HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2015-05-11 Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board
Monday, May 11, 2015 at 5:30 p.m.
Auenda
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
2. Report of County Legislature and Common Council
3. Fire Commissioner's Quarterly Report
4. Persons to be Heard and Board comments
5. 5:30 Public Hearing regarding a local laws amending the Town of Ithaca Code,
Chapter 230 entitled "Streets and Sidewalks" and Chapter 234 entitled "Subdivision
of Land," and Chapter 270 entitled "Zoning," to add references to the Town of
Ithaca's Complete Street Policy
6. Resolution of Appreciation to Laura Johnson-Kelly
7. Consider setting a public hearing regarding a proposed local law amending the Town
of Ithaca Code, Chapter 270 titled "Zoning" and revise the Town Zoning Map to
rezone Tax Parcels 32.-2-6 and 31.-2-28 located at 617 and 619 Five Mile Drive from
Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential (Amabel Project)
8. Consider referral of the proposed change to the Sterling House and Claire Bridge
Planned Development Zone to the Planning Board for review and comments to the
Town Board
9. Consider Authorization for Bulk Salt Purchase
10. Authorize Award bids:
a. Elm Street Extension
b. Coddington Rd Watermain
c. Inlet Valley Cemetery Repair
d. Sapsucker Tank Replacement
11. Consider approval of a resolution endorsing the development and submission of a
single, countywide Government Efficiency Plan establishing Tompkins County as
Lead Entity in the development of the Plan
12. Consider approval of Town of Dryden Sewer Agreements
a. Sewer District 1 (SDI)
b. Peregrine Hollow Sewer District (Snyder Hill)
13. Consider Consent Agenda Items
a. Approval of Town Board Meeting Minutes of April 27, 2015
b. Approval of Town of Ithaca Abstract
c. Approval of Bolton Point Abstract
d. Approval of Temporary Stipend—Sr. Engineering Technician
e. Approval of Change of Analog Phone and Internet Service Provider
f. Approval of appointment of a planning Intern
g. Approval of appointment of a crossing guard
h. Approval of Work Study Agreement
14. Report of Town Officials
15. Report of Town Committees and Intermunicipal Organizations
16. Review of Correspondence
17. Consider Adjournment
TOWN OF ITHACA
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION
I, Paulette Terwilliger, being duly sworn, say that I am the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County, New York that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of
the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and the notice has been duly published in the official
newspaper, Ithaca Journal:
O ADVERTISEMENT
O NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
O NOTICE OF ESTOPPEL
11 NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF PUBLIC INTEREST ORDER
Public Hearing for Zoning References to Complete Streets _-
Jtsgala 050 is II t��aP -_
Location of Sign Board Used for Posting: at TOWNOFNEWFIELD Mg at 215 N.Tic a St. at
d NOTICE OF SLIC which 6me all person°late,
Town Clerk's Office nt eared In commenting on the
°NOTICEI S Y of EN Proposed boot law will be
215 North Tioga Street >that a 1 H ring ba heard.
Ithaca, NY 14850 of the T 0 a m Paulette 01S iRgar
of the T o n Hai at 5/4/4.2015
8 de New e T n Xeu 168 5/4/2015 -
x Mein 51 .N d, on
Thu ay 14,20 at
Date of Posting: 5/4/2015(Web and Board) a`&30p or pu icco r eat NOTICE OF FORMATION.
Date of Publication: 5/4/2015 °o put ;td Noma. BIG flm ID. ides Orgam,
y
she
Can° ni t`�ions Fad n traC rery°d Sine
haT N tl. Sw,
of At s Imo a pl all Jan ry 2 015. of
I pe interee the LL 9 f in so
su ter h 1 be nee of I VW,
heard of g t E hhoca,
^No.4 1 a us i ap NY 1 8 .S NY signaled
Paulette Terwilliger
Plana" re a a he 6 LL for arvlce of
r+ew l a` d Uta s 55 Y s I mmI a
Town Clerk
T. le.g°' f p as send
Shea ^ Ct 63 Greens
B/ O of Ne ewSHd bo ..A 'hAcban.
Tom, VA .LL p is to
Karen pl r Kenereon '^4^Y c hry a.Nnr-
STATE OF NEW YORK) ' it . no.I4/27.s4.sn
Town of ewfield 5/1 015
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS: 0S0a�015
TOWN OF ITHACA) _,..T<
Po�
' HawKYd..
Cui�,le LLC
The Ithaca Town Board will filetl 5 with New
day of hold a Public Headng regard. York of rata
Sworn to and subscribed before me this �c — ing a proposed local Iew tee T n6
amending the Tam of hope Caign t d ea Code, Chapter 230 entitled LL don 201 5. 'Street$and Spin"alke'and who gd st Chapter 234 entitled'Subdl.he s all it Neon of Land.'end Chapter pros LL at 3 270 entitled'Zoning.'to add Soutreet,tlha,
references to the Town of NY 14850.
Itham's lbmplets Street Poh 5/4,5111.5/16,5/25,611,
icy at 49 May 11,2015 meet 6/6/2015
Nbtary Public
Debra DeAugistine
Notary Public-State of New Yak
No.01DE6148035
Ouniified in Tompkins County �/
My commission Expires June 19,20 3,L_
Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board
Monday, May 11,2015 at 5:30 p.m.
Minutes
Board Members Present: Herb Engman, Supervisor; Bill Goodman, Deputy Town Supervisor;
Pat Leary,Tee-Ann Hunter, Eric Levine, Rich DePaolo, and Rod Howe
Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning, Bruce Bates,Director of Code Enforcement;
Mike Solvig, Director of Finance,Judy Drake, Director of Human Resources; Paulette
Terwilliger, Town Clerk; Jim Weber, Highway Superintendent and Susan Brock, Attorney for
the Town
Item 1 Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance Meeting called at 5:32 p.m.
Item 2 Report of County Legislature and Common Council None
Item 3 Fire Commissioner's Quarterly Report (Attachment#1)
Mr. Gilligan reviewed his submitted report. Mr. Engman asked about the new fire truck that had
been mentioned last quarter and Mr. Gilligan responded that they haven't developed
specifications for it yet so it is unlikely it will go out this year. He added that he will check on
whether they are planning on putting it in the 2016 budget. Mr. Engman asked about the inquiry
regarding the sale of the South Hill station and Mr. Gilligan responded that there have been a few
over the years given the value of the land right but they hadn't gone very far. This one seems a
bit more serious and the City has hired a consultant to evaluate whether to go forward and to then
develop criteria to open bidding other interested parties.
Added Item
Form Ithaca Presentation—Better Cities and Towns (Attachment#1)
Rob Steuteville and David West gave a PowerPoint presentation and discussed the progress of
the Form Ithaca workshops. This is a joint project under a NYSERDA grant to develop draft
zoning changes to use as a guide in moving towards Form Based zoning. This evaluation and
drafting will be done by looking at land use regulations, housing demand, and public outreach.
Form Ithaca has held a number of public events and workshops where participants looked at and
evaluated different styles of buildings, both residential and commercial and mixed use and
commented on what they liked and didn't like,what they felt Ithaca identifies with and what
Ithacans want. Through those exercises and activities, they discovered that people really like
downtown urbanism as exemplified by the commons and the Fall Creek neighborhoods as well
as protecting natural areas such as Cascadilla Gorge. Other concepts and needs identified by the
participants was a need for affordable housing, a dislike or concern about the kinds of
development happening on Route 13, and the need for better street access for bikes.
In looking at the specifics of actual building types, they found that people really get Ithaca and
they rated places highly when they had shallow lots with small setbacks and high lot coverage
with pedestrian scaled details(this is very depicted in shots of the Fall Creek area). The
Page 1 of 19
presenters noted that both the City and Town codes make these things illegal while everything
that is legal to do and basically required were the things people rated poorly—low lot coverage,
off street parking etc. It seems people really want to get back to the village feel.
Form Ithaca selected two areas of focus; the waterfront/inlet area in the City and the East Hill
Plaza area in the town. The goal is to develop charrettes or plans for development in those areas
and the associated zoning changes for them. The demonstration models would use real criteria
including transportation factors, and the housing market in developing the code and charrette.
They would also be aligning the desires,likes and dislikes that have been expressed by residents
in the workshops and the ideas expressed in the Comprehensive Plan of the Town and the
beginnings of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Form Ithaca believes that both Comp Plans have
at their core the idea of sustainability in all facets and this type of form based building will
address those concepts.
Mr.West invited the board and the public to a series of events to get more information; a
walking tour followed by a group discussion and building ideas around the focus areas followed
by three days of focused group discussions to make changes in quick time and move forward.
The final output will be a code that will be adaptable or usable as a whole or in part by the Town.
Questions from the Board
Ms. Hunter asked if architectural standards would be included and Mr. West responded that it
would look at building type and placement but not how wide your molding will be or what kind
of lintels you will have and will be more strict than conventional zoning which doesn't look as
closely to building type and how it effects streets and surroundings. How the public spaces will
or could be shaped to affect the community feel of a neighborhood.
Ms. Hunter asked about the statement that people don't like large setbacks and if that was talking
about commercial space or residential. Mr.West responded that they used the whole spectrum
of building types in the Town of Ithaca and when people were looking at buildings that had 30-
40-50 foot setbacks, they said that wasn't desirable and that didn't think that was the character of
Ithaca they want to see. Mr. Steuteville added that it might not have been clear what in particular
they were reacting to, the setback or the style of building. He referred to the slide that showed
60 types and styles of buildings that were used that showed commercial, residential and mixed
use buildings.
Mr. DePaolo asked who "they"were. He wondered if they polled where the participants lived
now to see if that would show a preference or a bias as opposed to a planning perspective. Mr.
West responded that there were hundreds of people who came through the large public workshop
and a gallery night and they did not collect statistics. Mr. DePaolo responded that he was trying
to determine how much weight to put on the survey and asked if it was fair to say that the people
who would attend the workshops had far more interest in planning related things and who know
by extension that it is much"hipper" to want a small setback or form based code instead of a
traditional euclidian code or was it people who are not in touch with those types of things? Mr.
West thought it was a broad spectrum but they did not get statistics.
Page 2 of 19
Item 4 Persons to be Heard and Board comments
Mr. Engman reported that Nick Goldsmith, our Sustainability Coordinator, received a People's
Choice Sign of Sustainability Award and Rod Howe went to the Historic Ithaca workshop and
accepted an award from them for historic preservation for the rehabilitation of the Forest Home
Upstream Bridge.
Mr. DePaolo reported that he and Mr. Bates met with the IC A&E manager about lighting and
sound issues related to the outdoor field and they seemed to be receptive to checking some things
out such as turning the lights off when it is not in use and reorienting some speakers and it
seemed to be a good start to a dialogue to address some issues.
Mr. Engman responded that he checked the Kendall Ave area during the day and then at 7pm and
there was a large police presence and it really went pretty well and he checked the next day for
trash and it was cleaner than it usually is. So something is working and they did a good job with
it. Mr. DePaolo added that he thought the students were getting the idea and being better with it.
Ms. Leary asked about the gas line at the bridge in Forest Home that needs replacing and Mr.
Engman responded that he will be writing a letter to NYSEG to get out there and inspect,
stabilize and replace it. There is one pressure gas line and one local gas line that is very
deteriorated.
Item 5 5:30 Public Hearing regarding a local laws amending the Town of Ithaca Code,
Chapter 230 entitled "Streets and Sidewalks" and Chapter 234 entitled "Subdivision of
Land," and Chapter 270 entitled "Zoning," to add references to the Town of Ithaca's
Complete Street Policy
Mr. Engman opened the public hearing at 6:17pm and explained that the Town adopted the
policy at its last meeting and this local law was to add references to that policy in the Town Code
where applicable.
Doug and Bruce Brittain addressed the board.
Doug Brittain stated that the policy kind of steps back from the Transportation Plan the town
already has in place and he felt that the town does not need this policy. He went on to say that at
first blush, it sounds like a great idea, but the town has a great Comprehensive Plan and
Transportation Plan and we simply don't need it. The Brittains were concerned that there will be
more exceptions sought to this policy than actual implementation of the ideas. They understood
that there may be frustration on the Board that looking at some of the factors in the policy does
not happen during development review but adding another policy and law is not going to get that
done if the existing plans and policies are not held to right now.
Bruce Brittain went on to talk about the reasons he expects a lot of applications for an exception
will occur. The topography of the Town being the biggest because, for example, Forest Home is
at a 5%grade or more and if you want to build a sidewalk it can't be ADA compliant at that
grade. The Brittains also thought the town will get bogged down with the requests for
exceptions and the data collecting to substantiate them and they would rather see staff time and
energy spent on other endeavors.
Page 3 of 19
Doug Brittain pointed out a statement regarding"providing mobility for freight providers"which
sounds like making room for tractor trailers on our roads. To him this means wider roads,which
-are not possible everywhere and then if you add a bicycle lane that's even more asphalt and
wider roads and it is a proven fact that wider roads lead to aggressive and bad driving habits. He
felt that the policy doesn't seem to address the livability of an area and the impact of
accommodating all modes of transportation will definitely affect livability. Doug Brittain then
talked about how it seems the policy requires pedestrian accommodations to be added where
there may not be a need for extra room for them such as dead end streets or short, neighborhood
roads with only very local traffic. The policy seems to require an exception be applied for in
those cases even though it should be clear that a sidewalk or bike lane is not needed.
Bruce Brittain turned to the documentation that seems to be needed for performance measures
and stated that he wasn't sure where data could be pulled from and wasted time looking for it.
He also talked about bike lanes and the fact that they are not always desirable. He stated tha
accidents happen at turning points or intersections and it is safer to be in the road rather than in a
bike lane when turning. He was concerned the policy encourages more bike lanes to fill a quota
or performance measure rather than an actual need.
Bruce Brittain went on to address the gathering of information for the exception process and
asked what exactly a"street tree" is because he could not find a definition in the code or on the
town website and to him, it is a tree that extends over a road,not necessarily one within a ROW.
He also questioned the cost and time needed to development of a survey and process it which
this policy seems to require every year.
In summary, the Brittain's believe it was a good thought but they believe it will generate more
work than it is worth. They believed that referencing the Town's Comprehensive Plan and the
Transportation Plan would be sufficient.
Mr. Engman closed the public hearing at 6:40 p.m.
Mr. DePaolo thought some of the concerns the Brittains' expressed are already addressed in the
exceptions as stated.He added that we were careful to approach this in a common sense way and
to simply have the Planning Board or Town Board required to ask questions about what could or
should be considered when developing or redoing a road is the goal here. He felt this is more
applicable to newer developments and simply forces a developer and the town look at options.
Mr. DePaolo appreciated their attention to detail and their logic but thought this policy allows
enough flexibility to address a number of their concerns.
Ms. Hunter asked the Brittains about their comment regarding separate bike trails. She stated
that she is a strong proponent of those and she wondered if that was under the purview of this
policy and if not, she would be interested in championing language they could craft to include
consideration of them.
Mr. Engman stated that the intent was not to usurp the Comprehensive Plan or the Transportation
Plan but simply to extend the same type of review and consideration of town roads and streets
Page 4 of 19
projects as are now required of state and federally funded projects. He felt the reporting criteria
is a list of possible data sources that can be used and added that we have an extensive report from
Safe Routes to Schools at our disposal and county transportation studies to use as a base if we
want to look and evaluate certain areas.
Mr. Engman also explained the"freight transportation"reference saying that whenever you
review a road you need to think of all uses appropriate for that road; people want things
delivered to their house, and the question is will this allow a semi-trailer or a minivan and what
should it allow given the population. It doesn't mean that all trucks belong everywhere it just
means look at what should happen and what should be included and excluded. This policy and
law focusses the attention of that type of review into the planning and decision making
processes.
Mr. Goodman stated that one of the benefits-of adopting the Complete Streets as a policy rather
than an ordinance is that as questions come up as we begin to implement and use the policy,we
can amend it a lot easier as a policy than a local law so we can adjust as we go along.
