet)42,400.00 12,750.00 - - - 55,150.00 1.73 SF per person 2.00 SF per personNeed Exists8,630 Square Feet- - Need Exists11,186 Square Feet31,890 33,168 Notes:Population based on City of Ithaca populationMulti-purpose fields, basketball courts, tennis courts, and playgrounds are reduced based upon public availabilityRecreation/gymnasium square footage is based on average of 8,500 square feet per gymnasium and is reduced to 25%2017 Estimated Population 2022 Estimated Population 2017 Inventory - Developed Facilities 2017 Facility Standards2022 Facility StandardsCurrent Service Level based upon populationRecommended Service Levels;Revised for Local Service Area Additional Facilities/Amenities Needed Additional Facilities/Amenities Needed
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
46
6.3 SERVICE AREA ANALYSIS/EQUITY MAPPING
Service area maps and standards assist management staff and key leadership in assessing where services are offered,
how equitable the service distribution and delivery is across the Ithaca service area and how effective the service is
as it compares to the demographic densities. In addition, looking at guidelines with reference to population enables
the City to assess gaps in services, where facilities are needed, or where an area is over saturated. This allows the
City management to make appropriate capital improvement decisions based upon need for a system as a whole and
the ramifications that may have on a specific area.
The maps contain several circles. The circles represent the recommended per capita LOS found on the previous page.
The circles’ size varies dependent upon the quantity of a given amenity (or acre type) located at one site and the
surrounding population density. The bigger the circle, the more people a given amenity or park acre serves and vice
versa. Additionally, some circles are shaded a different color which represents the “owner” of that particular amenity
or acre type. There is a legend in the bottom left-hand corner of each map depicting the various owners included in
the equity mapping process. The areas of overlapping circles represents adequate service, or duplicated service, and
the areas with no shading represents the areas not served by a given amenity or park acre type.
It should be noted that similar providers included the school system, Cornell University, state parks, and other
greenspace owned by the City of Ithaca. In some instances, facilities/amenities located at Cornell University were
not considered in this mapping exercise given the private use nature of those facilities.
Figures 28-43 show the service area maps that were developed for each of the following major categories:
6.3.1 PARK ACRES
Neighborhood parks
Paved trails
Regional parks
6.3.2 FACILITIES/AMENITIES
Adult Baseball Fields
Basketball Courts
Dog Parks
Indoor Recreation Space/Gymnasiums
Multi-Purpose Fields
Outdoor Pools
Picnic Shelters
Playgrounds
Skate Parks
Softball Fields
Splash Pads
Tennis Courts
Youth Baseball Fields
6.4 EQUITY MAPPING “GAPS” AND CONCLUSIONS
The City of Ithaca parks system is not equally distributed within the City limits. Many amenities are located on the
northern half leaving several gap areas in the southern half and especially in the southeast part of the City. Since
Cass Park is located on the north part of the City and contains the active sports field and diamonds, it may be
necessary to expand partnerships with the school system to make other fields available for public use. A similar
concept can be applied for basketball courts, indoor recreation space, and playgrounds. In terms of park land, the
neighborhood parks have a gap in the eastern side of the City limits and in the northwest (even though the northwest
is served by large regional parks). And as exhibited by the paved trails map, there are many trails within the system;
however, connectivity throughout the system that connects the entire system is lacking.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
47
6.4.1 NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
Figure 28- Neighborhood Parks Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
48
6.4.2 PAVED TRAILS
Figure 29- Paved Trails Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
49
6.4.3 REGIONAL PARKS
Figure 30- Regional Parks Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
50
6.4.4 ADULT BASEBALL FIELDS
Figure 31- Adult Baseball Fields Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
51
6.4.5 BASKETBALL COURTS
Figure 32- Basketball Courts Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
52
6.4.6 DOG PARKS
Figure 33- Dog Parks Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
53
6.4.7 INDOOR RECREATION SPACE/GYMNASIUMS
Figure 34- Indoor Recreation Space/Gymnasiums Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
54
6.4.8 MULTI-PURPOSE FIELDS
Figure 35- Multi-Purpose Fields Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
55
6.4.9 OUTDOOR POOLS
Figure 36- Outdoor Pools Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
56
6.4.10 PICNIC SHELTERS
Figure 126- Picnic Shelters Equity Map Figure 37- Picnic Shelters Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
57
6.4.11 PLAYGROUNDS
Figure 38- Playgrounds Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
58
6.4.12 SKATE PARKS
Figure 39- Skate Parks Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
59
6.4.13 SOFTBALL FIELDS
Figure 40- Softball Fields Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
60
6.4.14 SPLASH PADS
Figure 41- Splash Pads Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
61
6.4.15 TENNIS COURTS
Figure 42- Tennis Courts Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
62
6.4.16 YOUTH BASEBALL FIELDS
Figure 43- Youth Baseball Fields Equity Map
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
63
CHAPTER SEVEN – GOVERNANCE, FINANCING, AND FUNDI NG
As part of the Master Plan, the consultant team reviewed the existing governance within the system (with an
increased focus on Stewart and Cass Parks). Specifically, the consultant team examined organizational structure,
operational efficiencies, policy development, and overall process effectiveness. The waterfront parks are a great
asset to the community and there is much interest as to how they are preserved for years to come. However, it
should be noted that the City of Ithaca parks system does not consist of two parks; instead, there is a need to identify
functional organization for the entire parks system including neighborhood parks and natural areas.
7.1 GOVERNANCE
As mentioned previously in this Master Plan, the City of Ithaca parks and recreation system is managed by a network
of entities in lieu of a dedicated parks and recreation department. For example, the Department of Public Works
(DPW) maintains much of the parks system and the City Forester supervises all employees that on parks while the
Ithaca Youth Bureau (IYB) employs maintenance staff that assist with activities largely focused on the IYB building
located adjacent to Stewart Park. Other
Since there is not a dedicated parks system, communication and a common vision is imperative to the success of the
future Ithaca parks and recreation system. The following sections provide a list of the organizations involved with
some level of oversight/influence of the parks and recreation system.
7.1.1 RECREATION
The following entities represent recreation operations within the City of Ithaca.
Recreation Partnership
o City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, Towns of Caroline, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Groton, Newfield, Ulysses
(including students who attend Trumansburg Schools), or the Village of Lansing
Ithaca Youth Bureau (IYB)/Cass Park
Greater Ithaca Activities Center (GIAC)
Recreation Support Services (RSS)
o RSS is funded by the Tompkins County Youth Services, the City of Ithaca, the Office of People with
Developmental Disabilities, the New York State Division for Youth, and Tompkins County Mental
Health Services.
7.1.2 FACILITY SUPPORT
The following entities represent facility support within the City of Ithaca.
