Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2007-02-07BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Committee of the Whole Meeting 4:45 p.m. February 7, 2007 PRESENT: Mayor Peterson Commissioners (6) - Jenkins, Dotson, Chapman, Schlather, Tripp, Wykstra OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney - Hoffman Superintendent of Public Works - Gray Assistant Superintendent of Streets and Facilities - Ferrel Assistant Superintendent of Water and Sewer – Whitney Common Council Liaison – Coles DAC Liaison – Roberts Information Management Specialist - Grunder Mayor Peterson reported that her office received a formal petition this week regarding the posting of parking on Inlet Island as two-hour maximum, (all parking in the triangular lot as two-hours maximum) and all parking within the new lot adjacent to the Route 89 bridge as twenty-four hour parking. She will make copies and distribute the petition to Board members. Mayor Peterson presented a sample resolution from Barbara Clary, Upstate New York State Safety Coalition Task Force, regarding controlling the waste trucks that are coming through the Finger Lakes communities. Sen. Charles Schumer has agreed to assist in this effort to get trucks back on Routes 81 and 90. Mayor Peterson requested that this item be placed on the agenda for the voting meeting next week. No Board member objected. Mayor Peterson stated that the new owner of the Franklin Plaza has expressed concerns about the condition of the road, the lack of sidewalks, and the landscaping in that area. She requested a meeting with the City and the Planning Department to discuss these issues. City Sidewalk Program Update: Asst. Civil Engineer Lynne Yost addressed the Board to report that a public hearing date will need to be scheduled regarding the new sidewalks on Elmira Road. Once that is done the City can send a letter to the owners of that stretch of the road explaining that the City is asking property owners to provide portions of private property for a public sidewalk at no cost to the City. She expects that the public hearing will be well attended. Supt. Gray explained that the City of Ithaca widened Elmira Road in the 1970’s and at the time, took a lot of land that resulted in a very peculiar set of property lines on Elmira Road. If the City wanted to construct a sidewalk and not use private property, it would have to be tight against the curve and the road carries too much traffic to do this safely. The sidewalk needs to be setback from the road and in order to do this, the City either has to widen its right-of-way or approach the property owners this way. The Board agreed to have the public hearing at their March 7, 2007 Committee of the Whole meeting. Commissioner Jenkins arrived at 5:10 p.m. Traffic/Transportation Improvement Program Project Update: Traffic Engineer Logue introduced Chris Smith from Fisher Associates who has been the lead agency on the South Meadow Street Traffic Study. Traffic Engineer Logue explained that the Department of Transportation (DOT) required this traffic study as a follow-up assessment of the operations along South Meadow Street from Clinton Street to Elmira Road corridor and also as a comparison to the City’s projections made prior to the construction project. 2 February 7, 2007 Supt. Gray explained that the State DOT conducted this study to make sure that traffic flow on Route 13 worked well and the City participated in the study to determine if the Route 13 improvements worked to put less pressure on cars to go through the neighborhoods to avoid Route 13. Mr. Smith explained that the study was conducted to fulfill the requirements of the highway work permit that was issued to the City so that the DOT could release the bond that is currently being held. The City added a few items to the study such as pedestrian/bicycle mobility on the corridor, and access management strategies primarily in the Elmira Road portion of the project. He further stated that the goals were to check the traffic signal timing and to check the traffic flow on the corridor to see if it can be optimized to better improve traffic flow. They studied safety before and after the development occurred. A requirement of the study was to show whether safety standards went up, down, or stayed the same. There were quite a few traffic changes with the City’s Six Point Traffic plan and the new development. He further explained in more detail the following categories of the study regarding traffic study, traffic flow, pedestrian/bicycle, and access management. He also explained what time of day, days of the week, etc. that traffic counts were done to get a good cross-section of the types and amount of traffic, both vehicular and non-vehicular that were using the roadway at every signalized intersection along the corridor. This data can help calibrate and validate traffic models. The study found that the traffic through most of the corridor works as well as it can be expected with the amount of capacity that is available, and the number of traffic signals. The congestion occurs in the Fulton/Clinton street area, however, the widened bridge has made an improvement. The only movements that were seen as unacceptable were at the northern most intersection. The rest of the intersections were seen as operating “acceptably” in traffic engineering language. In the morning, the east bound traffic would back up and in the afternoon it was the opposite. On Saturday, getting out of the City and the north bound traffic was pretty balanced, but not working all that great. There might be an opportunity to give a little more time to some of the side street movements. The State DOT has accepted the results of the study with technical recommendations regarding the extension of timing for some of the pedestrian crossing signals. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the timing of signals at various intersections for pedestrians and bicyclists, and where signals may need to be adjusted to allow more time for crossing. Mr. Smith stated that the DOT reviewed safety data from before and after the development. They looked at pavement markings, sign clutter, and all the different things that might go into the landscape of the traffic signal areas to see what could cause accidents. They found faded striping at approaches to intersections (one at Titus Avenue and one at South or Wood Street) where the pavement markings were unclear and confusing. The Commercial Avenue curb radius looks as though trucks are constantly driving over it. The City might want to make those a little bigger to help trucks get in and out more efficiently. Traffic signal equipment on the southern end should be upgraded because it’s small and blends into the background. The whole area was seen as a safety issue with so many uncontrolled driveways, people turning in and out and waiting in the middle lane. Prior to development the corridor showed 8.7 accidents per million vehicle miles traveled and the Statewide average is less than that. It was a heavily traveled corridor with a lot of uncontrolled access points. The types of accidents were mostly rear end accidents, which are usually lower speed with not as many injuries involved. Most accidents were congestion related where someone was trying to switch a lane. There were not a significant number of bicycle or pedestrian accidents. Post-development results found that accident rates were twice as much as the State-wide average and sometimes three times as much as the State-wide average at a few locations. The 3 February 7, 2007 accidents seemed to be mostly congestion related such as drivers trying to pull out into the roadway because there wasn’t a break in traffic, rear end accidents, and side swipe accidents. Pedestrian accommodations include a continuous sidewalk on the northern portion of the area with efforts being made to extend the sidewalk down the southern end of Elmira Road, and at several intersections there are count down audible timers. In addition they are considering three options which are unique pedestrian accommodations including an all red pedestrian phase located at Cayuga and Green Streets, a protected pedestrian phase where traffic would be shut off on one side of intersection, and leading pedestrian interval which is a concept that allows the pedestrian to establish themselves in the street before the signal will go green for anyone. Access management is a way to control the amount of driveways and the ability for vehicles to get out on the street. Recommendations were that as re-development occurs to remove the ten uncontrolled driveways, although there are a few that might not be able to be removed because there is no opportunity for cross access and no opportunity to get to a signal. Another recommendation would be the installation of a median and round about to help manage the flow and speed of vehicles and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety. Also recommended for further consideration would be the construction of another roadway from Home Depot to Walmart to accommodate traffic and provide access management along this corridor. To assist with redevelopment, the City could have requirements such as one curb cut if there is no signal access and if a traffic signal can be accessed no curb cut, if you can get to a side street no curb cut, if you can cross access to another property that has access to a signal and has an established driveway, no curb cut. What the City wants to do is reduce the number of curb cuts and consolidate traffic to points that can be controlled through a round about or traffic signal. In conclusion, the City has fulfilled its requirements of the New York State DOT highway work permit which was one of the biggest goals. Water Treatment Plant Update: Mayor Peterson explained that there are two resolutions coming forward to Common Council this evening. One is on the decision for lead agency with Common Council supporting the Board of Public Works as lead agency for environmental review; the other one is on the decision maker body. She stated that Common Council and the Board would benefit if the City had several topical seminars such as governance or the financial aspect of this process to learn more about them. She further stated that a client committee would need to be created that would include Deputy Director of Planning and Development Cornish, Supt. Gray, Rick Gell from O’Brien and Gere, Director of Planning and Development VanCort, and a few other people, including a Council member and a Board of Public Works member to help make sure the process moves along in a timely way and that the process is moving forward. She further explained that Rick Gell from O’Brien and Gere reported at the City Administration Committee meeting last week that there is still money left in the project so that once the thirty days for lead agency and the involved agency period ends the City can begin the scoping process. Commissioner Schlather stated that, assuming the Board goes forward with environmental review and they do it in the joint fashion that has been discussed, and a client committee is created which is essentially a joint committee, and topical meetings which would be joint meetings are conducted, that it doesn’t make sense, at this point, for Common Council to say they are making this decision. Mayor Peterson stated that she did not share that view. She further stated that Alderperson Coles, as the BPW Liaison to Common Council, would be happy to convey the sentiment of the majority of the Board. She knows what the sentiments are from this Board and she can’t overstate how strongly she feels that this is a Common Council decision. She further stated that she highly values the Board of Public Works and feels that the lead agency for environmental review is such a key part of the decision making process and that the Board would have a significant role in putting together the findings and making recommendations to Common Council. 