Mr. Levine stated that he agreed with Mr. Goodman and he really appreciated the Britain's'
comments but a policy can be changed much easier and this local law simply ads references to it
in our Code.
Mr. DePaolo talked about some absolute verbs such as"comply"and "required" in places since
this law is referencing the policy and doesn't have an enforcement aspect. In one instance, the
"comply"pertains to an existing attachment in the code listing specifications for building a
sidewalk and in the other it was changed to "as may be"to reflect the consideration of the
Complete Streets Policy not the requirement of it.
Ms. Hunter asked about the tipping point for traffic and the suitability of bikes on given road;
that is something she would like to look into at some point in relation to this policy or the Code
itself.
TB Resolution No.2015 -049: Adopt a Local Law Amending the Town of Ithaca Code,
Chapter 230 entitled "Streets and Sidewalks." Chapter 234 entitled "Subdivision of Land,"
and Chapter 270 entitled "Zoning,"to add references to the Town of Ithaca Complete
Streets Policy
Whereas, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca is interested in promoting the development of
transportation facilities that encourage more use by pedestrians and bicyclists; and
Whereas, "Complete Streets"is an approach to the design and construction of streets, roads and
highways that takes into account not only the needs of automobiles but also the needs of
pedestrians and bicyclists; and
Whereas, the Town's Public Works Committee reviewed the Complete Streets legislation
adopted by New York State and various municipalities within New York and recommended that
the Town consider similar legislation; and
Page 5 of 19
Whereas, at its March 9, 2015 meeting the Town Board discussed a draft Complete Streets law
and decided to consider adopting it as a Policy; and
Whereas,pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act("SEQRA")and
its implementing regulations at 6 NYCRR Part 617, the Town Board determined that adoption of
the Complete Streets Policy was an Unlisted Action for which the Town Board, acting as lead
agency in an environmental review with respect to the adoption of the Policy, made a negative
determination of environmental significance on April 13, 2015,after having reviewed and
accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Parts 1,2 and 3 prepared by the
Town's Planning staff; and
Whereas,at its April 13, 2015 meeting the Town Board adopted a Complete Streets Policy and
discussed adding references to the Policy in relevant sections of Town Code; and
Whereas,at its April 13, 2015 meeting the Town Board adopted a resolution for a public hearing
to be held by the Town on May 11, 2015 at 5:30 p.m., to hear all interested parties on the
proposed local law; and
Whereas,notice of said public hearing was duly advertised in the Ithaca Journal; and
Whereas,said public hearing was duly held on said date and time at the Town Hall of the Town
of Ithaca and all parties in attendance were permitted an opportunity to speak on behalf of or in
opposition to said local law,or any part thereof; and
Whereas,pursuant to SEQRA and its implementing regulations at 6 NYCRR Part 617, it has
been determined by the Town Board that adoption of the local law is a Type II action because the
addition of Complete Streets Policy references to various Town Code chapters constitutes
"routine or continuing agency administration and management, not including new programs or
major reordering of priorities that may affect the environment,"and thus this action is not subject
to review under SEQRA; Now,therefore,be it
Resolved,that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby adopt Local Law No. 3 of the
Year 2015 Amending the Town of Ithaca Code, Chapter 230 Entitled"Streets and Sidewalks,"
Chapter 234 Entitled"Subdivision of Land,"and Chapter 270 Entitled"Zoning,"to add
references to the Town of Ithaca Complete Streets Policy, and it is further
Resolved, that the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file said local law with the
Secretary of State as required by law.
Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Eric Levine
Vote: Ayes—Howe, Levine, Leary, Hunter, Goodman, DePaolo and Engman
Item 6 Resolution of Appreciation to Laura Johnson-Kelly
Page 6 of 19
TB Resolution No. 2015-050: Recognition of Laura Johnson-Kelly Dedicated Years of
Service to the Community
Whereas, Laura Johnson-Kelly was appointed as the Town Historian on April 1, 2004 and has
served continuously through April 30, 2015; and
Whereas, Laura has served as the Town Historian with distinguished devotion for over 11 years;
and
Whereas, the Town of Ithaca has greatly benefited from Laura's thoughtful consideration,
devotion, expertise, enthusiasm and her desire to serve our community in order to make it a
better place to live; and
Whereas, the Town of Ithaca is indebted to Laura for her contributions to the community
including designing the historical signage for the Tutelo Park, lobby displays on town history,
completing a Town of Ithaca tourism brochure with the Tompkins County Municipal Historians
group, representing the Town at local history gatherings, and being actively involved with the
town support of the Lakeview Cemetery by preserving Cemetery records; now, therefore be it
Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, on behalf of the Town and its citizens,
expresses its sincere appreciation, admiration and gratitude to Laura Johnson-Kelly for her
distinguished and dedicated service to our community.
Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Tee Ann Hunter
Vote: Howe, Hunter, Leary, Levine, Goodman, Engman and DePaolo
Item 7 Consider setting a public hearing regarding a proposed local law amending the
Town of Ithaca Code, Chapter 270 titled "Zoning" and revise the Town Zoning Map to
rezone Tax Parcels 32.-2-6 and 31.-2-28 located at 617 and 619 Five Mile Drive from Low
Density Residential to Medium Density Residential (Amabel Project)
Mr. DePaolo started the conversation wanting to make sure everyone was aware that this change
in zoning would be for the properties themselves, not necessarily the project linked to it. Once it
is changed, it is changed. He was a little uncomfortable doing a rezoning that can't be made
contingent on a project, which can't be done. Discussion followed on what any other project
would be or could be under medium density. Another developer could come in and not cluster
the buildings but it was noted that there is a lot of undevelopable land on the parcels due to
topography and stream setbacks and the like and they are next to other MDR parcels. Mr.
DePaolo felt it was more of a transition zone into the higher densities and this change in density
would change that transition. Ms. Ritter thought the Low Density Residential zoning was
probably due more to the location of a cemetery across the street so it was probably thought that
development wouldn't happen but now the Black Diamond Trail will be there and that makes it
more desirable.
Page 7 of 19
Mr. DePaolo asked if there was a way to link this change to the specific project and Ms. Brock
could not answer that without researching it. Some discussion followed and it was felt there
would be time to look into it before the necessary draft is required for publication of the notice.
There is also an option of coming to the Town Board after the Planning Board has granted final
approval.
The Board decided to move forward with researching options and still set the public hearing for
June.
Ms. Leary asked the Board if they were not in favor of rezoning if it wasn't clustered and people
jammed together instead of traditional placement. She was in favor of traditional zoning if that
is what was possible, to allow more housing in whatever form that housing took. Mr. Goodman
responded that most of the open space she is leaving is unbuildable due to a floodplain and there
is a major sewer problem necessitating pump stations so traditional would probably not happen.
Ms. Leary responded that that makes it even simpler to just rezone it. Mr. Engman reiterated that
the question is whether to set the public hearing and move forward and the board agreed to move
forward.
TB Resolution 2015 -051: Setting a public hearing regarding a proposed local law
amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code,titled "Zoning,"and the Town Zoning
Map to rezone tax parcels#31.-2-6 (portion of) and 31.-2-28 located at 617 and 619 Five
Mile Drive from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential
Resolved that the Ithaca Town Board will hold a public hearing regarding a proposed local law
amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning,"and the Town Zoning Map
to rezone tax parcels#31.-2-6 (portion of)and 31.-2-28 located at 617 and 619 Five Mile Drive
from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential at its regular meeting on June 8,
2015 beginning at 5:30 at Town Hall, 215 N.Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY at which time any person
wishing to comment can be heard, and it is further
Resolved,that the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca is hereby authorized and directed to publish
a notice of such public hearing in the Ithaca Journal and to post a copy of same on the signboard
of the Town of Ithaca.
Moved: Rich DePaolo Seconded: Rod Howe
Vote: Ayes—DePaolo, Howe, Hunter, Levine, Leary, Engman and Goodman
Item 8 Consider referral of the proposed change to the Sterling House and Claire Bridge
Planned Development Zone to the Planning Board for review and comments to the Town
Board
Ms. Hunter wanted to let the Planning Board and/or staff knows that she would like to see more
trees in any parking lot associated with the project.
Page 8 of 19
TB Resolution 2015-052: Refer Request of Sterling House & Clare Bridge of Ithaca to
Amend Planned Development Zone (PDZ) No. 10 Restarding New 32-Unit Development to
the Planning Board for a Recommendation
Whereas, the Sterling House & Clare Bridge of Ithaca facility, located at 101 and 103 Bundy
Road, proposes to construct a new building with 32 new resident rooms intended for seniors
transitioning between the assisted living facility (Sterling House) and the memory care facility
(Clare Bridge), on tax parcels Nos. 27.4-11.4 and 27.4-11.3, and
Whereas, the proposed building and related improvements and modifications will be largely
nestled into the existing development footprint on the 8.2 acre site, and
Whereas, the Planning Committee at its meeting on April 15, 2015 reviewed and discussed the
proposed expansion of the Sterling House & Clare Bridge of Ithaca facility and recommend that
the Town Board consider modifications to the PDZ language to allow for the additional facility
and to amend language discrepancies, and to refer the proposal to the Planning Board for a
recommendation and in depth review, now, therefore be it
Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby refers consideration of the proposed
changes to Planned Development Zone No. 10 (Limited Mixed Use, Sterling House/Sterling
Cottage) to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for a recommendation and in depth review of the
development proposal.
Moved: Tee Ann Hunter Seconded: Rich DePaolo
Vote: Ayes—Hunter, DePaolo, Goodman, Engman, Leary, Howe and Levine
Item 9 Consider Authorization for Bulk Salt Purchase
TB Resolution 2015 - 053: Budget Amendment Increasing the amount for Road De-icing
Supplies
Whereas: at the November 10, 2014 meeting, the Town Board adopted the 2015 Town of Ithaca
Budget which included $175,000 for Road De-icing supplies; and
Whereas: due to the severe winter weather conditions $175,000 has been spent so far this year;
and
Whereas: the remaining quantity of salt,approx. 100 tons, is not enough to treat the roads for the
beginning of the 2015/2016 winter season; and
Whereas: on average 1,000 tons of salt is applied from the beginning of the winter season until
the beginning of the new calendar year; and
Whereas: the NYS Office of General Services is requiring orders for road salt to be entered by
May 30, 2015; and
Page 9 of 19
Whereas: an additional 1,000 Tons of salt will be needed to achieve the normal amount of salt to
start a winter season; and
Whereas: Including this additional amount in the order to the NYS Office of General Services is
advisable; and
Whereas:At the April 21,2015 Public Works Committee meeting the situation was considered
and the Public Works committee recommended purchasing an additional 1,000 Tons of salt to be
available for the beginning of the 2015/2016 winter season, at a cost of approximately$60,000;
now therefore,be it
Resolved: That the Town Board approves an increase to the Road De-icing Supplies budget
DB5142.452, by an amount of$60,000 and authorizes and directs the Town Finance Officer to
record the appropriate budgetary amendment from the Highway Reserve Fund.
Moved: Pat Leary Seconded: Rod Howe
Vote: Ayes—Leary, Howe, Hunter,Engman, Goodman, Levine and DePaolo
Item 10 Authorize Award bids:
Mr. Weber reported that the bids for the Elm Street Ext. project came in significantly higher than
anticipated and has been pulled and will be reevaluated.
TB Resolution No.2015 -054: Authorization to Award Contract for Construction of the
Town of Ithaca Coddington Road Water Main Replacement Phase 2 Water Improvement
Proiect
Whereas on May 6, 2015, the Town of Ithaca Director of Public Works/Highway Superintendent
received bids for the Town of Ithaca Coddington Road Phase 2 Water Main Replacement Water
Improvement (the "Improvement"), for the replacement of 4,150 feet of existing ductile iron
main with new 8"water main made of Polywrapped Ductile Iron pipe, new valves,hydrant
connections and related ancillary facilities, and
Whereas the Director of Public Works has reviewed the bids and qualifications of the bidders
and has determined that the lowest responsive bid of$679,710.00 for the total project was made
by the lowest responsible bidder, R. B. Robinson Contracting, Inc., 535 Ithaca Road, Candor,
NY 13743, and
Whereas on April 8, 2013, the Town Board issued a Public Interest Order authorizing the
Improvement, which is Phase 2 of a two-phase project, with total costs for both phases not to
exceed $2,300,000, and
Whereas at the November 10, 2014, Town Board meeting, the Town Board authorized the
Town's 2015 budget by Resolution No. 2014-177, with the maximum amount of$760,000 to be
expended by the Town of Ithaca for this Improvement, which amount plus the phase 1 costs do
not exceed the $2,300,000 authorized for both phases in the Public Interest Order, now therefore
be it
Page 10 of 19
Resolved that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca authorizes the award of the contract for the
Town of Ithaca Coddington Road Water Main Replacement Water Improvement project to R. B.
Robinson Contracting, Inc., subject to final approval of the contract documents by the Town
Engineer and Attorney for the Town,and be it further
Resolved that the Town Supervisor is authorized to execute such contract upon such approval;
and be it further
Resolved that the Director of Public Works is authorized to approve change orders to such
contract upon receipt of appropriate justification provided that the maximum amount of such
change orders shall not in the aggregate exceed $68,000.00 without prior authorization of this
Board, and provided further that the total project cost, including the contract, engineering, legal
and other expenses does not exceed the maximum authorized cost of the project, and be it further
Resolved that the Town Finance Officer is directed and authorized to record all necessary and
appropriate budgetary and cash transactions, and transfer $679,710 bid amount plus a $68,000
contingency to establish the construction account, and $9,000 for ancillary project costs for a
total capital project fund budget of$756,710.00.
Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Eric Levine
Vote: Ayes—Howe, Levine, Hunter, DePaolo, Leary, Engman and Goodman
TB Resolution 2015 -055: Authorization to Award Contract for the Inlet Valley Cemetery
Wall Repair Proiect
Whereas: on January 12, 2015 the Town was notified by the NYS Department of State, Division
of Cemeteries that additional estimates or a bid would be required for the Cemetery wall repair
which was included in the Town's September 15, 2014 "Application of Maintenance Funds",
and
Whereas: On April 30, 2015 the Town of Ithaca Director of Public Works/Highway
Superintendent received bids for the Inlet Valley Cemetery Wall Repair, and
Whereas: The Director of Public Works has reviewed the bids and qualifications of the bidder
and has determined that the lowest responsive bid of $24,475.00 for the total project was made
by the lowest responsible bidder, Dycon Construction Northeast, LLC, 1841 Pennsylvania Ave.,
Pine City, NY 14871, and
Whereas: at its regular meeting on May 11, 2015, the Town Board has determined approval,
construction and implementation of the project are a Type II Action pursuant to the regulations
of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation promulgated pursuant to the
State Environmental Quality Review Act, because the Action constitutes "repaving of existing
highways not involving the addition of new travel lanes", and "replacement, rehabilitation or
reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on the same site," and thus approval,
construction and implementation of the project are not subject to review under SEQRA,and
Page 11 of 19
Resolved: that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca authorizes the award of the contract for the
Inlet Valley Cemetery Wall Repair Improvement Project to Dycon Construction Northeast LLC,
subject to final approval of the contract documents by the Town Engineer and Attorney for the
Town, and with approval of Funds from the NY State Office of Cemeteries, and be it further
Resolved: that the Town Supervisor is authorized to execute said contract upon such approval;
and be it further
Resolved: that the Director of Public Works is authorized to approve change orders to said
contract, without prior authorization of this Board, upon receipt of appropriate justification
provided that the maximum amount of such change orders shall not, in the aggregate, exceed
$2,500; and further provided that the total project cost, including the contract, engineering, legal
and other expenses does not exceed the maximum authorized cost of the project.