Cascadilla Boat Club
Cass Park Sports Groups
Cayuga Bird Club
Department of Public Works (Streets and Facilities Division)
Friends of Ithaca Youth Bureau
Friends of Newman Golf Course
Friends of Stewart Park
Ithaca Children’s Garden
Wharton Studio Museum
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
64
7.1.3 GOVERNANCE REVIEW
The consultant team conducted two workshops to discuss the direction for the waterfront parks (specifically) and
how they should be managed within the City of Ithaca parks system. The visioning sessions included department
staff, county legislatures, Town of Ithaca representatives, and supporting Friends Groups. Three main questions were
posed during the workshops:
1. What role do you see Stewart and Cass Park playing within the system?
2. What is your vision for the waterfront in general?
3. What is your vision for organization, coordination, etc.?
As a result of an in-depth discussion around the future of Cass and Stewart Parks, the group began to converge on a
vision for a future park system that managed the waterfront parks as a whole. The connectivity among the
waterfront areas is a strong attribute to the area and it is seen as a key cog to the waterfront system. In addition,
the waterfront area should be seen as an economic catalyst which should drive community planning.
In terms of management, a couple models were discussed for the City of Ithaca to consider. After much discussion,
it was determined that a conservancy or commission model may work well given the “players” already involved with
operating and managing parks and recreation services in and around the City of Ithaca. Conservancies are used all
over the country and have proven to be effective governance models for managing large parks or a group of park
sites. One negative aspect of conservancies is that they may take several years to fully operate at their potential.
However, given the set-up of how parks and recreation services are currently managed in and around the City of
Ithaca, a commission model may be a good starting point and it can evolve into a conservancy over time. The
commission model can be considered a more formal model of how the City is currently operating. There are key
partners within the model and each are responsible for different aspects of the system.
7.1.4 GOVERNANCE RECOMMENDATION
Given the number of entities currently supporting the City of Ithaca parks system, the following recommendation is
provided for future governance.
PARK COMMISSION
It is recommended that the City of Ithaca move toward a Commission. A Commission brings several entities together
to form a unified form of governance. The number of Park Commissioners would be dependent upon the
contribution breakdown between the involved entities. For example, if the Commission is comprised of City of Ithaca,
Town of Ithaca, and Tompkins County, the number of Park Commissioners would be commensurate to the financial
contribution provided by each entity. Commissions provide a degree of independence to all those involved and help
to focus public funding, an idea supported by City of Ithaca residents as identified via the statistically-valid
community survey.
However, as the park system evolves over time, it would be beneficial to transition into a Conservancy. A
Conservancy is an organization designated to protect natural resources. Many park systems across the country are
utilizing Conservancies to manage different aspects of their system. In this model, parks remain under government
ownership and the Commission would “hire” the conservancy (as a contractor, perhaps) to care for the parks. This
magnifies money because the Commission would take care of the baseline operations and maintenance (O&M)
expenditures while providing a dedicated fundraising arm to the system. The Conservancy is a great way to
supplement existing resources by providing funds and services above and beyond what currently exists.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
65
7.2 FINANCING AND FUNDING
Currently, the City of Ithaca operates the parks system with an operational budget of approximately $1,014,820. The
budget is divided into the regional parks (waterfront area) and the neighborhood parks (smaller parks). In 2016, the
City of Ithaca allocated $164,820 to neighborhood parks and approximately $850,000 to the regional parks.
However, it should be noted that these budget numbers are estimates. Additionally, Cass Park typically recovers
approximately 65% of its operating costs annually (2015 actuals; does not include fringe and debt service costs) and
the remaining costs are covered by the City’s municipal share. That is, revenues are currently being attributed to
offset operating costs. If some (if not all) revenues were able to be retained, there could be money allocated to
capital improvement expenses.
7.2.1 PER CAPITA AND ACRE SPENDING
The City of Ithaca currently spends approximately $31.82/capita for the parks system. According to the National
Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) PRORAGIS report, the following per capita figures are considered
benchmarks for New York agencies:
Low end: $46
Median: $54
Upper: $111
When adding in the surrounding states (to increase the sample size), the following per capita figures are considered
benchmarks:
Low end: $20
Median: $45
Upper: $73
Additionally, the national average is $77/capita spent on parks and recreation.
Another way of looking at costs is in terms of cost/acre. Currently, the City of Ithaca spends approximately
$2,681/acre (378.52 acres) of parkland. According to the NRPA PRORAGIS report, the following figures are
considered benchmarks for NY agencies in terms of cost/acre:
Low end: $2,485/acre
Median: $4,586/acre
Upper: $8,142/acre
When adding in the surrounding states, the following per acre figures are considered benchmarks:
Low end: $2,034/acre
Median: $4,424/acre
Upper: $9,961/acre
Additionally, the national average is $6,476/acre spent on parkland.
7.2.2 FINANCING RECOMMENDA TIONS
The following recommendations are provided for future park system financing.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
66
ESTABLISHING PER CAPITA AND ACRE UNIT COST PERFORMANCE MEASURES
It is recommended that the City of Ithaca establish a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) that includes per capita and
acre costs. By selecting a dollar figure goal, this will help position the City of Ithaca as to why it is making financial
decisions to increase the level of operational dollars allocated to parks and recreation services.
ADDRESSING UNDERUTILIZED PARKLAND
There are several neighborhood parks within the City of Ithaca parks system that are vastly underutilized as park
properties. Park properties include:
Columbia Street Park (.25 acres)
Dryden Road Park (.08 acres)
Hillview Park (.74 acres)
Maple Grove Park (.47 acres)
Strawberry Fields (9.16 acres)
The park sites listed above total 10.7 acres. The City of Ithaca is required to maintain its existing value of parkland.
Therefore, any parkland that is potentially de-classified and sold/traded would have to be exchanged for equal value.
The following recommendations are provided for addressing underutilized parkland:
SMALLER NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
It is recommended that the City of Ithaca de-classify Columbia Street, Dryden Road, Hillview, and Maple Grove Parks.
The park acreage would equate to 1.54 acres. It would benefit the City if a parcel of land at least equaling 1.54 acres
was used in lieu of the various smaller neighborhood parks. The small parks provide an operational challenge to the
City as they are generally hard to access and provide appropriate maintenance.
STRAWBERRY FIELDS
Strawberry Fields is located in the southeast part of the City of Ithaca. It is also adjacent to Belle Sherman Elementary
School. Many park and recreation departments across the country are including a “school park” classification in their
park system typologies. Similar to a neighborhood park or regional park, a school park designation provides
justification as to how the park property will work in concert with the adjacent school. Additionally, having a school
park classification will allow the City of Ithaca to work with the school district if and when a new school facility is
built. This will help provide support for including public recreation space along with the new school facility.