4 February 7, 2007 Mayor Peterson left the meeting. Commissioner Dotson assumed the role of Vice Chair and stated that this topic has been discussed at length here and suggested that the Board move forward with the rest of the agenda items at this time. Deputy Director of Planning and Development Cornish stated that she and Supt. Gray would provide more information on this topic for next week’s meeting and if possible would e-mail information to the Board before the meeting. BJM Pick Up/Drop Off Request: Traffic Engineer Logue explained that the City has a request to create a pick up/drop off zone on Buffalo Street from BJM. There is a fire lane in front of BJM on Buffalo Street just immediately west of Albany Street, and there are two handicap parking spaces. The City would like to create a zone in there that would allow standing on the street as long as the driver stays in the car from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. This change would allow parents to drop off and pick up children for school. He explained that the fire department is comfortable with this proposal. 124 Robert’s Place – Curb Cuts Supt. Gray explained that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission approved a proposal to construct a gravel drive at 124 Roberts Placed located in the Cornell Heights Historic District. The proposed drive is curved and will require a curb cut at either end, both accessing Roberts Place. He further explained that the scope of the Commission’s deliberation was limited to assessing the impacts on the historic and architectural character of the property and didn’t include issues such as the pros and cons of multiple curb cuts, which are within the Board of Public Works purview. The Commission’s decision supports the applicant’s request to accommodate a drive with two parking spaces. Properties at 122 and 124 Roberts Place originally shared the same site and continue to share a landscape, a condition that underscores the unique value placed on landscape design in the development of Cornell Heights. Based on physical and historical documentation presented at the Commission’s meeting, much of the original shared landscape has survived over a period of almost 100 years. This circumstance allows one to perceive a relationship between 122, 124 and the residence across Roberts Place, 123. The applicant Robert Mzarek and neighbor, Ken Vineburg studied several concepts for providing parking on the site in an effort to find a solution that would have the least impact on the landscape. The Commission members too, disturbed by the proximity of the drive to the house and the “front yard” location, discussed several different scenarios at the meeting. In the end, however, the Commission members were convinced that the current scheme was the only design that would successfully preserve the landscape context for these resources, a feature important to understanding the historic significance. The applicant is requesting that the Board of Public Works approve the request for two curb cuts. Robert Mzarek, applicant, addressed the Board to further explain his request. He explained that the property was designed and constructed by the Comstock family in 1914. He stated that he has attempted to restore this property in a way, hopefully, that Anna Comstock would be proud of. Unfortunately, she did not have to deal with the curse of the automobile. The certificate of compliance requires one parking spot for each one of the apartments in this particular house. He has two neighbors on Roberts Place and a next-door neighbor and they attempted to create a plan which was presented to the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission that would allow for two parking spaces on the property. He explained that it would be simple to create these two parking spaces and the proposal takes into consideration some of the historic configuration on both his property and his neighbor’s property, as well as the original Comstock home in trying to create a plan that would have the least impact on the property and it does include two curb cuts. The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation 5 February 7, 2007 Commission approved his request and he was hoping that the Board would also approve the request for two curb cuts. Supt. Gray explained that this request violates two of the guidelines that the City would have for driveways. One would be that a property of this size would normally only get one driveway curb cut. The other is that you would never put curb cuts this close to a corner. He stated that he thought the Board should take the time to review and consider this request. He further stated that if the Board felt that it had enough information particular to this property that the City might recommend that the driveway be only one way in and one way out, to only make right hand turns into it and right hand turns out of it. He explained that the property is located on a long sweeping curb that is pretty low speed, low volume location. He further stated that there is no on street parking because it is narrow and there is no room for parking on the street there. Mr. Mzarek explained that unusual to this property is that the sidewalks are on the property he owns as opposed to City property, so the double curb cuts would simply connect to the sidewalk. He stated that he has the full support of both his neighbors for this proposal as well. Commissioner Chapman asked if approval of this request might be setting a precedent for similar requests. Supt. Gray stated that it would be very rare to have someone sit before this Board having come through the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and produce the historic background and recommendations like this request. Normally, he would be very uncomfortable with this, but he thinks for a number of reasons this one gets to stand by itself. The Board requested that Supt. Gray prepare a resolution for their consideration of this item at their next meeting. ADJOURNMENT On a motion the meeting adjourned. Sarah L. Myers Carolyn K. Peterson Information Management Specialist Mayor