Moved: Tee Ann Hunter Seconded: Pat Leary
Vote: Ayes—Hunter, Leary, Levine, Engman, DePaolo, Goodman, and Howe
TB Resolution No.2015-056: Authorization to Award Contract for Construction of the
Town of Ithaca Sapsucker Water Tank Water Improvement and to Establish the Town of
Ithaca Sapsucker Water Tank Water Improvement Capital Project Fund
Whereas on May 8, 2015, the Director of Public Works/Highway Superintendent received bids
for the Town of Ithaca Sapsucker Water Tank Water Improvement project for the replacement of
an existing 500,000 gallon steel water tank with a 390,000 gallon glass-lined water tank, elevated
26 feet higher than the existing tank elevation on the same site located on Sapsucker Road, and
other related ancillary facilities, and
Whereas the Director of Public Works has reviewed the bids and qualifications of the bidders
and has determined that the lowest responsive bid of $1,293,233.00 for the total project was
made by the lowest responsible bidder, Statewide Aquastore Inc., 6010 Drott Drive, East
Syracuse, New York 13057, , and
Whereas, on December 8, 2014, the Town Board adopted a Public Interest Order authorizing the
Improvement,with a maximum cost of$1,600,000, now therefore be it
Resolved that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca authorizes the award of the contract for the
Town of Ithaca Sapsucker Water Tank Water Improvement project to Statewide Aquastore,
subject to final approval of the contract documents by the Town Engineer and Attorney for the
Town and final approval/authorization by the State Comptroller's Office, and be it further
Resolved that the Town Supervisor is authorized to execute such contract upon such approval of
the final contract documents; and be it further
Resolved that the Director of Public Works is authorized to approve change orders to such
contract upon receipt of appropriate justification provided that the maximum amount of such
change orders shall not in the aggregate exceed $130,000.00 without prior authorization of this
Page 12 of 19
Board, and provided further that the total project cost, including the contract, engineering, legal
and other expenses does not exceed the maximum authorized cost of the project, and be it further
Resolved that the Town Finance Officer is directed and authorized to record all necessary and
appropriate budgetary and cash transactions transferring $1,293,233.00 bid amount plus a
$130,000 contingency, and $19,500.00 for ancillary costs for a total budget of$1,442,733.00 for
the capital project fund"Town of Ithaca Sapsucker Water Tank Water Improvement"project.
Moved: Bill Goodman Seconded: Rod Howe
Vote: Ayes—Goodman, Howe, Levine, Leary, Engman,DePaolo and Hunter
Item 11 Consider approval of a resolution endorsing the development and submission of a
single, countywide Government Efficiency Plan establishing Tompkins County as Lead
Entity in the development of the Plan
TB Resolution 2015 - 057: Endorsing the development and submission of a single,
Countywide Government Efficiency Plan, establishing Tompkins County as Lead entity in
the development of the Plan
Whereas, the State of New York enacted legislation creating a Property Tax Freeze Credit as a
part of the 2015 State Budget; and
Whereas, the new law encouraged local governments to generate long-term property tax relief by
sharing services, consolidating or merging, and implementing operational efficiencies; and
Whereas, the law,provides a"freeze credit" to qualified homeowners that is equal to the increase
in property taxes levied by a taxing jurisdiction that limits any increase in its tax levy to a
property tax cap set by State law and develops and implements a Government Efficiency Plan
("Plan") determined to be compliant by the New York State Division of Budget; and
Whereas, to be determined compliant by the State, a Government Efficiency Plan must document
actions that have been,or will be, taken that will result in a sustained three-year savings,
beginning in 2017, that are equivalent to at least 1% of the combined 2014 property tax levies of
all signatories to the Plan; and
Whereas, in year one of the program, homeowners received a Freeze Credit if their local
government stayed within the property tax cap; and
Whereas, in year two of the program, homeowners will receive the Freeze Credit for taxes from
any taxing jurisdiction that stays within the property tax cap and that also puts forward a
compliant Government Efficiency Plan; and
Whereas,while allowing local governments to submit individual Plans, the State has encouraged
local governments to submit a single, countywide plan that achieves a savings of at least 1% of
the combined property tax levies of all of the participants; and
Page 13 of 19
Whereas, the State will recognize only savings associated with actions implemented after
January 1,2012; and
Whereas,prior to 2012, local governments in Tompkins County pioneered shared services,
mergers, and consolidations including the centralization of the property tax assessment function,
a fully consolidated public safety dispatch and interoperable communication system, a
consolidated public transit system, a two-county community college and, most recently, an inter-
municipal health benefits consortium that continue to generate multiple millions of dollars in
annual savings for taxpayers within Tompkins County; and
Whereas, in response to the State's directive, the Tompkins County Council of Governments
(TCCOG)formed a shared services committee that continues to explore a variety of prospective
shared services,but recognizes that time and careful thought is required to ensure that any shared
service initiative will result in lower costs and higher quality; and
Whereas, it is now estimated that savings well in excess of 1% of the $88.4 million levied by all
local governments within Tompkins County in 2014, including the County itself,will be
achieved and sustained during the period 2017-2019 by a combination of savings associated with
a dependent eligibility certification process undertaken by every municipal member of the Health
Benefits Consortium and changes made by Tompkins County to the cost structure of its health
benefit plan and; and
Whereas, additional efficiencies may be identified by participating municipalities that may also
be included in a countywide plan; and
Whereas, in a resolution enacted April 23,2015, the Tompkins County Council of Governments
found that a consolidated countywide Plan that documents savings in excess of 1% of the
combined 2014 property tax levies of all local governments within the County is the most
efficient and effective way to respond to the State's directive and has therefore endorsed the
development and presentation of a single countywide Government Efficiency Plan that includes
all local governments within Tompkins County; now therefore be it
Resolved, that the Town of Ithaca endorses the designation of Tompkins County as lead entity in
the development and submission of the Government Efficiency Plan and agrees to be a signatory
to a plan that is consistent with Tompkins County Administrator Joseph Mareane's April 23,
2015 memo to chief elected officers regarding the invitation to join a consolidated response to
the State Government Efficiency Plan.
Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Tee Ann Hunter
Vote: Ayes—Howe,Hunter, Levine, Leary, DePaolo, Engman and Goodman
Item 12 Consider approval of Town of Dryden Sewer Agreements
Mr. Engman reported that this is the culmination of a few years work to get existing sewer
services under an agreement and capture payments from the Town of Dryden.
Page 14 of 19
TB Resolution 2015 - 058: Approval of the sewer service agreement between the Town of
Ithaca and the Town of Dryden on behalf of Sewer District No. I
Whereas the Town of Ithaca and the Town of Dryden have revised the agreement for sewer
service on behalf of the Sewer District 1 (SD1), now therefore be it
Resolved, that the Town Board hereby approves the agreement, subject to approval by the
Attorney for the Town, and affix their signatures indicating same.
Moved: Bill Goodman Seconded: Eric Levine
Vote: Ayes—Goodman, Levine, Leary, Hunter, DePaolo, Howe and Engman
TB Resolution 2015 - 059: Approval of the sewer service agreement between the Town of
Ithaca and the Town of Dryden on behalf of the Peregrine Hollow Sewer District (Snyder
Hill)
Whereas the Town of Ithaca and the Town of Dryden have revised the agreement for sewer
service on behalf of the Peregrine Hollow Sewer District, now therefore be it
Resolved that the Town Board hereby approves the agreement, subject to approval by the
Attorney for the Town, and affix their signatures indicating same.
Moved: Eric Levine Seconded: Rich DePaolo
Vote: Ayes—Levine, DePaolo, Hunter, Goodman,Engman, Leary and Howe
Item 13 Consider Consent Agenda Items
Minutes had slight changes to them and Mr. DePaolo had a question about the phone and internet
length of contract which he will ask Ms. Carrier-Titti about. Ms. Brock also noted that the
Supervisor is the person who must sign the contract, not Ms. Carrier-Titti.
TB Resolution 2015 - 060: Adopt Consent Agenda
Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves and/or adopts the
following Consent Agenda items:
a. Approval of Town Board Meeting Minutes of April 27,2015—Pulled
b. Approval of Town of Ithaca Abstract
c. Approval of Bolton Point Abstract
d. Approval of Temporary Stipend—Sr. Engineering Technician
e. Approval of Change of Analog Phone and Internet Service Provider—Pulled
L Approval of appointment of a planning Intern
g. Approval of appointment of a crossing guard
h. Approval of Work Study Agreement
Moved: Eric Levine Seconded: Rod Howe
Vote: Ayes—Levine, Howe, Leary, Hunter, DePaolo, Engman and Goodman
Page 15 of 19
TB Resolution 2015 -060a: Approval of Minutes of April 27,2015—Pulled
Whereas, the draft Minutes of the April 27, 2015 meetings of the Town Board have been
submitted for review and approval, now therefore be it
Resolved, that the Town Board hereby approves the submitted minutes, with changes, as the
final minutes of the meeting April 27,2015 of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca.
Moved: Rich DePaolo Seconded: Bill Goodman
Vote: Ayes—Levine, Howe, Leary, Hunter, DePaolo, Engman and Goodman
TB Resolution 2015 -060b: Town of Ithaca Abstract
Whereas the following numbered vouchers have been presented to the Ithaca Town Board for
approval of payment; and
Whereas the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board; now
therefore be it
Resolved that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers in
total for the amounts indicated.
VOUCHER NOS. 503 -540
General Fund Town wide 371,865.36
General Fund Part Town 87898.44
Highway Fund Part Town 37569.81
Water Fund 12,363.67
Sewer Fund 13,367.35
Coddin ton Road Water Main Replace 542.80
Risk Retention Fund 89.00
Fire Protection Fund 387610.19
Debt Service 175.00
TOTAL 103,481.62
TB Resolution 2015-060c: Bolton Point Abstract
Whereas, the following numbered vouchers for the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water
Commission have been presented to the governing Town Board for approval of payment; and
Whereas, the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board; now,
therefore,be it
Resolved, that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers.
Voucher Numbers: 179-229
Page 16 of 19
Check Numbers: 15896-15947
Capital Impr/Repl Project $ 0
Operating Fund $ 56,015.56
TOTAL $ 56,015.56
Less Prepaid $ 11,549.43
TOTAL $ 44,466.13
TB Resolution 2015 -060d: Approval of Temporary Stipend—Sr. Engineering Technician
Whereas,Wayne Sincebaugh,Water& Sewer Maintenance Supervisor has been out on leave
from February 24, 2015 through April 28,2015; and
Whereas,Joseph Slater, Senior Engineering Technician, agreed to be available for emergency
response, outside of normal business hours during Mr. Sincebaugh's absence; and
Whereas, due to the severity of this past winter's weather resulting in above normal system
failures, Mr. Slater has been going above and beyond the call of duty to cover not just the
emergency on call responsibilities, but also the emergency response responsibilities during
normal business hours; and
Whereas, the Human Resources Manager and Director of Public Works recommend a temporary
stipend for Mr. Slater in the amount of$60 per week for the nine weeks Mr. Sincebaugh was
absent, for a total of$540; and
Whereas, the Personnel & Organization Committee has reviewed and discussed and approves the
recommendation for the temporary stipend; now, therefore be it
Resolved, the Ithaca Town Board hereby approves and authorizes the temporary stipend to
Joseph Slater, Senior Engineering Technician, to be paid in a lump sum of$540.00 in the next
payroll cycle.
TB Resolution 2015 -060e: Approval of new analog phone and internet service provider—
Pulled
Whereas, the Town currently contracts with Time Warner Cable for analog phone and internet
services for Public Works Facility and Town Hall, and
Whereas, the Personnel and Organization Committee has reviewed and recommended a change
of provider based upon information supplied by the Information Technology Department
showing a savings of approximately$700 a month by contracting with Finger Lakes Technology
Group,now therefore be it
Resolved, that the Town Board hereby authorizes the Town Supervisor to enter into an
agreement with Finger Lakes Technology Group for analog local/long distance phone services at
both Public Works Facility and Town Hall and internet service for Town Hall.
Page 17 of 19
Moved: Rich DePaolo Seconded: Bill Goodman
Vote: Ayes—Levine, Howe, Leary, Hunter, DePaolo, Engman and Goodman
TB Resolution 2015 -060f: Appointment of Planning Intern—Apodaca
Whereas, the Director of Planning has recognized the need for additional staff support for the
Planning Department during the summer months and has specific projects that would be
appropriate for the involvement of a Planning Intern; and
Whereas, the Planning Department has budgeted funds to cover the cost of having planning
interns and has traditionally hired temporary interns to provide them with valuable work
experience while the Town of Ithaca has received valuable technical support from the interns;
and
Whereas, MaryDena Apodaca will be completing a Master's Degree in City and Regional
Planning at Rutgers University in May 2016 and desires to expand her experience as a Planning
Intern, and has been assessed as possessing the qualifications necessary for appointment to this
temporary intern position; now, therefore,be it
Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves the Director of Planning's
appointment of MaryDena Apodaca as a temporary full-time Planning Intern, beginning on June
5, 2015, at an hourly rate of$12.25 based on a maximum of 37 'h hours a week to be charged to
Account#B8020.110. Benefits are limited to the temporary status of this position.
TB Resolution 2015 -060g: Appointment of Crossing Guard—Smithers
Whereas, there is presently a vacancy in the part time position of Crossing Guard on Warren
Road for the crossings for Dewitt Middle School; and
Whereas, the Human Resources Manager interviewed candidates for the said position and has
determined that Charles Smithers possess the necessary knowledge and skills to satisfactorily
perform the duties of Crossing Guard and makes the recommendation for appointment; now,
therefore,be it
Resolved, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the appointment of
Charles Smithers as part time Crossing Guard, retro-active to May 1, 2015 at the wage of$11.00
per shift, from account number A3120.100,with no benefits.
TB Resolution 2015 -060h: Approval of Federal Work Study Agreements.
Whereas, the Town has budgeted the necessary funds to cover the cost of participating in the
Cornell University and Ithaca College Federal Work Study Program to provide student interns
with a valuable work experience while providing the Town of Ithaca with valuable technical
support; and
Page 18 of 19
Whereas, Cornell University covers 75% of the hourly wages and 100% of the employment
expenses of this program and the Town would be responsible for the other 25% of the hourly
wages plus 10.25%for non-registered students employed for the summer; and
Whereas, Ithaca 1 College covers 100% of the hourly wages and 100% of the employment
expenses of this program; now, therefore, be it
Resolved, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the participation in the
Cornell University and Ithaca College Federal Work Study Programs for the school year of July
1, 2015 through June 30, 2016; and be it further
Resolved, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby authorize and direct the Town
Supervisor to sign any necessary Agreements or Participation forms; and be it further
Resolved, the cost of participating in the said program for the year 2016 shall be reviewed and
approved during the budget process.
Item 14 Report of Town Officials Ethics Disclosure Forms
Ms. Terwilliger reported that the Ethics Board met this afternoon to review the Ethics Disclosure
Forms and all but two were submitted and approved. She added that the Ethics Board approved
allowing people to state on a previous submission"no changes"and sign and date it each year if
that is applicable.
Item 15 Report of Town Committees and Intermunicipal Organizations
Item 16 Review of Correspondence
Item 17 Consider Adjournment
Meeting was adjourned at 8pm upon motion and a second.
Submitte
79
Paulette Terwilliger
Town Clerk
Page 19 of 19
Board of Fire Commissioners
Report to Ithaca Town Board
May 11,2015
The following is a summary of the Board of Fire Commissioners quarterly report to the Ithaca
Town Board for the first quarter of 2015.
Included with this report are:
• The Fire Chief's Report given at the April 14, 2015 BFC meeting.This includes the Fire
Marshal's Report& Fire Prevention Bureau activity.
• The department call activity reports for January 1- March 31, 2015.Total calls 1.198
slightly less than last year's first quarter.
• The financial operations summary through March 31, 2015.
Fire Department Operational Staffing (March 31,2015).
• As of March 31, 2015 the active Fire Fighting staffing totaled 63 (uniform staffing- 1
Chief, 6 Assistant Chiefs, 8 lieutenants, &47 Fire Fighters plus 1 Deputy Chief on per
diem. In addition there is 1 Administrative Coordinator for a total of 64 personnel. This
is the first time in recent years that the department has been nearly fully staffed.