Alternatively, Strawberry Fields would be a good candidate for a partnership with Cornell University. Many
universities utilize “teaching preserves” both for field experience instruction and for conducting field research. Given
that Cornell University has a City and Regional Planning Department, it would benefit both entities to enter into a
partnership to elevate Strawberry Fields’ standing within the community. According to the equity maps, the parkland
provided by Strawberry Fields is in an area of the City that is not served by many other choices (currently).
LAND ACQUISITION STRATEGIES
The following definitions are provided to the City of Ithaca in order to rank and prioritize potential land acquisitions.
Criteria should be scored between 1-10 (1 being the most restrictive and 10 being the least) and weighted by City
staff to prioritize land acquisitions.
Adequate Size. Property is evaluated for its size to accommodate park uses
Availability of Utilities. Property is reviewed for proximity of existing City utilities to the sites (i.e. water,
sanitary, and storm sewer).
Cost/Availability of Acquisitions. Property is scored based upon the parkland cost and the ease of
acquisition.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
67
Impacts (soils, earthwork, etc.). Property is scored based upon reviewed GIS information on soils,
topography, drainage, and wetlands that may impact park development.
Major Arterial Access. Property is scored based upon its general proximity to major arterial roadways in
Ithaca.
Pedestrian/Bike Access. Property is scored based upon its general proximity to existing and proposed
trails/pathways in Ithaca.
Population (5, 10, 15 minute drive time). Property is evaluated based on its general proximity to existing
population densities of the City. Properties outside of the urban City areas can be evaluated in order to
provide additional services and coverage for more rural areas.
7.3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP)
This section of the plan reflects the capital improvement recommendations that are necessary to fulfill the facility
needs of the community. In order to plan and prioritize capital investments, the consulting team recommends that
the City of Ithaca applies specific guiding principles that balances the maintenance of current assets over the
development of new facilities. The CIP framework is also utilized to determine and plan CIP projects and make budget
decisions that are sustainable over time. These criteria (e.g., safety compliance, commitment, efficiency, revenue)
and priorities are also focused on maintaining the integrity of the current infrastructure and facilities before
expanding and/or enhancing programs and facilities.
The community, through this planning process, has indicated strong support for this concept of prioritization. Even
with the indications of a modest economic turnaround, funding is not sufficient to take care of all existing assets and
build new facilities.
The result is the recommendation to develop a three-tier plan that acknowledges a stark fiscal reality, leading to the
continuous rebalancing of priorities and their associated expenditures. Each tier reflects different assumptions about
available resources.
The Critical Alternative has plans for prioritized spending within existing budget targets. The intention of
this alternative is to refocus and make the most of existing resources with the primary goal being for the
City to maintain services. The actions associated with these projects address deferred maintenance,
accessibility issues, and other critical needs at existing facilities and is funded through existing tax dollars.
These projects are typically prioritized for years 1-2; however, they are spread out over years 1-5 due to
the expense. The subtotal for the Critical Alternative is $6,463,000.
The Sustainable Alternative describes the extra services or capital improvement that should be undertaken
when additional funding is available. This includes strategically enhancing existing programs, beginning new
alternative programs, adding new positions, or making other strategic changes that would require
additional operational or capital funding. In coordination with the Mayor’s Office, City Council, and the
Parks Board, the City would evaluate and analyze potential sources of additional revenue, including but not
limited to capital bond funding, partnerships, program income, grants, and existing or new taxes. These
projects are typically prioritized for years 3-5. The subtotal for Sustainable Alternative is $6,917,250.
The Visionary Alternative represents the complete set of services and facilities desired by the community.
It is fiscally unconstrained but can help provide policy guidance by illustrating the ultimate goals of the
community, and by providing a long-range look to address future needs and deficiencies. In this Master
Plan, the Vision Alternative addresses aging facilities to make improvements in operational effectiveness
and the overall sustainability of the park and recreation system. Funding for vision projects would be
derived from partnerships, private investments, and new tax dollars. These projects are typically prioritized
for year 5 and beyond. The subtotal for Visionary Alternative is $13,294,000.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
68
The following pages detail the recommended capital improvement projects – developed in conjunction with staff -
for the three-tier spending plan. It should be noted that the City should have leeway for addressing Sustainable or
Visionary projects before completing Critical projects if project funding becomes suddenly available. The intent of
the prioritized CIP is to provide a guide for the City, but they should also retain the latitude to be flexible as project
dollars become available.
7.3.1 CRITICAL PROJECTS
Figure 44- Critical CIP Projects
Asset Project Type Description Estimated Total Project Cost Year in which to be
completed
Auburn Park Repair
Turf repair; playground mulch
installation; fencing and park gate
improvements; park signage
$40,000
Baker Park Repair Cement bench repairs; park signage $5,000
Brindley Park Repair
Tree maintenance; stone dust trail
paving; garden maintenance; park
signage
$20,000
Bryant Park Repair Fencing repairs; park signage $6,000
Cass Park Repair
Tennis court resurfacing; wading pool
replacement; field light replacement;
athletic field renovation; topcoat of
Phase 1 of CWT; maintenance storage
space for equipment; park signage; park
site plan
$3,500,000
Columbia Street Park Repair Sidewalk repairs; park signage $10,000
Conley Park Repair Landscaping repairs, signage repairs and
improvements $10,000
Conway Park Repair Lighting replacement; new basketball
nets; park signage $30,000
DeWitt Park Repair Hardscaping repairs; park signage $15,000
Dryden Park Repair Park signage $3,000
Hillview Park Repair Drainage improvements; park signage $10,000
Ithaca Falls Repair Lead remediation; park signage; safety
improvements $30,000
MacDaniels Park Repair Picnic table repair; tree maintenance;
park signage $20,000
Maplewood Park Repair Park signage $3,000
Southwest Natural Area
(Negundo Woods)Repair Control park access points $15,000
Stewart Park Repair
Tennis court resurfacing/repurposing;
concession stand removal; pavilion
repairs; geese mitigation; turf
maintenance; landscape maintenance
$1,750,000
Strawberry Fields Repair Turf repair; park signage $20,000
Thompson Park Repair Lighting installation; monument
upgrade; park signage $40,000
Titus Flats (Wood
Street)Repair Drainage improvements; park signage $15,000
Titus Triangle Repair Retaining wall enhancements; lighting
installation; park signage $55,000
Van Horn Park Repair Park signage $3,000
Washington Park Repair Tree maintenance; sidewalk paver
repair; bench repairs; park signage $20,000
Cayuga Waterfront Trail Upgrade *See Sustainable Projects -
CRITICAL PROJECTS (Repair Existing)
Total w/ 15% Contingency $6,463,000
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