2015 Fire Department Budget- The Department operating budget for 2015 is approximately
20,000 lower than the 2014 budget. Expenditures overall for the first quarter are running slightly
under the budgeted amount. (Note: that the staffing resources required for the Chapter House
fire on April 14,will impact these expenditures and will be reflected in future financial updates.)
SCBA Equipment—In April the department received notification that the federal Firefighters
Assistance grant submitted for the complete replacement of the Department's 15 year old SCBA
(Self Contained Breathing Apparatus)equipment has been approved. It is anticipated that the
grant will cover a little over$400,000 of the total replacement cost which is estimated to be
about$500,000.
Station 9 (Collegetown) - The Chief reported that a developer had expressed interest in
purchasing Station 9. An appraisal has been done on the property and the City has hired a
consultant to look into the proposal.
Board of Fire Commissioners
In April the Board of Fire Commissioners passed a resolution urging the County Legislature to
not approve a change to the County Code that would allow"Sparklers" and similar devices to be
sold in the County. This was in response to a State law that allowed local counties to determine
whether or not to treat sparklers as an exception to the statewide ban on dangerous Fire Works.
The County Legislature voted against changing the County Code on May 5, 2015.
The BFC meeting agendas and minutes have been posted on the City Website.
The link to all available minutes(dating back to October 1987) : https:Hlfweb.tompkins-
co.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=297404&dbid=l3
Board of Fire Commissioners
Report to Ithaca Town Board
May 11,2015
Volunteer Program Development
Two volunteers began interior firefighter training in February 2015. One of these new
volunteers will complete the course next week and will become a Class I interior firefighter with
the department. The other one needed to withdraw due to an injury but is interested in serving
as a member of the Fire Police group.
The Fire Police hold monthly training sessions and the interior volunteers participate in training
with the career staff.
The draft volunteer handbook will be reviewed and revised in 2015. An effort is underway for a
more active recruitment campaign to begin in 2015.
Other Items & Items in progress:
1 Upgraded software in 2015 for the 911 system, may make it possible to implement
proposed changes in the dispatch protocols used for determining when the fire
department is dispatched for EMS calls in 2015. The software upgrade is also expected
to provide better communication capability between emergency response units from
different service areas across the state.
2 Charter Review- the BFC continues to review and discuss changes in the charter relating
to the role and responsibilities of the Board of Fire Commissioners. We anticipate
working with the Common Council's City Administration committee on this issue.
3 Resource recovery/False Alarm Policy—Currently on hold following preliminary review
with the City Attorney.
4 County Fire-Disaster—EMS Advisory Board—no new action on this issue.
5 Training Center Facility Project—this is still under consideration, no construction has
been authorized due to the training site being located on land designated as City Park
land.
6 City-Town Fire Service Contract-The Board of Fire Commissioners remains concerned
about the organizational impact and impact on the Community served by the Ithaca Fire
Department if there is a significant change in the current agreement between the City and
the Town.
7 There has been a vacancy on the Board since January 2014 .
Notable incidents - Chapter House fire on April 14,2015.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bill`Gilligan
Chair, Board of Fire Commissioners
f
CITY OI; ITHACA
V rt 310 West Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850-5.497
OFFICE OF THE:FIRE CHIEF
Telephone: 60'7,272-1234 Fax: 60?-2-72-2`93
MEMORANDUM
To: Board of Fire Commissioners
From: Tom Parsons, Fire Chief
Date: April 10th, 2015
Re: Fire Chiefs Monthly Report to the Board of Dire Commissioners
ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION
Administration
1) Career Personnel Rcport
PERSONNEL STAFFING LEVELS
1 Chien
I Deputy Chid(per diem) '
6 Assistant Chicfs
K Lieutenants
47 Fire Fighters
62 Uniform Personnel
1 Administrative Coordinator
"Total employees as of March 31'', 201 5—64
a) Vacancies
• None
h) Retirements:
• Nonc
0 Hiring/Promotions
Page 2 of'5 - Fire Chief's Monthly Report April 10"'. 2015
• Fire Lieutenant Robert Covert 11 was promoted to Assistant Firc Chief on
March 10"', 2015. The promotion fills the vacancy caused by Assistant Chief
LaBuff's ret ircment.
• f irefighter James Wheal was promoted to Fire Lieutenant on March 10"',
2015. 1"he promotion fills the vacancy caused by Lt. C:'over•t's Promotion.
• Firefighter Dylan W'atros was hired on March 30'x', 2015. The hiring fills the
vacancy caused by Firefighter Wheel's promotion to Fire Lieutenant.
2� Budget Status
a) 2015 Budget: Budget Summary—sec accompanying report
3) County Communications and 911 Programs:
a) Tompkins County 911 has updated its communications systems and paging
system. The updates will allow for more streamlined paging and fewer tones
being transmitted when dispatching any particular department.
b) The 911 Center has installed a new recording systcrn that will allow for better
auditing and review of incidents. The recording system was funded by a NYS
grant.
4) Grants and Donations
a) The 2014 Assistant to Firefighters Grant Application was submitted on December
5"', 2014. The grant request is to fund the replacement cif our 15 year old Self
Contained Breathing Apparatus. We have received requests for additional
information from FEMA regarding our application. The application is currently
under staff review, and we are waiting for the results ol'our application.
LIFE SAFELY DIVISION
Fire Prevention Bureau
1) Code l.:
• Page 3 of'5 - Fire Chief's Monthly Report April 10`x', 2015
Town Fire Safety&Property Maintenance 50
City- Sprinkler Inspec€ions 2
City- Alternative Dire Protection Systems 1
City- I"ire Alarm Inspection I
City - Standpipe Flow Test 1
City- Fire Pump Flow Test 0
Permits or Certificates: 29
Operating Permit - Assembly Occupancy 14
Operating Permit -- Hazardous Occupancy 1
Operating Permit - Lumber Yard I
Operating Permit - Elevator 0
Operating Permit- Fireworks 0
Certificate of Compliance- Occupancy I I
Certificate of Compliance- Fire Alarm I
Certificate of Compliance-Fire Sprinkler 0
Certificate of Compliance- Fire Pump 0
Certificate of Compliance-Fire Standpipe 0
Certificate of Compliance-Alternative Suppression 1
2) Fire Investigation Unit:
The Fire Investigation Team performed an investigation f'or a house fire at 425 N.
Cayuga St., in the City of Ithaca. The cause of the fire was determined to be accidental.
3) Public Education and Special Events
Public Education Events: 2
Fire Drills Witnessed: 0
Child Safety Seat Inspections: 2
OPERATIONS DIVISION
Response
1) Januat toubil March 2015 Responses - 1196 Incidents
City of Ithaca: 835 Incidents(69.82%z)
Fires: 20
Overpressure/Rupture
EMS/Rescue: 3.'37
Hazardous Conditions: 39
Service Calls: bb
Good Intent: 110
Y
Page 4 of 5 - Fire Chiers Monthly Report April 10"'. 2015
Alarms/No fires: 261
Severe Weather: 0
Town of lthaca: 352 Incidents(29.43%)
Fires: 3
Overpressure/Rupture ()
EMS/Rescue: 229
Hazardous Conditions: 7
Service Calf: 12
Good Intent: 46
Alarims/No Fires: 25
Severe Weather: 0
Mutual Aid: 9 Incidents(0.75%)
Fires: 4
Overpressure/Rupture 0
EMS/Rescue: 0
Hazardous Conditions: 0
Service Ca l Is: 2
Good Intent: 3
A larmst No Fires: 0
Severe Weather: 0
Simultaneous Incidents: 323 incidents (27%)
2) Emergency Management: No Report
3) Mutual Aid Calls: Quarterly Report
Support
1) Training
Quarterly Report
2) Training Center
Quarterly Report
3) Apparatus and Facilities
No Relx}rt
Volunteer Recruitment and Retention
Q
Page 5 of 5 -.Fire Chief's Monthly Repod April 10"', 2015
1) Summaries of'Service Hours: Quarterly Report
2) There are currently 17 Active Volunteer Firefighters and Fire Police
3) Requests from Company Members to become active: None
-M
2015 REVENUE SUMMARY BY ACCOUNT
MARCH 2015
Revised Remaining Average
REVENUE YTD REVENUE PCT Collected REVENUE Mthly Projected
Fire Code Inspecffon J565 .$59,000 $16,916.00 29% $42,084 $5,639 $67,664
.......... .... ............ ... ....
�
Home&Comm Services 2189 0% ;$1100 :$o $o
Public Safety Services a7
,2260 $'3,5;0 0 so 0/0 $3,500 $0 $0
0
Fire Protective Services '2262 $1'3,135,000 $413,249 13% $2,721,751 $137,71J $1,652,996
......... .... .... .... .... ......
...... .... ..
.......... ........
Rental of Real Property ;2410 $11,000 $150 1% $10,850 1$50 $600
Rental of Equipment 2414 :so 0% $0 :so $0
$9.000
Public Safety Permits 2550 $10,000 $1,000 )0% :$4,000
.... .... ...... .. ... ..... ......
....... .......... .......
;
Fines&Forfeited Boil �2610 :$2,000 $180 0% $1,820 $60 $720
Minor Sales 2655 $100 $2 2% $98 $1 $8
Sale-of-Equipment 2.6615.-.,-$0.. 0% 40
.......
Insurance Recoveries 2680 $10,000 $159 2%
$9,841 $53 '$636.....
.............
:
;
Other Compensation for Loss 2690 $50 0% $50 :$o $o
Refund Prior Year Expense 2701 $200 $0 0% $200 $0 so
.Gifts..&.Donations.1..,. 2705- 7.74.,37.7 $0 .05
Unclassified Revenue 2770 '$600 $0 0%
$0 $o $0
Home&Community Service 3989 $0 0% $0 $0 :$o
$4,005,927 $431,656 10.8% $2,799,294 $143,885 $1,726,624--
Ithaca FD
Incident Type Period Comparisons
Alarm Date Between {01/01/2015} and {03/31/2015}
Incident Type 01/01/2015 01/01/201 01/01/2013 01/01/2012
to 4 to to to
03/31/2015 03/31/201 03/31/2013 03/31/2012
4
2 0 0 0
100 Fire, Other 3 3 0 0
111 Building fire 8 19 7 8
112 Fires in structure other than in a building 0 1 0 0
113 Cooking fire, confined to container 6 8 5 12
114 Chimney or flue fire, confined to chimney or flue 3 1 0 0
116 Fuel burner/boiler malfunction, fire confined 1 0 0 0
118 Trash or rubbish fire, contained 0 3 3 2
130 Mobile property (vehicle) fire, Other 0 0 1 0
131 Passenger vehicle fire 2 4 3 2
132 Road freight or transport vehicle fire 0 1 0 0
143 Grass fire 0 0 0 1
150 Outside rubbish fire, Other 0 1 0 1
151 Outside rubbish, trash or waste fire 1 3 0 3
154 Dumpster or other outside trash receptacle fire 1 1 1 1
160 Special outside fire, Other 2 0 0 0
161 Outside storage fire 0 0 1 0
240 Explosion (no fire), Other 0 1 1 0
251 Excessive heat, scorch burns with no ignition 2 1 0 0
300 Rescue, EMS incident, other 0 3 3 4
3001Gorge Rescue, EMS incident, Ground Evacuation 0 0 1 0
3002Gorge Rescue, EMS incident, Low Angle Rope Assist 0 1 0 0
311 Medical assist, assist EMS crew 1 3 5 4
320 Emergency medical service, other 6 10 12 2
321 EMS call, excluding vehicle accident with injury 519 442 468 464
322 Motor vehicle accident with injuries 18 24 29 18
323 Motor vehicle/pedestrian accident (MV Ped) 6 2 5 9
324 Motor Vehicle Accident with no injuries 13 8 7 8
331 Lock-in (if lock out , use 511 ) 2 0 0 0
3311Lock-in / Knox Box Access Required 0 0 0 1
341 Search for person on land 0 0 0 2
350 Extrication, rescue, Other 1 0 0 1
352 Extrication of victim(s) from vehicle 0 0 2 1
353 Removal of victim(s) from stalled elevator 0 3 2 1
381 Rescue or EMS standby 0 3 0 1
400 Hazardous condition, Other 10 17 9 12
410 Combustible/flammable gas/liquid condition, other 0 2 3 3
411 Gasoline or other flammable liquid spill 1 1 1 1
412 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 12 20 22 12
413 Oil or other combustible liquid spill 0 0 0 2
421 Chemical hazard (no spill or leak) 1 0 2 0
04/06/2015 10:44 Page 1
a
Ithaca FD
Incident Type Period Comparisons
Alarm Date Between {01/01/2015} and {03/31/2015}
Incident Type 01/01/2015 01/01/201 01/01/2013 01/01/2012
to 4 to to to
03/31/2015 03/31/201 03/31/2013 03/31/2012
4
424 Carbon monoxide incident 10 5 6 1
440 Electrical wiring/equipment problem, Other 3 2 4 4
441 Heat from short circuit (wiring), defective/worn 0 1 4 0
442 Overheated motor 2 2 1 3
444 Power line down 3 2 2 4
445 Arcing, shorted electrical equipment 1 4 4 6
451 Biological hazard, confirmed or suspected 0 1 0 0
461 Building or structure weakened or collapsed 1 0 0 0
463 Vehicle accident, general cleanup 2 0 1 0
480 Attempted burning, illegal action, Other 0 0 1 3
481 Attempt to burn 0 1 0 0
500 Service Call, other 32 51 33 28
510 Person in distress, Other 4 4 4 3
511 Lock-out 4 0 5 0
520 Water problem, Other 9 20 2 2
521 Water evacuation 0 12 1 0
522 Water or steam leak 11 21 4 6
531 Smoke or odor removal 2 0 0 2
540 Animal problem, Other 1 1 0 0
541 Animal problem 0 1 0 0
550 Public service assistance, Other 3 3 7 1
551 Assist police or other governmental agency 3 5 3 6
552 Police matter 3 1 2 0
553 Public service 2 0 1 0
554 Assist invalid 5 1 5 0
555 Defective elevator, no occupants 1 0 0 0
561 Unauthorized burning 0 1 1 0
600 Good intent call, Other 10 12 15 16
611 Dispatched & cancelled en route 4 0 2 2
6111Dispatched & cancelled en route - By Dispatcher 4 8 2 2
6112Dispatched & cancelled en route - By Bangs 45 37 54 31