69
7.3.2 SUSTAINABLE PROJECTS
Figure 45- Sustainable CIP Projects
Asset Project Type Description Estimated Total Project Cost Year in which to be
completed
Auburn Park Repair Enhance park access $25,000
Baker Park Repair Add site amenities $50,000
Brindley Park Repair Lighting installation; trailhead
enhancement $35,000
Bryant Park Repair Add site amenities $50,000
Cass Park Repair
Large pool replacement; pavilion
renovation; main building addition;
splash pad addition
$4,500,000
Columbia Street Park Repair Bench enhancements; add site
amenities $20,000
Conley Park Repair Greenway connection development $15,000
Conway Park Upgrade Fencing and trash can enhancements $10,000
DeWitt Park Repair Park entrances enhancements $20,000
Dryden Park Repair Add site amenities $15,000
Hillview Park Repair *See Critical Projects -
Ithaca Falls Repair *See Critical Projects -
MacDaniels Park Repair Playground installation; apple tree
plantings $60,000
Maplewood Park Repair Add site amenities $15,000
Southwest Natural Area
(Negundo Woods)Repair Crate Black Diamond Trail connection
point(s)$20,000
Stewart Park Repair Trail kiosks; add nature swim element $75,000
Strawberry Fields Repair Easement improvements $10,000
Thompson Park Repair Enhance creek access $10,000
Titus Flats (Wood
Street)Repair Restrooms and drinking fountain
installation $50,000
Titus Triangle Repair *See Critical Projects -
Van Horn Park Repair Add site amenities $15,000
Washington Park Repair Additional lighting $20,000
Cayuga Waterfront Trail Upgrade Trail resurfacing (as needed)$1,000,000
SUSTAINABLE PROJECTS (Improving What We Have)
Total w/ 15% Contingency $6,917,250
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
70
7.3.3 VISIONARY PROJECTS
7.3.4 FUNDING AND REVENUE STRATEGIES
The following financial options outline opportunities for the City of Ithaca to consider in supporting the capital
improvements outlined in this Master Plan as well as operational costs associated with managing the system for the
future. Some of these funding sources may not be currently allowed by the City, or have never been used, but should
be pursued through legislative means should the City of Ithaca agree with the value in pursuing these funding
sources.
General Obligation Bond: A general obligation bond is a municipal bond secured by a taxing authority to improve
public assets that benefits the municipal agency involved that oversee some of the parks and recreation facilities in
the city. General Obligation Bonds are a tool used by local governments to borrow money. The bonds are guaranteed
by the governing body’s full faith and credit and backed by property tax revenues. The City can use revenue
generated from the sale of general obligation bonds to fund a park project and repay the bonds and interest with
future property tax revenue.
General Obligation Bonds should be considered for park and recreation facility projects; such as an update to
Neighborhood and Regional Parks, trails, and new facilities such as indoor recreation spaces and sports complexes.
Improvements to parks should also be covered by these funding sources because there are very little operational
revenues associated with these parks to draw from and some of the city parks improvements are in need of upgrades
and renovations limiting the uses of other revenue sources. These parks help frame the City’s image and benefit to
a wide age segment of users and updating these parks will benefit the community as a whole and stabilize
neighborhoods and other areas of the city. This has to be viewed as an economic impact improvement to stabilize
neighborhoods and invite people to live in these neighborhoods because of the quality of parks. If the parks are
maintained to a higher level than the neighborhood it raises the value of property. If parks are maintained below
the level of existing homes in the neighborhood it will bring the property values down.
Figure 46- Visionary CIP Projects
Type Project Type Description Estimated Total Project Cost Year in which to be
completed
Land Acquisition and
Park Development NEW Neighborhood parks - 12 acres $600,000
Land Acquisition and
Trail Development NEW Trail mileage - 3 miles $1,500,000
Facility Development NEW Stewart Park performance plaza $3,000,000
Facility Development NEW Picnic shelter $40,000
Facility Development NEW Adult baseball field $200,000
Facility Development NEW Basketball court $100,000
Facility Development NEW Sand volleyball $20,000
Facility Development NEW Splash pad $100,000
Facility Development NEW Recreational indoor space/facility $5,000,000
ADA Access NEW Accesibility and Development $1,000,000
Total w/ 15% Contingency $13,294,000
VISIONARY PROJECTS (Developing New Opportunities)
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
71
EDIT Funds: These funds are used to support economic impact projects in parks in many cities.
Levy on Property Tax: Public agencies around the country receive funding through property tax revenues. State laws
vary on how these funds can be used- rather applied to operating cost or capital investments.
Special Purpose Levies: Public agencies, including parks can receive funding through a tax levy designated to a
specific purpose and generally for a limited period of time. This could be a one time, special purpose levy
implemented for a limited time period.
Recreation and Park Impact Fees: The City could implement a recreation impact fees if the City wanted to pursue
these funds from developers. The current deficiencies in neighborhood park lands could be alleviated in certain parts
of the city that are short of park land and trails. Impact fees generally provide some capital funds but rarely are they
sufficient to provide full funding of large projects. The City of Carmel Parks and Recreation and Brownsburg Parks
and Recreation have Impact Fee Ordinances in place to help acquire and develop parks in the city.
Internal Park Improvement Fund: This funding source is created from a percentage of the overall park admissions
or fees to use the attractions such as sport complexes, golf courses, or special events in a park and would allow a
percentage usually in the 3-5% of gross revenues to be dedicate to the park or recreation facility for existing and
future capital improvements. This type of user fee does not require voter approval but is set up in a dedicated fund
to support the existing park for future capital, maintenance, and improvements.
Tax Increment Finance District: Commonly used for financing redevelopment projects. A Tax Increment Finance
District (TIF) involves the issuance of tax-exempt bonds to pay front-end infrastructure and eligible development
costs in partnership with private developers that are considered Quality of Life improvements that capture increases
in property tax revenue within a designated geographic area and allocates it for a specific public purpose. TIF revenue
has been used towards park acquisition, maintenance, and improvements in certain cities. As redevelopment occurs
in the City, the “tax increment” resulting from redevelopment projects is used to retire the debt issued to fund the
eligible redevelopment costs. The public portion of the redevelopment project funds itself using the additional taxes
generated by the project. TIFs can be used to fund park improvements and development as an essential
infrastructure cost.
Developer Cash-in-Lieu of meeting the Open Space Requirement: Ordinances requiring the dedication of open
space within developments to meet the park and recreation needs of the new residents often have provisions
allowing cash contribution to substitute for the land requirement.
Park Land Dedication Fee: A park land dedication fee requires that a portion of any housing or commercial/industrial
development be dedicated to public use, in the form of parks, recreation facilities, playgrounds, etc. Alternatively,
the development may pay cash in lieu of a land dedication, which would be put in a special fund and used for future
park acquisition.