6113Dispatched & cancelled en route - By CUEMS 21 21 14 14
6114Dispatched & cancelled en route - By CU EH&S 24 35 20 11
6115Dispatched & cancelled en route - By IC Safety 20 11 24 3
6117Dispatched & cancelled en route - By MA Dept 1 7 0 2
6118Dispatched & cancelled en route - By IPD 3 5 2 0
6119Dispatched & cancelled en route - By Other Police 0 1 0 0
621 Wrong location 0 0 0 1
622 No Incident found on arrival at dispatch address 8 6 3 5
631 Authorized controlled burning 0 0 2 0
651 Smoke scare, odor of smoke 3 2 5 3
04/06/2015 10:44 Page 2
Ithaca FD
Incident Type Period Comparisons
Alarm Date Between {01/01/2015} and {03/31/2015}
Incident Type 01/01/2015 01/01/201 01/01/2013 01/01/2012
to 4 to to to
03/31/2015 03/31/201 03/31/2013 03/31/2012
4
653 Smoke from barbecue, tar kettle 0 1 0 2
661 EMS call, party transported by non-fire agency 1 0 0 0
671 HazMat release investigation w/no HazMat 12 7 8 6
700 False alarm or false call, Other 6 1 4 1
700lFalse alarm or false call, Other - Medical Alarm 22 7 11 2
710 Malicious, mischievous false call, Other 2 1 4 1
711 Municipal alarm system, malicious false alarm 0 0 3 0
713 Telephone, malicious false alarm 0 0 1 0
714 Central station, malicious false alarm 9 10 11 6
715 Local alarm system, malicious false alarm 3 0 0 0
721 Bomb scare - no bomb 0 0 0 1
730 System malfunction, Other 7 7 5 23
731 Sprinkler activation due to malfunction 6 8 5 1
733 Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 16 12 7 7
734 Heat detector activation due to malfunction 1 3 3 1
735 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 20 32 18 34
736 CO detector activation due to malfunction 13 5 5 8
740 Unintentional transmission of alarm, Other 8 16 27 20
741 Sprinkler activation, no fire - unintentional 14 4 12 4
743 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 119 118 130 112
744 Detector activation, no fire - unintentional 37 64 54 53
745 Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional 31 31 36 31
746 Carbon monoxide detector activation, no CO 2 6 2 6
900 Special type of incident, Other 0 1 0 0
Totals 1198 1205 1177 1059
04/06/2015 10:44 Page 3
Ithaca Fire Department
January through March 2015 Responses-Incident Type by District
800
■Other
700 •Severe Weather
Nam No Fire
600 ■Good Intent Call
_ ■Service Call
500
o Hazardous Condition
400 ■EMSIRescue
■Overpressure/Rupture
300
■Fire
200 _
100 .. ---� —
_ kz
0 q-
£4
°" °^' O" O� o. g G$
q ry % 'cm •o C% m �4 ('o�
�Sr
District
Ithaca Fire Department
January through March 2015 Responses-Incident Type by Municipality
000
800
00
■Other
600 ;, _ --- '----" ■Severeweather
_ ■Alarril Fire
500 .,'t ■Good Intent Call
■Service Call
400 G Hazardous Condition
■EMS/Rescue
300 ■Overpressure/Rupture
■Fire
200
100
0
Total City Total Town Outside Ithaca
Municipality
Ithaca Fire Department
January through March 2015- Responses by Municipality
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50% Ill Ithaca
■Town of Ithaca
40% ■City of Ithaca
30
20
10%
Municipality
Ithaca Fire Department
Municipality.District,and Incident Type Responses
January through March 2015
erpreesur ous Good Intent Severe Percentage of
District Fire Rupture EMSIRescue Condition Service Call Call Alarms/No Fire Weather Other Total Incidents
City of Ithaca 18 2 311 35 86 70 236 0 0 738 61.71%
City of Ithaca-Comall Property 2 0 26 4 0 40 25 0 0 97 8.11%
City of Ithaca-Ithaca College 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.G0%
City Cascadillla Crack Gorge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
City Fall Crock Gorge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
City Six Mile Crock Gorge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Town of tduwa 2 0 182 6 11 21 29 0 0 251 20.99%
Town of Ithaca-Cornell Property 0 0 5 0 1 8 9 0 0 23 1.92%
Town of Ithaca-Ithaca College 1 0 42 1 0 17 17 0 0 78 6.52%
Town of Ithaca-Six Mile Gorge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Town of tthace-Buttermilk Gorge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 040%
Town of Ithaca-Tmman Gorge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
Outside Ithaca 4 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 9 0.76%
Tatal 27 2 566 46 80 159 316 0 0 1198 100.00%
verpres urof Hazardous Good Intent severe Percentage of
District Fire Rupture EMSIRescue Condition Service Call Call Alarms/No Fire Weather Other Total Incidents
Total City 20 2 337 39 66 110 281 0 0 836 69.82%
Total Town 3 0 229 7 12 46 55 0 0 352 29.43%
Outside Ithaca 4 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 9 0.75%
Total 27 2 566 46 80 159 316 0 0 1198 100.00%
Ithaca Fire Department Responses-Electron District
January-March 2015
Overpressure hazardous
Fire Rupture FMS Rescue Conditlon Servlco Call Good lntent Alarm/No Fire Sovere Weather Other Total
City-tst Ward District 1 NE,West HO 0 0 14 0 3 0 2 0 0 19
C' -1st Ward District 2,W.West NO 1 0 23 1 3 7 5 0 0 40
C -tst Ward,District 3,SW,Southwest 2 0 27 5 2 10 12 0 0 S8
City-tst Ward.District 4,S,Lower South NO 0 0 9 1 4 0 5 0 0 19
City-tst Ward.District 5,S.UpW South NO 1 1 4 2 2 1 14 0 0 25
City-2nd Ward District 1,NE,Triangle 0 0 25 1 3 1 5 8 0 0 42
C -2nd Ward District 2 S.Southsida Titus 3 0 50 4 11 5 54 0 0 127
C -2nd Ward.District 3.W Fulton Court Lin 5 0 48 2 8 19 18 0 0 100
C -2nd Ward District 4,Commons East Business 1 1 39 3 8 6 37 0 0 95
C' -3rd Ward District 1,E,Cornell Cameg 1 0 21 3 1 30 20 0 0 76
C' -3rd Ward,District 2,E.Collegetri BelShef 1 0 16 3 2 2 11 0 0 37
C' -3rd Ward District 3,SE.BeiSher,E State 1 0 7 1 2 2 1 0 0 14
City-4th Ward District 1 NE.West Campus 0 0 6 1 1 5 11 0 0 24
C -4th Ward,District 2,E.Maldle East NO 1 0 4 6 3 4 12 0 0 30
City-4th Ward District 3 E.Lower Cologatown 1 0 10 1 6 3 27 0 0 So
C" -5th Ward,Dstrict 1.N,Fad Crk and WOw 0 0 13 2 2 2 4 0 0 23
City-5th Ward,District 2,N.Fall Crk,Gun H41 1 0 6 0 1 3 4 0 0 15
City-5th Ward District 3 NE,Comell He hts 1 0 6 1 2 3 13 0 0 26
C' -5th Ward District 4 Farm Aurora King 0 0 7 2 0 3 3 0 0 15
C' -5m Ward,District 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Town-District 1 NW TrumansbuM Rd 0 0 24 3 0 1 0 5 0 0 32
Town-District 2,SW Bostwick 8 Etmira Rds 0 0 5 1 0 5 1 0 0 12
Town-District 3,S.Stone Quarry and South NO 0 0 57 0 0 9 9 0 0 75
Town-District 4 E Ellis Hollow to Statemtlo 0 0 25 1 5 3 8 0 0 42
Town-District S NE Cornet Campus to NE 0 0 2 0 0 9 6 0 0 17
Taws-District 6,N RoatKanshaw Winthrop 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Town-District 7 N Village of Cayuga Hgts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Town-District B N Cay2ga Heights Rd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Town-District 9 N East Shore and RerrMck 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 4
Town-District 10 S Ithaca Cotlege 1 0 49 1 0 14 15 0 0 60
Tam-District 11.SE Troy Codckngtn Slaterville 0 0 7 1 2 1 1 0 0 12
Town-District 12.E.Maple Ave 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2
Town-District 13 S South of King Rd 1 0 7 0 4 1 3 0 0 16
Town-Ds"14,W.Mecidenhirg Rd i 1 1 0 1 51 0 1 3 4 0 0 60
Town-District 75,N.Hanshaw.H' ate Tr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Out of District 4 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 9
January through March 2015- Ithaca Fire Department Responses-Election District
0Other
o Severe Weather
oAlarm/No Fire
■Good Intent
BService Call
❑Hazardous Condition
■EMS Rescue
•Overpressure Rupture
ae h
■Fire
c�
I ,
fi9S99yEy9yflfiHSY894445 & § � � 11 11y4
R b f L 9 6 6 6 6 td 6 6 � fJ 3r, ; l t
4 4 f f f £ £ £ £ 4 4 f f 4 £ £ 4 4 4 4
Y Y N qg �j
iigi = �' a 5"e9§ Est g 8 8
5 t i b
Eledlon Olatrid
Ithaca FD
Primary Action Taken Report (Summary)
Alarm Date Between {01/01/2015} And {03/31/2015}
Type of Action Taken Count Percent
11 Extinguishment by fire service personnel 15 1.25%
23 Extricate, disentangle 2 0.17 %
30 Emergency medical services, Other 22 1.84 %
31 Provide first aid & check for injuries 19 1.59 %
32 Provide basic life support (BLS) 352 29.41 %
41 Identify, analyze hazardous materials 1 0.08 %
42 HazMat detection, monitoring, sampling, & analysis 6 0.50 %
45 Remove hazard 3 0.25%
52 Forcible entry 2 0.17 %
55 Establish safe area 12 1.00%
60 Systems and services, Other 6 0.50%
63 Restore fire alarm system 3 0.25%
64 Shut down system 7 0.58%
70 Assistance, Other 9 0.75%
71 Assist physically disabled 6 0.50 %
73 Provide manpower 2 0.17 %
75 Provide equipment 6 0.50 %
80 Information, investigation & enforcement, Other 45 3.76 %
81 Incident command 4 0.33 %
84 Refer to proper authority 1 0.08 %
86 Investigate 223 18.63 %
861 Investigate Alarm Condition 167 13.95 %
862 Investigate EMS, Released by Bangs EMS 117 9.77 %
863 Investigate EMS, Released by CU EMS 15 1.25 %
864 Investigate EMS, Released by Other EMS Agency 1 0.08 %
865 Investigate, Hazardous Condition 17 1.42 %
866 Investigate Non-EMS, Released by Police 2 0.17 %
869 Investigate Not Specified 2 0.17 %
87 Investigate fire out on arrival 4 0.33 %
92 Standby 4 0.33 %
93 Cancelled en route 122 10.19 %
Total Incident Count: 1197
04/06/2015 10:48 Page 1
,j
/j
%�% AM AM
0 % '
onop ,PI.M.
i
2015
Budget Program Account Balances
50 51 52 53 54 f 55
°g m i
2015 10 ` Z i ? moo, m i 0 I v
1 m j c j c f d $ -
•- { a o
a >v o
m i
171,505 105 27,958 I 1,855 1 371 I 834 1 2,434 1
Admin I 2,166 1,484$ 37,102 78%i 134403
Staff 4,842,152 110 59,683 91,890 1 11,486 I 574,319 330,394 21.8241 44,796 j 1,134,392 7796] 3707,760
_____-.---..._._-.__. __._ __- __---- -----__.__._.__..__._.__.._.___1____-_- ___..------___.__c__--•-- -_-..___..
OverTime 370,000 125 5,240 f 161 1 343 1 45.399 0 01 1,0981 52,241 8696' 317,759
Furn&Fbdures 0 205 ! i p 0%� 0
- - -
Off lee Equip 0 210 I ( p
` Other Equip 44.850 225 5 1_-____-.__._ 154 '
_.. 100%; 44,696
17,139 405 2 079 f 1...___ ._ ._.. � ` - - --�-----------___ .--- ----•
Telephone 1.159 3,238 81% 13,901
78%? 66.
Umes 85.000 410 18.432; 18.432
568
Clothes 100.000 415 0' 17,199 `- 83%! 82801
Gas b Op 71.000 420 _ _- _ .___i .._. __._...___ ____•--_-_ -_-___ 15 f -. -
15 100%� 70.988 5
Office Expen 9.000 425 340 135. _...! 475 9596 8,525
Contracts ---15,000 435___._..__2.002 { ` ' 2.002 87%1 12.998
-- --.�...r ,-.-_.._-.-_._ _ ...__-----
Statt Devel 19,000 440 0 i 01--__.._..-.0 E O.`___�____ 0, p 100X; 19.000
Travel 10,000 445 0 i 791 ' 791
92% 9,209
-
Insurance 110.375 455 37,988 , 37,988 66X; 72387
_--- --_-__ __ _.. . _-i __-_____ __r_•- _i_.__._ _. ____7
Prgm Supp1 21,000 460 112 -_�-_0 r 01 8.466 i 1,364 i 0; 9,942 11,058 y
_ -_--.__--
Rental 1,700 470 ! �{ 91 91 9596 1,609
Prop Ma1n1 39.000 475 -- ----------_- --- -r-------�--- 7.963 _._._.-....____ 7,963 ---•----8��-------- -•-_•_-
31.037
Equip Malnt 140,000 476 01 0 23,013; 0, 23,0131 84%, 116.987
............_......____..�-___..._.-_. �..._...._........ _
75,000 477 i
Equip Parts ; i 7,433 I 7,433 90%° 67,567
Bldg MaInt 8.800 480 i 1,266 ; i 1,266 86%1 7,534
6,130,521 135,402 93,906 ; 12,200 629,018 ' 409,758 ` 25,284 ' 48,169 ` 1,353,737 78% 4,796,784
I
2015 Accts JMO
i
..
'^ 6
lof( Q1
60,
Ln
Di
6
o , —z-
3. I ? c 2
v
n N
Q �
1
falMeH sug:)
seue8 >lonyo
uewll!w eo!ssar
ua!poS ApupS
sale!oossV pue tiWeH y1DS
:saosi pn b a�la�l
dV (1331 'V18 'VIV lsaJewa4 yeoN
pieMAo; anow anilejogello:) WV38.LS
am se uo!led!o!lied pue sluawwoo Al!unwwoo ajow of paeAuo; Mool I pue
weal eoeyll wjo3 ayl;o lied aq of pa6al!n!ad loaf I -umol pue A4!D ayl jo; dV (13311s9M P!ned
sa!l!unlioddo 6u!l!oxe sja;;o loafad s!yl '(l!unwwoo ayl adeys luawdolanap 4N 4331 Ilepuea rD
pue suo!lelnbai asn pue! Mog woj; 'Allied 'awoo l!!m ssaoons s,eoegll asneoa8 Sdauueld }SOM+IlePuea
-uMOl ayl Pue Jauols a!le)i
'Al!:) 9yl 'uollepuno3 Maed ayl woa; saoinosaj 6u!golew yl!M eoeyll wao3 V-nND all!nalnalS ljagoa
6u!pun; si fluoglnV luawdolana(j pue yojeasay A51au3 alelS MJOA MaN ayl suMOl )$ Salt!o jaauae
:weal luelinsuoo
•apoo Mau a woa; uo!lualle le!oads asn pinoo leyl saoeld pue luawdolanap
ao; seaae snoo; saaoldxa l,odaj agl 'uo!l!ppe ul -suogeln6ai asn peel gl!M
palaoddns aq pinoo layl Moy pue 'slued!o!lied doL4"joM yl!M aleuosai
sloadse leyM 'spoogjogy6!au s,eoeyll ;o JaloeJeyo aql olu! sanlap liodai s!yl
-uo!6ai ayl jo; Cwouooa 6uoils a pue 'suo!ss!wa se6
asnoguaaa6 w uo!lonpai a 'ao!oyo uogeliodsuejl salel!lpe; leyl �lioMawea;
e u!yl!M suo!ldo al qsa;p pue 6u!snog ;o abuej I!n; e slioddns loafoid agl
-sueld an!suayaadwoo J!ayl;o san!loafgo pue sleo6
ayl laaw of suo!lelnbai asn peel alepdn ol 'MJOA MaN 'eoeyll ;o uMOl pue
Rl!p agl;o spoga 6u!o6uo agl lioddns dlag of an!le!l!ul we sl eoeyll wood
-dogsMaoM ayl iaue pue aao;aq gloq paiin000 leyl lioM 6u!uueld pue
u6!sap pue 'sF)wjaaw 'gojeasaj plag snld — Ajejq!1 Alunoo su!Mdwol ayl le
'SIOZ '9l tienuer palsoy doysMioM eoeyll wao3 ayl sezpewwns Nodal s!yl
r
Why character is
important to Ithaca
The "character" of Ithaca's neighborhoods are key to their appeal. Character shapes
people's activities and daily lives—such as how often they walk or ride a bike to destinations,
and how often they use car-share or transit. Zoning and land use regulations shape the
physical components of neighborhoods that contribute to character. Understanding how
zoning affects character is therefore critical to quality of life and the future of Ithaca.