Business Improvement District: The public private partnership collects additional taxes from business within a
designated area. The fees are used for public projects, based on the notion that a well maintained public space will
increase commerce for local businesses. Generally used in downtown areas, a Business Improvement District (BID)
is a useful strategy for pooling revenue to support a common goal. BID funding is managed by a nonprofit corporation
created through the city. This BID district can help support downtown park areas as well.
Impact Development Fees: Impact Development Fees are one time fees assessed on residential or commercial
development based on the theory that growth pays for growth. Revenue generated from impact fees are allocated
towards public infrastructure, including parks. This is a major source of funding for many fast developing
communities.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
72
Facility Authority: A Facility Authority is sometimes used by park and recreation agencies to improve a specific park
or develop a specific improvement such as a stadium, large recreation center, large aquatic center, or sports venue
for competitive events. Repayment of bonds to fund the project usually comes from a sales tax in the form of food
and beverage. A facility Authority could oversee improvements for the large facilities; such as an aquatic center,
community center, and sports field complex. The City could seek out a private developer to build a future facility for
with the City paying back these costs over a 20-year period through the facility authority. The Facility Authority could
include representation from the schools, the City, and private developers.
Utility Lease Fee: Utility lease fees have been used to support parks in the form of utility companies supporting a
park from utility easements, storm water runoff and paying for development rights below the ground. This funding
source is derived from fees on property own by the City based on measures such as the amount of impervious
surfacing as well as fees from utility companies having access through the park. It is used by many cities to acquire
and develop greenways and other open space resources that provide improvements in the park or development of
trails. Improvements can include trails, drainage areas, and retention ponds that serve multiple purposes such as
recreation, environmental protection, and storm water management. This could be a source for the utilities to make
a contribution to support the parks and trails in the future.
Transient Occupancy Tax: This funding source is used by many cities and counties to fund improvements to parks
from hotels that benefit from the parks in the form of sporting events or entertainment where participants stay in
hotels when they use city or county owned sports complexes or competitive facilities. The Transient Occupancy
Taxes are typically set at 3-5% on the value of a hotel room a 1% sales tax that can be dedicated for park and
recreation improvement purposes as well. Because of the value that parks could provide in the way of events, sports,
entertainment and cultural events, hotels in the area that benefit could be set up with a portion of their occupancy
funds going to support park and recreation related improvements. This funding source has been implemented
progressively by other communities as the City increases the number of events it sponsors or develops. Tracking the
economic value back to the hotels is important to build trust with the hotel business community.
Food and Beverage Tax: A 1% sales tax on food and beverage is currently used by other cities on fast food and
restaurants only. These dollars can come from the local community as well as visitors to the city to help pay for a
bond to finance future park and recreation related improvements. Food and Beverage Taxes are very well accepted
in most communities. Many park and recreation agencies have a 1% food and beverage tax to support land
acquisition across the country.
Capital Improvement Fee: A capital improvement fee can be added to an admission fee to a recreation facility or
park attraction to help pay back the cost of developing or updating the facility or attraction. This fee is usually applied
to golf courses, aquatic facilities, recreation centers, amphitheaters, and special use facilities such as sports
complexes. The funds generated can be used either to pay back the cost of the capital improvement on a revenue
bond that was used to develop or redevelop the facility. Capital improvement fees normally are $5 per person for
playing on the improved site or can be collected as a parking fee or admission fee.
Capitalizing Maintenance Costs: Levies and bonds for new projects do not always account for the ongoing
maintenance and operations funding that will be needed by those projects. By capitalizing maintenance costs, cities
include those anticipated costs into the specific levy or bond proposal and then set the funding aside in an
endowment to cover the future costs.
License Back: License backs are a source of capital funding in which a private sector entity such as a development
company buys the park land site or licenses the park land and develops a facility such as a park, recreation attraction,
recreation center, pool, or sports complex; and leases the facility back to the municipality to pay off the capital costs
over a 20 to 30-year period. This approach takes advantage of the efficiencies of private sector development while
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
73
relieving the burden on the municipality to raise upfront capital funds. This funding source is typically used for
recreation and aquatic type facilities, civic buildings, and fire stations.
Park and Recreation Capital Improvement Fund: Fees, donations, and revenue from vending machines established.
Fees may be established and collected by the Park and Recreation Board for particular special events held on park
property as the Board may deem necessary for that specific event. Private organizations who hold their event on
park property and who charge admission for the event shall donate a portion of those charges to The Park and
Recreation Capital Improvement Fund. Revenue from all vending machines placed on park property and accessible
to the public shall be placed in the fund.
Partnerships: The City of Ithaca has many partnerships in place. Most do not have equitable agreements for how
the partnership is financed. Establishing policies for public/public partnerships, public/not-for-private partnerships
and public private partnerships needs to be established with measureable outcomes for each partner involved. The
City of Ithaca can gain a lot of operational monies back to the system if they can manage their partnerships in a more
equitable manner.
Land Licenses/Concessions: Land licenses and concessions are public/private partnerships in which the municipality
provides land or space for private commercial operations that will enhance the park and recreational experience in
exchange for payments to help reduce operating costs. They can range from food service restaurant operations to
retail operations on city owned property. Licenses usually pay back to the city a percentage of the value of the land
each year in the 15% category and a percentage of gross from the restaurant or retail attraction. They also pay sales
tax and employee income taxes to the city which supports the overall government system in the city.
Admission to the Park: The City of Ithaca currently does not charge a vehicle entrance fee to their regional parks
and doing so can help support operational costs. This fee should continue to be studied and if deemed feasible,
implemented.
Parking Fee: Many parks that do not charge an admission fee will charge a parking fee. Parking rates range from $3
to $4 dollars a day. This funding source could work for helping to support special events, festivals, and tournaments.
User Fees: User fees are fees paid by a user of recreational facilities or programs to offset the costs of services
provided by the City of Ithaca in operating a park, a recreation facility, or in delivering programs and services. A
perception of “value” has to be instilled in the community for what benefits the system is providing to the user. As
the City continues to develop new programs, all future fees should be charged based on cost recovery goals
developed in a future Pricing Policy. The fees for the parks and/or core recreation services are based on the level of
exclusivity the user receives compared to the general taxpayer. It is recommended that user fees for programs be
charged at market rate for services to create value and operational revenue for the City of Ithaca. For services where
the City feels that they cannot move forward on adequate user fees to obtain the required cost recovery,
consideration of contracting with a non-profit and/or private company to help offset service costs should be
pursued. This would save the system dollars in their operational budgets while still ensuring the community receives
the service to keep the quality of life at a high standard.
Corporate Naming Rights: In this arrangement, corporations invest in the right to name an event, facility, or product
within a park in exchange for an annual fee, typically over a ten-year period. The cost of the naming right is based
on the impression points the facility or event will receive from the newspapers, TV, websites, and visitors or users
to the park. Naming rights for park and recreation facilities are typically attached to sports complexes,
amphitheaters, recreation centers, aquatic facilities, and events. Naming rights are a good use of outside revenue
for parks, recreation facilities or special attractions in the City.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
74
Corporate Sponsorships: Corporations can also underwrite a portion or all of the cost of an event, program, or
activity based on their name being associated with the service. Sponsorships typically are title sponsors, presenting
sponsors, associate sponsors, product sponsors, or in-kind sponsors. Many agencies seek corporate support for
these types of activities.
Advertising Sales: Typical amenities and facilities that lend well to advertising sales include sports complexes,
scoreboards, gym floors, trash cans, playgrounds, locker rooms, dog parks, along trails, flower pots, and as part of
special events held in the City. Advertising sales help support operational costs and have been an acceptable practice
in parks and recreation systems for many years.
Maintenance Endowment Fund: This is a fund dedicated exclusively for a park’s maintenance, funded by a
percentage of user fees from programs, events, and rentals and is dedicated to protect the asset where the activity
is occurring.
Park and Recreation Revenue Revolving Fund: This is a dedicated fund to be used for park purposes only that is
replenished on an ongoing basis from various funding sources such as grants, sponsorships, advertising, program
user fees and rental fees within the park system. The City of Ithaca could establish a revolving fund supported by all
of the funding sources identified in this section and kept separate from the tax general fund.
Permit Fees: This fee is incorporated for exclusive reservations for picnic shelters, sports fields, and special events
that are provided by the City of Ithaca and for competitive tournaments held in the City by other organizations (that
utilize City of Ithaca-owned facilities). Permit fees include a base fee for all direct and indirect costs for the City to
provide the space on an exclusive basis in addition to a percentage of the gross for major special events and
tournaments held on park-owned permitted facilities. Alcohol permits should be explored and if determined
worthwhile, added to these permits which would generate more income for the City of Ithaca for these special use
areas. This money could be applied to a Recreation and Park Revolving Fund to help support park improvements and
operations in the future.
KEY FUNDING AND REVENUE STRATEGIES
After reviewing the funding and revenue strategies above, the City and consulting team have identified the following
funding and revenue strategies as key elements of implementing the recommendations in this Master Plan:
Internal Park Improvement Funds
Grants
Impact Fees
Facility Collaborations and Partnerships
User Fees
Alternative funding streams such as parking fees, licenses, and fiber optic sales
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Business Improvement District (BID)
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
75
CHAPTER EIGHT – ACTION PLAN
The Action Plan provides a summary of the key action items recommended throughout the Parks and Recreation
Master Plan. Items are organized into four major sections:
Governance and Operations
Finance
Programming
Land and Facilities
Vision Statements specific to Governance and Operations, Finance, Programming, and Land and Facilities are
provided to assist with prioritization and decision-making.
Within each section, key Strategies for implementation are listed. These strategies represent the major ideas or
philosophies recommended by the consulting team that are required by the City to implement the Master Plan. To
help achieve each Strategy, Tactics are identified along with recommendations for the Group Responsible, Start
Date (i.e., when to initiate the tactic, not necessarily complete it), and Performance Measures.
The Action Plan is intended to serve as a dynamic document, reviewed on a regular basis by City staff and the
appropriate Commission, to plan work tasks and support decision-making in order to carry out the Master Plan. By
reviewing the Action Plan quarterly or annually, accomplishments can be noted, adjustments can be made, and new
items can be added.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
76
Strategy Timeframe Tactics Group
Responsible
Performance Measure Start Date
Formalize Cass, Stewart, Newman, and the waterfront trail as a
cohesive waterfront district
COI Planning *Written documentation
with the intent to formalize
a Waterfront District
2018
Form a short-term steering committee comprised of City, Town,
and County individuals to fund and a Waterfront District Master
Plan as Phase II of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
COI Planning
TOI Admin
County Officials
*Steering committee formed
*Waterfront District Plan
study funded and RFP
created
2018
Move toward a formalizing a Park District to operate and maintain
the City of Ithaca parks system. Additionally, use the results of the
Waterfront District Plan to adjust as necessary/appropriate.
Common Council,
Public Works
*New organizational
structure adopted and
implemented 2018
Formalize operational standards by developing a maintenance
management plan.
Public Works *Maintenance
management plan
completed
2018
Develop and adopt design standards for park amenities and the
system in general.
Public Works *Design standards identified
and adopted 2018
Increase maintenance division FTE.Common Council *# of staff hired and trained 2019
Establish a partnership policy/statement for: public/public,
public/non-profit, and public-private.
COI Planning
IYB
*Statement/policies created
and adopted Ongoing
Hold semi-annual "summit" in which all existing Friends Groups and
fundraising organizations come together to discuss collaborative
planning.
COI Planning
IYB
*Summit schedule created
*Summits held 2018
Develop Friends Group policy that includes a mandatory threshold
for operations and maintenance (O&M) endowment/seed money
for all approved capital projects.
Public Works *Policy created
2018
Train staff on existing policies and procedures.Public Works, IYB *Training provided
*Policies revised as needed
*Policies distributed
Annually
Formalize lead and supporting roles (functions) as they currently
exist to maintain the parks system and organize into one document.
Public Works, IYB *System document
developed and implemented 2019
Teach staff how to effectively use marketing data to make informed
decisions.
Public Works, IYB,
Planning
*Training provided
*Evidence of data-driven
decisions
2019
Review all planning documents annually for relevancy and direction.
Hold collaborative review and discussion annually
Public Works, IYB,
Planning
*Staff meeting held
*Plan(s) implementation
completion percentage
identified
Annually
Create more exposure and enhance cross marketing for volunteer
opportunities.
Public Works, IYB,
Partners
*Increase of volunteer
individuals and hours Ongoing
Ensure volunteer record keeping systems are coordinated so that it
is easy to determine who is volunteering and where.
Public Works, IYB,
Partners
*Use of consistent system 2020
Keep volunteers fully informed of park activities to gain support and
advocacy from this important pool of park representatives.
Public Works, IYB,
Partners
*Number of volunteer
communications Ongoing
Increase volunteer use to augment staffing levels.IYB
Forestry
*Volunteer use is
approximately 30% of total
park work force hours
Ongoing
Consider purchasing a work order management system to assist
with calculating and tracking operations and maintenance costs.
Public Works *Data manager selection
and training 2021
Develop policy-supported criteria for contracting operations and
maintenance services. The policy should support the guidelines for
what work should be done in-house and what can be outsourced.
Criteria and key performance indicators (KPIs) should be developed
to trigger an automatic review.
Public Works *Development of criteria
*Adoption of policy
2021
Governance and Operations
Vision: "The City of Ithaca will have a unified, formalized, and sustainable parks and recreation system that leverages existing and future collaborations and partnerships."