The character of a place is often equated pride and place. Buildings, sidewalks, large swaths of homes at the same
with specific architectural elements,a street trees,roadways and blocks work time.As a result,these neighborhoods
particular historical style,or the manner together to create a public realm that are walkable and compact. Diverse
in which a single use predominates is pleasant and inviting. Understanding residential buildings are located near
an area. While these elements are exactly how these elements work together shops,restaurants,and other businesses.
important,character is also shaped by in Ithaca is important in considering
the relationship of buildings to streets. how to preserve the uniqueness of In cooperation with the city and town of
Most importantly, the way buildings, existing neighborhoods and shape Ithaca,Form Ithaca hosted a Community
yards, sidewalks, street trees and future neighborhoods. Character Workshop on January 16. At
street widths create public space and this event, Ithacans worked together
"outdoor rooms" defines character
and creates places where people live,
work, and play. Ithaca has a rich urban fabric and our
Placemaking and neighborhoods have a strong sense of
Local DNA
pride and place.
Placemaking is the art and craft of
making people-centered public spaces.
Creating unique places based on local Most of the City of Ithaca's neighborhoods to understand the past, present, and
history,community assets, culture and were developed prior to the proliferation future of their neighborhoods. The
enterprise has measurable positive of cars, and the dramatic changes purpose was to gather community input
impacts on social interaction, public in planning that came into fashion to help write a code for the city and
health, and economic stability. in the mid-20th century. Most of our town based on community character.
neighborhoods also predate zoning and We are using the SmartCode,the most
Ithaca has a rich urban fabric and our were built before the financial industry frequently used"form-based code"as
neighborhoods have a strong sense of made it easy for developers to build a basis. The SmartCode is calibrated
yy _4
IN
i111 AN _
JUMP-
� r \
Creating zoning refiT;�cts each neighborhood's
unique developmerrt-pattbrn will protect and
preserve neighborhood c0bracter.
to local conditions based on physical surveys of
Ithaca' neighborhoods, paying special attention to
places that Ithacans find most appealing. Surveys _ r.
document residential densities, block sizes,lot widths,
thoroughfares (including posted speed limit), civic
spaces, lot occupation,setbacks, public and private
frontages, and building shape, size, function, and
disposition.The measurements help to define Ithaca's —\ r
DNA; which in turn can shape a zoning code that • IX\I w
allows the built environment to reflect both historic
character and shared aspirations.
Ithaca is made up of neighborhoods
Ithaca is a collection of neighborhoods: places with
their own character and culture. Neighborhoods
have changed in character over the years. Many of _
the small shops that used to be scattered throughout
the neighborhoods have disappeared, replaced by
national chains along Route 13 and other locations.
Manufacturing in neighborhoods, such as Morse
Chain, Ithaca Gun, and Ithaca Calendar Clocks, has
declined as well. However, many small businesses Mixed-use, walkable neighborhoods
still thrive in the community and other forms of
mixed-use, such as schools and churches, thrive. typically measure a quarter mile from center
Neighborhoods are coming back in many ways. to edge, a distance that is called a "pedshed."
As technology increasingly allows people to work The map above shows pedsheds in Ithaca's
remotely from or near their homes,the market for a walkable areas, color-coded by type.
car-free or"car-lite" lifestyle is growing.
Studying and understanding Ithaca from a neighborhood
perspective allows a nuanced approach to guiding
future development and redevelopment. We can with more "modern;' car-oriented development.
identify key opportunities to reintegrate amenities Zoning was enacted to remove commercial and
and housing choices into appropriate locations with industrial uses from neighborhoods. Diverse amenities
sensitivity to the unique context of each place. within walking distance were not prioritized because
automotive transportation was viewed as the inevitable
wave of the future.Zoning was also used to separate
Impact of zoning on character, housing types and classes in a hierarchy.Single-family
community, and performance homes are allowed almost everywhere,duplexes are
allowed in fewer places,and multifamily buildings are
Zoning regulates what kinds of buildings can be limited to fewer areas still—with added restrictions.
built in a particular area, how tall they can be, the Commercial and business development is separated
sizes of lots that are allowed, what parts of a lot from most neighborhoods,though many people are
can be covered and what uses are allowed. Since unaware of this because there is so much that has
Ithaca has great neighborhoods, one may assume been "grandfathered" into existing locations.
that the zoning that shaped those neighborhoods is
great, but that is not necessarily the case. Most of Because current zoning was originally intended to
Ithaca's neighborhoods and the features that make make neighborhoods more car-friendly, it includes
up their unique character were designed and built provisions that negatively affect walkability and
before zoning. character when new development does occur.Setbacks
are one example. Historic development of walkable
When zoning was developed, starting in the 1920s human scale streetscapes has very small setbacks;
but really taking hold in the mid-20th Century, city yet, zoning in Fall Creek, Southside and Northside
leaders sought to retrofit the historic neighborhoods requires that new development be set back from the
6 1 FORM ITHACA
street significantly more than the surrounding historic Reflecting community values
buildings. Imposing deeper setbacks weakens the The SmartCode helps address the community goals
sense of an "outdoor room" as new buildings replace of a reduction in GHG emissions and vehicle miles
the old. Minimum lot sizes are also problematic.Most traveled, preservation of farmland and nature, and
City and all Town residential zones require lots that increased tax base. Consultant engagement with
are much larger than the fabric of the community's the city's comprehensive plan committee allows for
historic neighborhoods. Traditional neighborhoods a holistic, integrated, and value-added approach.
have a variety of lot sizes, creating different housing
opportunities for people with different needs. When The City of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan draft Future
large, uniform lot sizes are required, infill sites Population Scenarios forecasts the current 2010 city
become more difficult to develop and new greenfield population rising from 30,014 to 46,240 by 2035, an
development lacks the diversity and character that increase in the city's share of the county's population
makes historic neighborhoods attractive. from 29.6 percent to 40 percent. This corresponds
with the Regional Sustainability Plan's Land Use
At the January 16,2015 workshop,the consultant team target of increasing the proportion of Southern Tier
used interactive tools like brainwriting, pedestrian residents who live in existing cities and villages.
shed delineation, and zoning character 'trading
cards'to enable participants to visualize and respond The Town of Ithaca adopted a new Comprehensive
to how the community is changing. The interactive Plan in September,2014.The plan calls for preservation
tools helped the participants understand metrics— of the Town's rural character through compact,
like density, housing and transportation costs and mixed-use growth in three areas—one each on East
diversity, and GHG emissions per household — of Hill, South Hill, and West Hill.
various forms of growth.
Ithaca Building Footprints -- Lot Coverage Violations
T� •Y• .
• -
z3."
Most of Ithaca's
neighborhoods would not
Buildings in red could not
be allowed under current °" ° have been built
under today's zoning code.
zoning.
, 3=♦ ti
This map represents buildings that `
exceed the allowed lot coverage in
residential zones, this is just one of
many zoning parameters that conflict
with the built environment that N
Ithacan's love. 0 0.25 0.5 Miles
Randall-West 2013--NY Cenirel Stale Plane 1 1 1 1 1
1 r _
�� VIII 11 r N/�.�-1� `�� �'
It
� ��?r � � ��► t I I I T -.alp II :i.; 1 �T - ,Ea1 �1
b
Mixed-use Main Street buildings create value
and a sense of community, but theyare not
\ allowed in most neighborhoods because of
I TL u
outdated_Coning.
I now
- I l
r _
I,-
�RAP
i � t
+ o
i
a .
Workshop
The SmartCode is a tool for preserving existing character and directing
the new growth in a way that enhances community character.
One of the SmartCode's strengths as an open-source zoning tool is its ability to be adjusted to reflect and
respond to local character.The SmartCode is based on the Transact, a system to analyze and code land use
patterns on a rural-to-urban continuum.A prototypical American rural-to-urban transect has been divided into
six Transed Zones,or T-zones.This zoning system replaces conventional separated-use zoning systems that
have encouraged a car-dependent culture and land-consuming sprawl. Parking lots and garages are placed
away from the street and the mix of housing styles,types, and sizes allows for walkability and connectivity.
The overall goal of the workshop was for participants to gain a thorough understanding of the project and
how they can be involved.
Working together,
participants
weigh in on which
development
types contribute
positively to Ithaca's
unique character
and sort cards
+M
by development
+ intensity.
s
1 9
Pre-Workshop Activities
We invited the planning,zoning,and sustainability staff zoning map to consider focus areas for SmartCode
from the City and Town of Ithaca to a pre-workshop implementation.SmartCode author Sandy Sorlien of
staff retreat in downtown Ithaca on December 12. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, presented examples of
The retreat was well-attended by the respective how the SmartCode has been implemented across
City and Town departments, and offered a chance a variety of locales nationwide. Earlier in November,
for staff to interact and discuss big-picture planning SmartCode retail module author Seth Harry visited
ideas in an organized but informal atmosphere.After Ithaca for a meeting with the Form Ithaca team to
a bus tour around the city and town to examine local evaluate Ithaca's retail landscape and potential
examples of development patterns and building future development.
types, staff gathered around a large combined
City and Town of Ithaca
legend
OuRcing fy"s _avavrvvtrvl wrvD Mxuwee
M .Ewo..XO..EOU1
s.N.wc..1D rw.eE wxn•w
uxDwc UNFRw1 plov,M.1ro,..ND COmMUrvulron
-COMMERCIM wIq 4ll.p -M.L AIII 'PNG
-fMCwll[NV !L&iC All4/.CIIOM A. ]lFX1]tMRR 9ull.'lw4f
-EWIAKl IISI 1E wND I.C.1114S
ENE4,:1 wwIMIII I A..I.I.IM(I:I
10 1 FORM ITHACA
Workshop Participation Planning and development `trading
We used many methods of participation during the card' activities
workshop, including a process where participants
were asked to become familiar with the characteristics We created two sets of planning and development
of existing Ithaca neighborhoods and building types. trading cards:a set of building typology trading
Another process asked participants to reply to a series cards and a set of neighborhood unit trading
of three placemaking questions using "brainwriting:' cards.
Building typology trading cards illustrated the
Brainwriting builds on the brainstorming process by characteristics of building types common in Ithaca.
removing fear of evaluation through eliminating the Each 31/2" x 5" building type trading card included
step by which participants publicly state ideas one the name of the neighborhood prominently placed at
at a time. Participants are focused on the questions the top left hand corner along with a plan view map
presented rather than extraneous chat. Workshop with amenities and diverse uses highlighted.Statistics
attendees were asked to quickly(within two minutes) included lot size; lot coverage; frontage length;
write down their ideas on three separate index front setback; stories; and housing units. To create
cards about three pre-selected questions: 1) What an interactive planning and zoning experience for
are your favorite places in the community and why?; practitioners and the public,we asked participants to
2) What's missing from Ithaca? — Draw on some of first decide whether the character of the development
your favorite places around the country and world; was inherently compatible with Ithaca neighborhood
3) What are areas in the community you feel need characteristics; after eliminating the building types
some work? (Participants turned their answers in not deemed representative of Ithaca,the participants
and we compiled feedback from these questions; were asked to assign the remaining trading cards a
that information is available below under the section Transect zone, following the local T-2 through T-6
'Lessons Learned:)A brief discussion followed, based nomenclature. We have documented this process
on what the participants wrote on the cards. in the following photos:
a.;
c,.
s
,yw.r-
1
�9
DEVELOPMENT TYPES
types What • • you like to see more of
ME
OLIN
Y
A O
z �
12 1 FORM ITHACA
Place-based trading cards illustrated the characteristics of Both the neighborhood and building type "trading cards"
four neighborhoods centered around a pedestrian shed in engaged the participants, who were split up into four
and around Ithaca: Deer Run, Northeast Ithaca,Southside, large (8+ person) tables, for about an hour and a half. We
and the Village of Dryden. Each 8'/2" x 11" neighborhood received helpful verbal and written feedback from these
trading card included the name of the neighborhood at the activities. Participants followed up with suggestions, like
top left corner along with a plan view map with amenities the following example,that inform our plans for expanded
and diverse uses highlighted. Running along the right and targeted participation:"When we looked at the different
side of the trading card are four 'action shots; character building types, we were only shown examples already
photo examples from that neighborhood that illustrate within Ithaca. I suggest that you consider inclusion of types
the building types of the community. Statistics included that we currently don't have, or have in just small supply,
population; amenities; dwelling units/acre; Walk Score; such as:townhouses/row houses; low-rise 4-plex or 6-plex
housing and transportation as a percentage of income; styles; "woonerf" styles where the "road" is more like a
housing diversity; and carbon emissions in tons per shared driveway."
household. To create an interactive planning and zoning
experience for both practitioners and the public, we then
clipped the pedestrian shed from the neighborhood trading
cards for workshop participants to use as hypothetical
overlays on areas of Ithaca targeted for redevelopment.
We documented this process:
Dryden
NO heastIthaca SOJ.Jt, side
i y M, 7
o nn
Spa �i a
. Lq_. 'dig J�IVdr
_1
�e iV
T �°Pi.stwp�rncer cplfee '� �r'
. ' �� tiaPPeh rmaeY.@vary, rh 2q>- _ , "r 1P. -
}
2 5 cb T
57,
- Semewrtr{yaikade 9� empv'/.G�4rar$
some a `^m �
1. anpa wn 4 _ enr 2
_jr.D P^-dent mmW�heOOnfWt ac 5
SCY.oliPiome M ryNaUG 66 91y� RA
ae`�rraoosre ofn me �\ /
mh�Onry l-r aParrme r J<�
Va
A M 9re fane]Y hQ m�r�et.
a Di
�6 AFP
1 13
Lessons Learned
Feedback
It's a primary recreational spot. Much of the day-to-day
Participants provided comments and questions after businesses is transacted there. But vacant buildings
the workshop via email, such as the comment in the like the old Tompkins County Library and the Masonic
previous paragraph.The next event will be a "charrette" Temple,and vacant storefronts on The Commons rob
or intense multi-day planning workshop to be held in the downtown of vibrancy, many residents feel. The
early June of 2015. During this event we plan to identify downtown could be improved with more general retail,
missing development forms and include measured more residents, and more liveliness at night.
character examples from other places.
Ithaca's neighborhoods are tremendous assets,
The following is participant feedback collected from particularly their diverse character, historic homes,
the "brainwriting" index cards: small-scale gathering spots, and walkable scale. More
"third places" and corner stores could improve these
The Route 13 corridor is both a problem and opportunity, neighborhoods in many cases,residents feel."There's
according to citizens and stakeholders.The waterfront, no small commercial gathering place on West Hill—it
Stewart Park,Cass Park,the Waterfront Trail,the Ithaca needs a Gimme Coffee equivalent,"says one resident.
Farmer's Market, and important stores like Wegman's "South Hill needs a grocery store; notes another. Many
are located on the west side of the highway. Most residents appreciate easy access to small-scale retail
residents live on the east side. "Barriers like Route and mixed use, in neighborhoods like Fall Creek and
13 need to be overcome," says one resident. "Better Northside, and downtown.
crossings could weave communities together."
Connections on foot and by bicycle are valued in Ithaca.
In our informal survey, Route 13 was frequently cited as Residents would like more of these connections in places
a problem and an opportunity for growth. "The Route like the Southwest, the West End, and across Route
13 corridor doesn't have to be suburban form—it could 13. Most comments relate in some way to walkability
be more urban, pedestrian-oriented," and "Route 13 in neighborhoods, downtown, across corridors, and
shopping could be more mixed-use and walkable," connecting to nature.
are typical comments.
The waterfalls and gorges are huge assets—particularly
By making the road more pedestrian friendly, residents Ithaca Falls, Cascadilla, and Six Mile Creek, which
would be connected to the city's greatest natural asset, residents can easily reach in a few minutes on foot.
the lake. Residents call for"lakefront access;'an "urban In the Town of Ithaca, Forest Home is singled out as
waterfront," "restaurants on the water," "waterfront
neighborhoods,"and a "waterfront district with cafes/ # pt
bookstores/mixed-use, and the density to make that + II9°
happen" Says one resident, "I miss having a good
connection to the lake." 'llll�l
The West End, where Route 13 is split into Meadow
and Fulton streets, "could be cool some day. It has a •jI .' e
ton of potential but is so pedestrian unfriendly." Inlet
Island is underutilized.
The coordination,and quantity,of traffic lights may add {
to automobile congestion. One resident of West Hill
notes that"when the signals are out,traffic Flows better."
Downtown is a favorite place for many Ithacans. The
Commons,Restaurant Row,and the area around Dewitt
Park were singled out as places of particular importance.
Downtown is the community's chief gathering place.
14 1 FORM ITHACA
Favorite Places
place
Fa1lCreek �'`��4'1 :reek � Auroras
° IthacaFalls
StewartPark - -:-, communit} MaGorge
CDeautiful� a. �r�al Cascad
ommons People downtown
RestaurantRou architecture
s O
r r �
3 �J
Hundreds of responses to the brain writing activity have been archived digitally.
To briefly understand the most significant responses we have created word clouds
of the top 50 responses for Favorite Places and Places That Need Work.
Text size is relative to how frequently each word or phrase was repeated by multiple
respondents. Responses were minimally edited to use consistent language when
referring to the same location, for example Restaurant Row was inserted whenever
a respondent mentioned the block of Aurora St. between State and Seneca.
Places That Need Work
Sidewalks
i, •:r :r, tialkahic shopping Cityneed
walkability S0UtIlHlllWaterfront area westEnd reas Soth Town PoliceCommunityRelations ��
needs n.AffordableHousing °"r commercial housing
Bikelnfrastructure m any Commons across
outeI3 '"""' WestHill
empty
1 15
a striking, appealing community. Many cite the natural assets of the town—the farms, The Plantations, and farm
stands— as important. Problems noted include sprawl and limited public access to the lake. East Hill Plaza is an
opportunity for mixed-use development.
The universities are assets to many—particularly East Hill with its intellectual life and adjacent neighborhoods like
the 1920s Belle Sherman area, Collegetown, and gathering places like the Chapter House.
Many residents call for more affordable housing—in particular housing that is integrated into existing neighborhoods
and amenities.Transit access to West Village is problematic, one resident notes. More diversity in housing is missed.
Residents mentioned condominiums, townhouses and rowhouses, bungalows, duplexes and other multiplexes,
stacked flats, and apartments in short supply.
More frequent transit and better connections to outlying areas is desired.
Examples of Positive Character Workshop participants rated places
highly when they had:
-1
s Shallow Setbacks
Small Lots
lit
High Lot Coverage
Pedestrian Scale Detail
Neighborhood Retail
Walkable Streets
Relatively Dense and Diverse Housing
4.
Workshop participants rated places
poorly when they had:
Off street parking along the sidewalk
ti.
Deep Setbacks
Large Lots
Low Lot Coverage
IIt
Monoculture Development
Auto-Dependent Strip Retail
16 1 FORM ITHACA
Mixed-use development focus areas
The project team used a multifaceted approach to create 3) Danby Road and King Road.This lower-intensity focus
the map of development focus areas.These are the areas area is centered on an important gateway to the community
of the City and the Town where mixed-use development near Ithaca College.
is desired and most likely to occur—and therefore are
places of special attention for code reform. In this report, 4) Cayuga Medical Center.This lower-intensity mixed-use
the mixed-use development focus areas map is a draft— focus area is adjacent to the county's fifth-largest employer.
subject to refinement, if necessary, based upon further
input from citizens and community leaders. 5)Waterfront District.This higher-intensity mixed-use area is
among the most promising sites for development in the city,
The city's draft Comprehensive Plan and the Town's centered along the waterfront and Route 13.The attention of
adopted Comprehensive Plan are the documents that Workshop participants gravitated to this area.
set the parameters for this work. The city's plan calls for
significant mixed-use growth in its existing mixed-use 6) Inlet Island/West End.This area already has significant
centers of downtown(including the State Street corridor), mixed-use and is becoming more diverse. Workshop
and Collegetown.Additional mixed-use growth is called for participants viewed this area as having tremendous potential
along the Route 13 corridor from Southwest to the waterfront for higher-intensity mixed-use development.
area. The town's plan calls for areas of higher density on
East Hill near Cornell University and South Hill near Ithaca 7) Meadow Street/Old Elmira Road. This commercial area
College, and medium density walkable development on is beginning to attract new development and is an area
West Hill, some adjacent to Cayuga Medical Center, the where the city's draft Comprehensive Plan calls for more
county's fifth largest employer. residential. The city recently invested in streetscape
infrastructure along Old Elmira Road.
The team conducted field research with mixed-use
development expert Seth Harry, who was active in the 8)Southwest Development Area.This area behind Walmart
January 16 workshop.In addition, a bus tour on December and Lowe's has long been slated for development.
12 with City and Town planning staff toured potential areas
of growth and focus areas for SmartCode implementation. This map provides a framework for the SmartCode process
but also, potentially,clarifies future development patterns
During the January Workshop, participants placed in Ithaca's urbanized area in a way that could guide
hypothetical overlays of four different development infrastructure investment that boosts quality of life.
patterns, two mixed-use and two single-use. Participants
overwhelmingly preferred the mixed-use patterns, one
lower intensity and one higher intensity.
In the map at right we see the outcome of this process.
The gray areas are the existing urban centers of downtown
and Collegetown. The black concentric circles are eight
potential mixed-use focus areas—four are in the city,three
are in the town, and one is shared between the city and
the town.
1) East Hill Plaza.This high-intensity mixed-use focus area
is adjacent to Tompkins County's major employer,Cornell
University. Cornell has located some of its facilities in this
shopping area that includes a supermarket and other
neighborhood-serving shops, businesses,and restaurants,
and a hotel. This area could be transformed into a walkable
urban center with a significant residential component.
2) Chain Works District. This lower-intensity mixed-use
focus area is centered on the redevelopment of Ithaca's
largest former industrial site, a prime location between
downtown and Tompkins County's second largest employer,
Ithaca College.
' J
60
3O �
Town of Ithaca City of Ithaca IR Irz vi
1. East Hill Plaza 2. Chain Works District ArropmomILE5 /__2. Chain Works District 5. Waterfront District va /�va va
3. Danby/King Road Interstttion 6. Inlet Island/West End I/■//�4. Cayuga Medical Center 7. Meadow Street/Old Elmira Road S. Southwest Development Area OMILES OMILES
MIXED- SE FOCUS MIXED-USE FOCUS EXISTING MIXED-USE
MIXED-USE FOCUS ARE A MI%EO-USE FOCUS AREA
Next Steps
Plans for expanded and targeted participation
The next major event in the development of a better zoning code for the `
City and Town of Ithaca will be a 4-day long intensive"charrette"focused
on key areas for the new mixed-use centers that were identified in the
January 16th Community Workshop.The charrette is a dynamic collaborative
process that brings together representatives from a mix of established
planning, architecture, engineering, and development disciplines. This
process is open to all members of the community, regardless of expertise.
It helps to bring out the generalist in practitioners, and gives the public
the benefit of expert opinion in an open, inclusive forum.
A charrette is divided into two phases:creative phase and the production
phase. The creative phase includes a host of community engagement — �
techniques including a welcome message from the city mayor and town
supervisor, respectively,prior to presentations giving an overview of the
entire project process and important existing conditions.We anticipate that the charrette will be held at a highly visible public location refashioned
as a 'studio' v`
In the lead up to the charrette, the Form Ithaca Team will be meeting
frequently with neighborhood groups and other local organizations. \
These meetings are an opportunity to build support for better zoning
and a chance for the team to hear concerns and new ideas that can be \
incorporated into the code. Form Ithaca will be working closely with city
and town staff to develop draft definitions of each zone based on the
historic fabric of Ithaca's neighborhoods. These definitions will be the _h
starting point for more specific urban design and planning work for new
and existing neighborhoods during the charrette process. e-
Once we have a draft code, Form Ithaca is planning a 'Crack the Code'
event,where the public and planning design practitioners are invited to a
public event to test the worst development possible under the proposed _ r
guidelines. Participants will be encouraged to 'crack the code' — to find
gaps in the existing and proposed zoning code that permit undesirable
community character. This participation helps further the production of a
feasible,working code developed in an engaging,transparent, interactive,
and even fun environment. It allows for the public review of the zoning
code's strengths and weaknesses and promotes the assessment of the —
code in relation to the respective comprehensive plans. Z,f'
Presentation of character examples alongside the code increases — _
confidence that the renderings are representative examples of what may
actually get built. Examination of the proposed zoning on a constrained
site, balanced alongside factors such as market conditions, is essential
in a project that seeks to connect sustainability metrics to fundamental
aspects in design of the built environment.
I
��+`� ��� � • .:.fit '�-�� .. ,
r..
He
don
r^ ✓ >x '
ti
? '/Sly.°f -r.• '�<... � 1 i R � f 1
n
There are a number of ways you can ask questions and share
your thoughts about the Form Ithaca project, including sending us
a message or contacting your local municipal planning staff and
representatives.
Better Cities&Towns
Robert Steuteville, Executive Director
(607)275-3087 mail @newurbannews.com
Better Cities& Towns
218 Utica St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
You can also call or write your local planning staff and/or
representatives:
Town of Ithaca
Susan Ritter, Director of Planning
(607) 273-1736 x120
Town Hall
215 North Tioga St
Ithaca, NY 14850
City of Ithaca
JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning & Economic Development
(607) 274-6550
City Hall
108 E. Green Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
Project 7c7 tedule :
June 3-6, 2015
Focus Area Planning Charrette
September 2015
Consultant Presentations to City and Town
December 2015
Anticipated City Common Council and Town Board formal acceptance
of draft zoning report
Early 2016
Formal municipal review process of re-zoning gets underway
formithaca.org
TOWN OF ITHACA
FINANCIAL REPORTS
FOR THE MONTH ENDED
APRIL 30, 2015
REPORTS:
BALANCE SHEET
REVENUE & EXPENSE SUMMARY
and CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS
DETAILED CASH LISTING
FOR FIDUCIARY FUNDS
SUMMARY OF BANK COLLATERAL
TOWN OF ITHACA
BALANCE SHEET
FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015
GENERAL GENERAL HIGHWAY WATER
FUND
SEWER
FUND
CAPITAL
DESCRIPTION TOWNWIDE PART-TOWN PART-TOWN PROJECTS
FUND FUND FUND FUNDS
ASSETS
UNRESERVED CASH:
CASH $4,629,488 $649,034 $1,681,990 $1,984,748 $1,904,659 $969,623
INVESTMENTS ------
PETTY CASH 700 -200 ---
TOTAL - UNRESERVED CASH $4,630,188 $649,034 $1,682,190 $1,984,748 $1,904,659 $969,623
RESERVED CASH:
PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLAN $735,774 $.$$-$-$
GENERAL PURPOSE BENEFIT 180,434 63,563 99,902 14,225 8,005
HIGHWAY EQUIPMENT -212,162 --
PRESERVE MAINTENANCE 40,046 ---
LAND STEWARDSHIP 10,005 ---
INVESTMENTS ----
FIDUCIARY FUNDS n ---
TOTAL - RESERVED CASH $966,259 $63,563 $312,064 $14,225 $8,005 $
OTHER ASSETS:
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE $.$$.$-$-$.
WATER & SEWER RECEIVABLES _.55,766 210,850 _
'^JE FROM OTHER FUNDS .-
("ATE & FEDERAL AID RECEIVABLE ----
DUE FROM OTHER GOV'TS 20,731 n 24,737 -
PREPAID EXPENSES 8,023 --
TAXES RECEIVABLE - CURRENT ---.
TOTAL - OTHER ASSETS $28,754 $$-$80,503 $210,850 $-
TOTAL ASSETS $5.625,200 ?712.598 $1,994.254 ?2.079.476 $2.123.514 ?969.623
LIABILITIES and FUND BALANCE
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE $37,865 $8,898 $3,570 $12,364 $1,367 $543
ACCRUED LIABILITIES 46,487 52,935 121,955 -48,000 -
DUE TO OTHER FUNDS n n n n --
RETAINAGE n n •-•37,316
DEFERRED REVENUE ------
RESERVED FUND BALANCE 966,259 63,563 312,064 14,225 8,005 -
UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE 4,574,589 587,201 1,556,665 2,052,888 2,066,141 931,764
TOTAL LIABILITIES & FUND BALANCE $5.625.200 ?712.598 $1.994.254 5 2.079.476 $2.123.514 $969.623 1
ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE
FUND BALANCE - 01/01/2015 $3,117,429 $833,740 $1,709,669 $2,091,325 $2,184,797 $935,818
Add: REVENUE 3,568,346 206,259 1,243,590 1,548,899 810,836 12,919
Less: EXPENSE 1,144,928 389,234 1,084,730 1,573,112 921,487 16,973
IFUND BALANCE- 04/30/2015 $5.540.848 S 650.765 ?1.868.529 $2.067.112 $2.074.147 $931.764
Page 1 of 4
TOWN OF ITHACA
BALANCE SHEET
FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015 /-s
RISK FIRE LIGHTING DEBT TRUSTS.INLET
DESCRIPTION RETENTION PROTECTION DISTRICT SERVICE AGENCY VALLEY
FUND FUND FUNDS FUND FUND CEMETERY
ASSETS
UNRESERVED CASH:
CASH $167,346 $3,786,846 $14,821 $1,335,223 $$.
INVESTMENTS ..
PETTY CASH •-.•.
TOTAL • UNRESERVED CASH $167,346 $3,786,846 $14,821 $1,335,223 $-$-
RESERVED CASH:
PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLAN $$$$.$$
GENERAL PURPOSE BENEFIT .
HIGHWAY EQUIPMENT .
PRESERVE MAINTENANCE .
LAND STEWARDSHIP
FUNDS FOR BOND REFUNDING .919,536
FIDUCIARY FUNDS -.106,211 9,078
TOTAL. RESERVED CASH $$-$S 919,536 $106,211 $9,078
OTHER ASSETS:
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE $$$$$$_
CUSTOMER RECEIVABLE
DUE FROM OTHER FUNDS
STATE & FEDERAL AID RECEIVABLE
DUE FROM OTHER GOVTS
PREPAID EXPENSES
TAXES RECEIVABLE - CURRENT ..
TOTAL-OTHER ASSETS $$$$$-$-
TOTAL ASSETS 5 167.346 ?3.786.846 $14,821 $2.254.759 $106.211 ?9,078
LIABILITIES and FUND BALANCE
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE $89 $38,610 $$175 $_$
ACCRUED LIABILITIES ...106,211 .
DUE TO OTHER FUNDS ..
RETAINAGE ..