1.1 Develop/formalize governance model.
Short-Term (now
through 2020)
1.2 Prepare organizational structure to meet future
demand.
Short-Term (now
through 2020)
Short-Term (now
through 2020)
1.3 Clarify partnership groups roles and responsibilities.
1.4 Update policies and procedures on an annual basis.
Ensure all staff have access to them, and that they
create maximum flexibility for staff in the field to do
their work in a timely manner.
Short-Term
(now through
2020)
Mid-Term
(now through
2023)
1.6 Promote financial sustainability through facility
management practices.
Long-Term
(now through
2027)
1.5 Develop a stronger and more organized volunteer
system that builds advocacy and support for the City
of Ithaca parks system.
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
77
Strategy Timeframe Tactics Group
Responsible
Performance Measure Start Date
Continue to benchmark local and regional agencies to identify per
capita and /or per acre costs.
COI Planning *Benchmark analysis report
published 2018
Establish a per capita and/or per acre cost goal/policy for the City of
Ithaca parkland.
City of Ithaca *Per capita/per acre policy
established and adopted 2018
Review grant research listing and apply for at least 1 new grant
each year for park system funding.
COI Planning
IYB
*Grant(s) identified and
application(s) submitted Annually
Change earned income policy for revenue-generating facilities and
programs and allow the revenue to be re-invested into the
facility/program. This process usually involves creating an
Enterprise Fund. Enterprise funds generally are segregated as to
purpose and use from other funds and accounts of the
governmental entity with the intent that revenues generated by the
enterprise activity and deposited to the enterprise fund will be
devoted principally to funding all operations of the enterprise
activity.
City of Ithaca *Policy changed
*Enterprise Fund established
2018
Incorporate at least two new dedicated funding sources into park
system focusing on private land lease policy, waterfront TIF/BID
district, general obligation bond, capital improvement fee for
facility entrance, parking fee, sponsorships and naming rights, and
maintenance endowment fund.
City of Ithaca *New funding source(s)
established
2019
Ensure financial stability through short and long-range financial
forecasting.
City of Ithaca *Monthly budget numbers
are tracked 2019
Ensure the annual operating budget will project and produce a
balanced budget for each fiscal year.
City of Ithaca *Balanced budget produced
and adopted 2020
Set and achieve an overall system cost recovery goal and reflect it in
the budget.
IYB, Public Works *Cost recovery goal
identified
*Cost recovery increase each
year until goal is met
2020
Commit to financial transparency by providing easy access to the
organization’s financial data and reports.
COI Planning *Standardized and
accessible reports produced 2020
Finance
Vision: "The City of Ithaca parks and recreation system will be sustainably funded to continue providing enriched services to residents."
2.1 Develop a consistent per capita and/or per acre
funding strategy Short-Term
(now through
2020)
2.2 Develop an earned income strategy for facilities,
programs, and operations (e.g., land leases, BID, TIF,
etc.).
Short-Term
(now through
2020)
2.3 Develop a long term financial plan that is consistent
with the goals and objectives of the City of Ithaca
and support the initiatives and strategies as reflected
in City of Ithaca approved plans. Agency goals and
objectives, which affect operating funds, need to be
consistent with fund availability and financial
projections.
Mid-Term
(now through
2023)
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
78
Strategy Timeframe Tactics Group Responsible Performance Measure Start Date
Develop a Recreation Program Cost Recovery Policy for all programs to clarify and gain
consensus on which programs should be subsidized by tax dollars versus user fees or a blend of
both.
IYB *Cost Recovery Policy adopted
2018
Update the Recreation Program Pricing Policy to identify which forms of pricing
strategies/tactics are appropriate for each type of program in order to achieve cost recovery
goals.
IYB *Pricing policy adopted
2018
Enhance program evaluations to collect and track information needed to make data-driven
decisions about programs. Recommended data includes Core Program Area, Lifecycle Stage,
Classification (Essential, Important, or Value-Added), Target Cost Recovery, Actual Participation,
Actual Revenue, and Actual Cost Recovery.
IYB *Program evaluation protocol created
and implemented 2018
Utilize additional methods of customer surveys to collect more diverse feedback.IYB *User surveys created and
implemented 2019
Develop Mini Business Plans for each Core Program Area that identifies goals, outcomes,
financials, and marketing strategies.
IYB *Mini Business Plans created and
adopted 2019
Provide training for recreation staff to conduct Cost of Service analyses to understand the cost
of providing each program.
IYB *Training completed 2020
Track national and regional trends for programs and services and how they may apply to the
community.
IYB *Trend report created and
revised/updated annually Annually
Annually assess relevance of selected Core Program Areas and determine if changes need to be
made based on current trends, demographics, and community surveys.
IYB *Annual comprehensive review of
program inventory to adjust program
mix
Annually
Track the lifecycle of all programs to ensure they match the distribution recommended in the
Program Assessment.
IYB *Annual revision of lifecycle analysis Annually
Terminate programs that fall into the decline and or saturation phase.IYB *Number of programs terminated
*Lifecycle distribution aligns with best
practices
Annually
Institute a monitoring program to track the need to modify programs over time.IYB *Annual review process established Annually
Through collaboration, partnership, or rental agreement, work with other service providers to
bring programming to underutilized park sites.
IYB *Increase in park utilization Annually
Continue to enhance adult programming within the City of Ithaca as denoted by Priority
Rankings.
IYB *Increase in participation numbers Annually
Continue to enhance nature programs and environmental education as denoted by Priority
Rankings.
IYB *Increase in participation numbers Annually
Continue to enhance special events and Farmers' Market programming as denoted by Priority
Rankings.
IYB *Increase in participation numbers Annually
Formalize all existing partnership agreements (i.e., transition verbal agreements to written) and
include performance measures and partner responsibilities.
IYB *All agreements written and
documented 2018
Evaluate the need for special park use permits for photography, weddings, receptions, and
other special events/occasions.
IYB, Attorney's Office,
Partners
*Special park use permit policy created
and enforced 2018
Develop a strategic marketing plan specifically for the City’s parks, recreation, and events.IYB, Parks & Forestry *Strategic marketing plan created and
adopted 2019
Assign one staff member as a point person to coordinate marketing efforts.City of Ithaca *Marketing coordinator duties
assigned 2019
Establish priority segments to target in terms of new program/service development and
communication tactics.
City of Ithaca *Priority programs/services targeted 2019
Build volunteerism to serve marketing and communication efforts. Recruit new volunteers with
new skills as the marketing program grows.
City of Ithaca *Increased volunteer hours donated 2020
Establish and review regularly performance measures for marketing; performance measures can
be tracked through increased use of customer surveys as well as some web-based metrics.