DEFERRED REVENUE -----
RESERVED FUND BALANCE --919,536 9,078
UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE 167,257 3,748,236 14,821 1,335,048 --
TOTAL LIABILITIES & FUND BALANCE ?167.346 $3.786.846 $14.821 ?2.254.759 $106.211 $9.078
ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE
FUND BALANCE - 01/01/2015 $141,875 $1,038,139 $5,565 $1,427,187 $-$9,076
Add: REVENUE 25,040 3,581,443 13,204 988,929 -2
Less: EXPENSE (341)871,346 3,947 161,532 --
FUND BALANCE - 04/30/2015 $167.257 $3.748.236 5 14.821 2.254.584 $-5 9.078
Page 2 of 4
TOWlITHACA>BALANCE SHEET for CAPITAL PROJECTSFOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015ACTIVE CAPITAL PROJECTSFUND H4FUNDHSFUND H8FUND H14FUND H18FUND H?1FUND H22FUND H23FUND H24FUND H25FUND H26FUND H27TOTALDESCRIPTIONHanstiaw RoadPine Tree RoadGateway TrailForest Home OrWhitetail DriveSand Sank RdWinners CircleClirlstopher CrICoddlngton RdSapsuckerHonness LaneMarty CourtCAPITALWalkwayWalkway/Bridge(Grant Fundtng)Upstrm BridgeImprovementsImprovementsImprovementsWater TankWater MainWater TankImprovementsImprovementsPROJECTSASSETSUNRESERVED CASH:CASHS100,551$35,105S77,036S93,068$10,158S359,723$40,742$ 101,891$151,349$.$$$969,623INVESTMENTS.............TOTAL. UNRESERVED CASH$100,551s35,105$77,036$93,068$10,158$359,723$40,742$ 101,891$151,349$•i$s969,623OTHER ASSETS:ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE$.$.$.$.$.s.S.$$.$$$$CUSTOMER RECEIVABLE...........DUE FROM OTHER FUNDS...........STATE/FEDERAL RECEIVABLE...........DUE FROM OTHER GOVTS...........PREPAID EXPENSES...........BAN LOANS-..........TOTAL - OTHER ASSETS$-$-%-$-$-sn$-$SnS$$$TOTAL ASSETSs100,551$35.105%77.036$93.068$10.158s359,723$40,742$ 101.891S151.349s$$$969,623LIABILITIES_&_FUND BALANCEACCOUNTS PAYABLE$.$.$.$.$.$.$,$s543s.$$$543ACCRUED LIABILIITES...........DUE TO OTHER FUNDS.............RETAINAGE....10,000...27,316...37,316BAN PAYABLE----------.-.RESERVED FUND BALANCE---..----•.-UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE100,55135,10577,03693,068158359,72340,742101,891123,491--•931,764ITOTALLIAB& FUND BALANCE $ 100,551 $ 35.105 S 77,036 $ 93,068 $ 10.158 $ 359.723 $ 40.742 $ 101,891 $ 151.349 $¨ $• $- $J69,62^BSTIMATED FUND BALANCEFUNOBALANCE-01/01/2015 S 100.S26 S 35,096 S 64,344 $ 93,045 $Aod: revenue 25 9 12,692 23Less; EXPENSE ....155 $ 359,632 $ 40,731 $ 117,895 $ 124,394 S3 90 10 28 3916,032 941- $$ 935,81812,91916,973FUND BALANCE - 04/30/2015$ 100,551 $ 35.105 % 77,036 $ 93,068 $ 158 $ 359.723 $ 40,742 S 101.891 $ 123,491 $n $- SPage 3 of 4
TOWN OF ITHACABALANCE SHEET for LIGHT DISTRICTSFOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30. 2015FUND SL-1FUND SL-2FUND SL-3FUND SL-4FUND SL-5FUND SL-6FUND SL-7FUND SL-8FUND SL-9TOTALDESCRIPTIONForestGlensideRenwickEastwoodClover LaneWinner'sBurieighWesthavenCoddingtonLiGHTHomeHeightsCommonsCircleDriveRoadRoadDISTRICTSASSETSUNRESERVED CASH:CASHINVESTMENTSTOTAL - UNRESERVED CASHOTHER ASSETS:ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLECUSTOMER RECEIVABLEDUE FROM OTHER FUNDSSTATE & FEDERAL AID RECEIVABLEPREPAID EXPENSESTAXES RECEIVABLE - CURRENTTOTAL - OTHER ASSETS3,374 $3,374 $- $- $799 $1,660 $2,426 $364 $963 $939 $ 2,710 $799 $ 1,660 $- $2,426 $364 $963 $- $$- $- $$- $I TOTAL ASSETS$ 3.374 $799 $ 1.660 $ 2.426 £364 $963 $939 $ 2.710 S1,587 $ 14,821- $939 $ 2,710 $ 1,587 $ 14,8211.587 $ 14.821LIABILITIES and FUND BALANCEACCOUNTS PAYABLEACCRUED LIABILIITESDUE TO OTHER FUNDSDEFERRED REVENUERESERVED FUND BALANCEUNRESERVED FUND BALANCETOTAL LIABILITIES & FUND BALANCE3,374- $799$ 3.374 $799 $1,6601.660 S2,4262.426 $. $364364 $963- $9392,710963 $939 $2.710 $- $1,58714,821.587 $ 14.82ESTIMATED FUND BALANCEFUND BALANCE - 01/01/2015ADD: REVENUELess: EXPENSE143 $4,000768404 $6502561,043 $9513331,160 $1,901635241200774737002104038002641,0922,501883607 $1,5005215,56513,2043,947[FUND BALANCE - 04/30/20153.374 $799 $1.660 $2.426 $364 $963 $939 $ 2.710 $1.587 $ 14.821))Page 4 of 4
TOWN OF ITHACA
rs
REVENUE and EXPENSE SUMMARY
FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015
GENERAL GENERAL HIGHWAY
WATER
FUND
SEWER
FUND
CAPITAL
DESCRIPTION TOWNWIDE PART-TOWN PART-TOWN PROJECTS
FUND FUND FUND FUNDS
REVENUE
BUDGETED REVENUE
ACTUAL & ACCRUED
4,590,245 $ 1,394,050 $ 3,391,500
3,568,346 206,259 1,243,590
6,409,658 $ 2,453,582
1,548,899 810,836 12,919
REVENUE OVER (UNDER)$ (1.021.899) $ (1.187,791) $ (2,147,910) $ (4,860,759) $ (1,642,746) $ 12,919
% OF BUDGET EARNED 77.7%14.8%36.7%24.2%33.0%0.0%
EXPENSE
BUDGETED EXPENSE
ACTUAL & ACCRUED
$ 5,190,058 $ 1,601,305 $ 3,716,211 $ 6,320,463 $ 2,795,520 $
1,144,928 389,234 1,084,730 1,573,112 921,487 $ 16,973
$ (4,045.130) $ (1.212.071) $ (2,631.4811 $ (4.747.351) $ M.874.033) $ 16.973"EXPENSE OVER (UNDER)
% OF BUDGET EXPENDED 22.1%24.3%29.2%24.9%33.0%0.0%
ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE
>^^UND BALANCE - 01/01/2015 $3,117,429 $833,740 $1,709,669 $2,091,325 $2,184,797 $935,818
Actual & Accrued
Add: REVENUE 3,568,346 206,259 1,243,590 1,548,899 810,836 $12,919
LESS! EXPENSE 1,144,928 389,234 1,084,730 1,573,112 921,487 $16,973
FUND BALANCE • 04/30/2015 $5,540,848 $650,765 $1,868,529 $2,067,112 $2,074,147 $931,764
CASH and
CASH EQUIVALENTS
UNRESERVED CASH
CASH (CHECKING/SAVINGS)$4,629,488 $649,034 $1,681,990 $1,984,748 $1,599,275 $969,623
CASH - SJC OPERATING ----305,383 -
INVESTMENTS n ---n -
PETTY CASH 700 -200 ---
TOTAL - UNRESERVED CASH $4,630,188 $649,034 $1,682,190 $1,984,748 $1,904,659 $969,623
RESERVED CASH
PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLAN $735,774 $•$-$•$.$
GENERAL PURPOSE BENEFIT 180,434 63,563 99,902 14,225 8,005
HIGHWAY EQUIPMENT -212,162 •
PRESERVE MAINTENANCE 40,046 .-
LAND STEWARDSHIP 10,005 --.
INVESTMENTS -n n -
FIDUCIARY FUNDS ----
TOTAL • RESERVED CASH $966,259 $63,563 $312,064 $14,225 $8,005 $
TOTAL CASH 04/30/2015 $5.596.446 $712.598 $1.994.254 $1.998.973 $1.912,664 $969.623
Page 1 of 4
TOWN OF ITHACA
REVENUE and EXPENSE SUMMARY
FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015
RISK FIRE LIGHTING DEBT TRUSTS.INLET
DESCRIPTION RETENTION PROTECTION DISTRICT SERVICE AGENCY VALLEY
FUND FUND FUNDS FUND FUND CEMETERY i
REVENUE
BUDGETED REVENUE $25,000 $ 3,605,000 $13,200 $988,984 S $
ACTUAL & ACCRUED 25,040 3,581,443 13,204 988,929 •2
REVENUE OVER /UNDER)$40 $ (23,557) $3 $(55) $$2
% OF BUDGET EARNED 100.2%99.3%100.0%100.0%0.0%
EXPENSE
BUDGETED EXPENSE $15,500 $ 3,405,000 $14,120 $1,236,400 $.$1,500
ACTUAL & ACCRUED (341)871,346 3,947 161,532 -
EXPENSE OVER SUNDER)$ (15.841) $ (2.533,654) $ M0.173) $ (1,074.868) $(1.500)
% OF BUDGET EXPENDED ■2.2%25.6%28.0%13.1%0.0%
ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE
FUND BALANCE - 01/01/2015
Actual & Accrued
Add: REVENUE
Less: EXPENSE
$ 141,875 $ 1,038,139 $
25,040
(341)
3,581,443
871,346
5,565 $ 1,427,187 $
13,204
3,947
988,929
161,532
FUND BALANCE - 04/30/2015 $ 167,257 $ 3.748.236 $ 14.821 $ 2.254.584 $
- $
• - $
9,076
9.078
CASH and
CASH EQUIVALENTS
UNRESERVED CASH
CASH (CHECKING/SAVINGS)
CASH - SJC OPERATING
INVESTMENTS
PETTY CASH
TOTAL - UNRESERVED CASH
RESERVED CASH
PARKS & OPEN SPACE PLAN
GENERAL PURPOSE BENEFIT
HIGHWAY EQUIPMENT
PRESERVE MAINTENANCE
LAND STEWARDSHIP
FUNDS FOR BOND REFUNDING
FIDUCIARY FUNDS
TOTAL - RESERVED CASH
$ 167,346 $ 3,786,846 $ 14,821 $ 1,335,223 $
$ 167,346 $ 3,786,846 $
$ . $ . $
$
14,821 $ 1,335,223 $
919,536
106,211
$$ 919,536 $ 106,211 $
TOTAL CASH - 04/30/2015 $ 167.346 $ 3.786.846 $ 14,821 $ 2.254.759 $ 106.211 $
9,078
9,078
9.078
Page 2 of 4
TOWlITHACAREVENUE and EXPENSE SUMMARY for CAPITAL PROJECTSFOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015ACTIVE CAPITAL PROJECTSFUND H4FUND H5FUND H8FUNDH14FUN0H18FUND H21FUND H22FUND H23FUND H24FUND H25FUND H26FUND H27TOTALDESCRIPTIONHanshaw RoadPine Tree RoadGateway TrailForest Home OrWhitetall DriveSand Bank RdWinners CircleChristopher CrICoddlngton RdSapsuckerHonness LaneMarcy CourtCAPITALWalkwayWalkway/Bridge(Grant Fundincj)Upstrm BridgeImprovementsImprovementsImprovementsWater TankWater MainWater TankImprovementsimprovementsPROJECTSREVENUEBUDGETED REVENUE$$$$$$$$$$$$SACTUAL & ACCRUED25912,69223390102839---12,919REVENUE OVER lUNDER)$ 25$ 9S 12.692$ 23$ 3S 90$ 10S 28$ 395SSS 12.919% OF BUDGET EARNED0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%EXPENSEBUDGETED EXPENSE$5$$s$$$s$$$$ACTUAL & ACCRUED-n••-n-16,032941--n16,973EXPENSE OVER (UNDER)3S$$sS$S 16.032S 941$$s$ 16,973% OF BUDGET EXPENDED0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%ESTIMA TED FUND BALANCEFUNDBALANCE-01/01/2015 $ 100,526 S 35,096 S 64,344 $ 93,045 SActual & AccruedAdd: REVENUE 25 9 12,692 23Less: EXPENSE ....155 $ 359,632 $ 40,731 $ 117,895 $ 124,394 $90102816,03239941- $• $• $ 935,81812,91916,973IFUND BALANCE n 04/30/2015S 100.551 t 35.105 $ 77.036359.723 $ 40.742 $ 101.691CASH andCASH EQUIVALENTSCASH (CHECKING/SAVINGS)INVESTMENTS[TOTAL CASH -04^0/2015'$ 100,551 % 35,105 S 77,036 S 93,068 S 10,158 $ 359,723 $ 40,742 $ 101,891 $ 151,349 $- $- $• $ 969,62335.105 S 77.036 t 93.068 $ 10.158 5 359.723 S 40.742 S 101.891 S 151.349 5 • S5 969.623Page 3 of 4
TOWN OF ITHACAREVENUE and EXPENSE SUMMARY for LIGHT DISTRICTSFOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015DESCRIPTIONFUND SL-1ForestHomeFUND SL-2GlensldeFUND SL.3RenwickHeiahtsFUND SL-4EastwoodCommonsFUND SL.5Clover LaneFUND SL-6Winner'sCircleFUND SL-7BurleighDriveFUND SL.8WesthavenRoadFUND SL-9CoddingtonRoadTOTALLIGHTDISTRICTSREVENUEBUDGETED REVENUEACTUAL & ACCRUED$ 4,0004,000$ 650650$ 950951$ 1,9001,901$ 200200$ 700700$ 800800$ 2,5002,501$ 1,5001,500$ 13,20013,204REVENUE OVER fUNDERIS 0$ 0$ 1$ 1$ 0$ 0S 0$ 1$ 0S 3 1% OF BUDGET EARNED100.0%100.0%100.1%100.0%100.1%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%EXPENSEBUDGETED EXPENSEACTUALS ACCRUED$ 3,500768$ 750256$ 1,100333$ 2,200635$ 27077$ 800210$ 900264$ 2,900883$ 1,700521$ 14,1203,947% OF BUDGET EXPENDED22.0%34.1%30.3%28.8%28.5%26.3%29.3%30.4%30.7%28.0%ESTIMATED FUND BALANCEFUND BALANCE • 01/01/2015$ 143 $404 $1,043 $1,160 $241 $473 $403 $1,092 $607 $5,565Actual & Accruedadd: REVENUE4,0006509511,9012007008002,5011,50013,204Less: EXPENSE768256333635772102648835213,9471364 $963 $9.660 $ 2.426 %39 $ 2.710 $ 1.S87 $ 14.821CASH andCASH EQUIVALENTSCASH (CHECKING/SAVINGS) $ 3,374 $ 799 $ 1,660 $ 2,426 $ 364 $ 963 $ 939 $ 2,710 $ 1.587 $ 14,821INVESTMENTS ..........ITOTAL CASH-04/30/2015 $ 3.374 $ 799 $ 1.660 $ 2.426 $ 364 S 963 $ 939 t 2.710 £ 1.587 S 14.82T)Page 4 of 4)
TOWN OF ITHACA
DETAILED CASH LISTING - FIDUCIARY FUNDS
FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
TRUST & AGENCY FUND
TA200C DISBURSEMENTS CHECKING $
TA200P PAYROLL CHECKING 12,466.62
TA2G2 ON-LINE COLLECTIONS 9.59
TA205 NEXTEL SITE LEASE DEPOSIT 4,503.70
TA206 ITHACA TOWERS OPTION ESCROW 11,848.82
TA207 WIRELESS ONE 4,595.39
TA209 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING 11,808.47
TA210 STORMWATER COALITION 42,388.55
TA211 VERIZON WIRELESS ESCROW 271.43
TA212 CAYUGA LAKE WATERSHED INTERMUNICIPAL ORG 18,318.02
TOTAL CASH: TRUST & AGENCY FUND $ 106,210.59
INLET VALLEY CEMETERY FUND
TE202 INLET VALLEY CEMETERY - EXPENDABLE TRUST $ 9,078.10
TOTAL CASH: FIDUCIARY FUNDS $ 115,288.69"
TOWN OF ITHACA
SUMMARY OF BANK COLLATERAL
FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2015
TOMPKINS TRUST COMPANY:
CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS $ 19,523,619
INVESTMENTS
TOTAL CASH ON DEPOSIT
LESS: FDIC INSURANCE
$19,523,619
$250
LESS: FMV OF COLLATERAL ON DEPOSIT @ 4/30/2015
U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCY OBLIGATIONS
OVER (UNDER) COLLATERALIZED
,000
$21,227,900
$1,954,281
CASH ASSETS COLLATERALIZED @ FMV 4/30/2015 110%
Collateral is held by the Bank of New York, pledged for the Town of Ithaca, New York, for
all deposits and/or repurchase agreements of Tompklns Trust Company.
NOTE:
For deposits In excess of FDIC coverage, General Municipal Law, section 10 requires that
the excess amounts are to be secured by eligible collateral.