City of Ithaca *Marketing performance measures
identified *Surveys
implemented
2020
Leverage relationships with partners to enhance marketing efforts through cross-promotion.City of Ithaca, Partners,
DIA, Visitors' Bureau
*Partners utilized for marketing 2021
Determine the City of Ithaca's role in providing special events and Farmers Markets.Clerk's Office *Summit meeting organized and held 2022
Convene a meeting of regional event providers to determine the types of events that satisfy a
regional market demand and are appropriate for City of Ithaca facilities.
Clerk's Office, Visitors'
Bureau, Strategic Tourism
Planning Board
*Summit meeting organized and held
2023
Track the economic impact of special events.COI Planning, DIA, Visitor's'
Bureau, Strategic Tourism
Planning Board
*Methodology to track identified
*Annual report developed 2024
3.4 Enhance marketing and promotion practices.
Mid-Term
(now through
2023)
3.5 Enhance special events capabilities pertaining to: infrastructure and
staff support, partnership agreements (accountability and financially),
and investing back into the space/facility Long-Term
(now through
2027)
Programming
Vision: "The City of Ithaca will continue to provide recreation programming commensurate with community need while advancing the breadth and scope of opportunity for residents."
3.1 Implement consistent program management principles for all programs
to ensure equitable service delivery, quality delivery, and long-term
financial sustainability.
Short-Term
(now through
2020)
3.2 Align program offerings with community needs and priorities.
Short-Term
(now through
2020)
3.3 Enhance facility use partnership policies.Short-Term
(now through
2020)
City of Ithaca
Parks and Recreation Master Plan – DRAFT
79
Strategy Timeframe Tactics Group Responsible Performance Measure Start Date
Annually assess progress towards Level of Service (LOS) recommendations and update
CIP accordingly.
City of Ithaca *LOS spreadsheet revision
*CIP updated Annually
Collaborate with Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, and other partner groups to
expand trail system.
City of Ithaca *Prioritized list of expansion projects
jointly developed 2018
Improve field quality and safety at Cass Park.IYB, Public Works *Funded in CIP 2019
Add an additional 3 miles of trails.COI Planning *Funded in CIP 2021
Add an additional 12 acres of neighborhood parkland.COI Planning *Funded in CIP 2022
Identify gaps in trail system and prioritize trail development that links parkland to trails
that creates city and regional loop trails.
COI Planning *Prioritized list of trail corridors
developed 2018
Create a signature brand for the City of Ithaca Parks System and incorporate this into a
comprehensive signing and wayfinding system.
COI Planning *City of Ithaca color scheme, signage,
and wayfinding developed and
approved
2019
Work with potential partners (e.g., New York State Park System, Town of Ithaca Park
System) to conduct collaborative system planning.
COI Planning *Joint prioritized system planning
conducted.2019
Annually assess progress towards Level of Service (LOS) recommendations and update
CIP accordingly.
COI Planning *LOS spreadsheet revision
*CIP updated Annually
Conduct a site master plan for Cass Park.COI, Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County,
Partners
*Funded in CIP
2018
Conduct a site master plan for Stewart Park (including Newman Golf Course).COI, Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County,
Partners
*Funded in CIP
2018
Conduct a site plan for Strawberry Fields to see if it should be transitioned into a
teaching preserve (and available partnerships), moved into a School Park classification,
or sold/swapped for different parkland.
COI Planning *Funded in CIP
2019
Implement the recommendations from the funded feasibility study for a nature
swimming/outdoor pool area at Stewart Park.
COI Planning, FSP *Funded in CIP 2019
Add an additional picnic shelter to the system.COI *Funded in CIP 2020
Add an additional baseball field to the system.COI *Funded in CIP 2020
Add an additional basketball court to the system.COI *Funded in CIP 2021
Add an additional 2 sand volleyball courts to the system.COI *Funded in CIP 2021
Add 1 additional interactive water feature/play to the system.COI *Funded in CIP 2022
Add an additional 11,000 square feet of indoor recreation space to the system.COI *Funded in CIP 2022
Formalize (document) all existing maintenance standards and keep them in one place.Public Works *Maintenance standards document
published 2018
Adopt and implement Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)
standards.
COI Planning, Forestry *Maintenance standards document
published 2018
Develop a maintenance management plan for the park system.COI Planning, Forestry *Funded in CIP 2019
Establish utilization productivity goals for each facility (e.g., ratio of utilized hours to
available hours).
COI Planning *Goals established 2019
Develop a business plan and pro forma to inform operations and use when developing
a new facility or completing major improvements.
COI Planning, Public
Works, IYB
*Policy established for new facilities 2019
Identify and prioritize ADA accessibility concerns throughout the system.COI Planning *ADA project list identified and
prioritization plan associated 2018
Consider enhancing and relocating the maintenance facility at Stewart Park.COI Planning , Public
Works, FSP
*Funded in CIP 2019
Consider increasing the amount of covered outdoor storage for equipment at Cass
Park, and IYB storage in Stewart Park, and carousel enclosure.
IYB, Public Works *Funded in CIP 2019
Add wayfinding signage from downtown to direct to Ithaca Falls.COI Planning *Funded in CIP 2019
Conduct a utilization analysis to calculate all park facility annual use. Use this
quantitative information to provide justification for de-classifying property as parkland.
COI Planning, Forestry *Methodology identified and
utilization calculated and published 2020
Enhance and publicize the adopt-a-park program for underutilized park sites.COI Planning *Adopt-a-park program enhanced 2020
Create and adopt a policy to de-park underutilized park facilities.COI Planning *De-park process and criteria
established 2019
Create and inventory of possible substitute park land.COI Planning *Inventory of substitute park land
created 2019
4.2 Complete a network of open space corridors and trails that
connect neighborhoods, schools, commercial areas, and local
destinations to parks and facilities.Short-Term
(now through
2020)
Short-Term
(now through
2020)
Land and Facilities
Vision: "The City of Ithaca will maintain and operate a diverse system of parkland and facilities that keep pace with the evolving needs of the community."
4.1 Ensure the growth of the parks and trails system keeps pace
with the needs of the community, but does not outpace the
financial or organizational resources of the City of Ithaca.
Short-Term
(now through
2020)
Mid-Term
(now through
4.3 Ensure the development of recreation facilities keeps pace with
the needs of the community, but does not outpace the financial
or organizational resources of the City of Ithaca.
Mid-Term
(now through
2023)
4.6 Create a policy for underutilized facilities and parkland.
Mid-Term
(now through
2023)
4.4 Establish consistent and comprehensive maintenance and
design standards for parks, trails, and facilities to uphold the
quality of user experience and promote financial sustainability.
Short-Term
(now through
2020)
4.5 Improve key facilities and amenities to address deficiencies
and/or meet changing needs of the community.
Short-Term
(now through
2020)