Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-22-13 Board of Public Works Meeting AgendaBOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS OFFICIAL NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING A meeting of the Board of Public Works will be held on Monday, April 22, 2013, at 4:45 p.m. in Common Council Chambers — Third Floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. Agenda 1. Additions or Deletions to Agenda (Items 1 -5: 15 min.) 2. Mayor's Communications 3. Communications and Hearin as from Persons Before the Board 4. Response to the Public 5. Reports Special Committees of the Board Council Liaison Board Liaisons Superintendent and Staff Other Department Heads 6. Approval of Minutes 6.1 April 1, 2013 Minutes 7. Administration and Communications 8. VOTING ITEMS 8.1 Buildinas, Properties. Refuse and Transit 8.2 Highways, Streets and Sidewalks A. Authorization for the Use of Right of Way by the Food Truck Association for Food Truck Roundups at Thompson Park — Resolution B. Resolution to Amend Vehicle and Traffic Schedule IV: One -Way Streets, Schedule XII: Parking Prohibited at All Times, and Schedule XX: Continuous Parking for 200 Block of Prospect Street — Resolution 8.3 Parking and Traffic 8.4 Creeks. Bridges and Parks 8.5 Water and Sewer A. Request to Standardize Main Coagulant until a Year After the Completion of the New Water Treatment Plant — Resolution B. Award of Bids for "Water Supply Project: Water System Improvements — Contracts 2A and 2B — Resolution C. Award of Bids for "Water Supply Project: Giles Street & Interconnection Building — Contracts 3A and 3B — Resolution D. Rejection of Bids & Authorization to Re -Bid for "Water Supply Project: Giles Street & Interconnection Building — Contracts 3C -HVAC and 3D- Plumbing — Resolution E. Acceptance of Proposal for Professional Engineering Services For Control Systems Integration for The City of Ithaca Municipal Water Supply Project — Resolution 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS 9.1 Boat Slip Rental Fees 9.2 Request to Use DeWitt Park for Homeless Conference 9.3 Request for Modification of Parking Regulations on East Falls Street 9.4 Request to Improve Water Quality on Woodcrest Avenue 9.5 Green Garage Trash Facility Program Improvements — Resolution 10. FOR YOUR INFORMATION 10.1 Safe Routes to School Project and Bike Boulevard Plan Update 11. New Business 12. Adjournment If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 607 - 274 -6570 at least 48 hours before the The Board of Public Works meets on the second, third and fourth Wednesdays of the months at 4:45 p.m. All meetings are voting meetings, opening with a public comment period. Meeting agendas are created from prior public input, Department operating, planning issues, and requests made to the Superintendent. The Board reserves the right to limit verbal comments to three minutes and to request written comments on lengthy or complex issues. This information may then be used to create committee agendas, with the speaker or author invited to attend. Page 2 Notes for BPW Agenda, April 22, 2093 8.2A Authorization for the Use of Right of Way by the Food Truck Association for Food Truck Roundups at Thompson Park — Resolution Per the Board's recommendation, the draft agreement has been shared with the City Attorney's office and the Special Events Committee. A resolution is provided authorizing an agreement with the Food Truck Association to locate its Roundups at Thompson Park, per the submitted proposal. 8.213 Resolution to Amend Vehicle and Traffic Schedule IV: One -Way Streets Schedule XII: Parkina Prohibited at All Times, and Schedule XX• Continuous Parking for 200 Block of Prospect Street Kent Johnson has provided a memo and resolution requesting the installation of a contra -flow bicycle lane on the 200 block of Prospect Street. 8.5A Request to Standardize Main Coaaulant until a Year after the Completion of the New Water Treatment Plant During the construction of the new water treatment plant, staff would like to standardize the coagulant chemical that they are used to working with. To change the coagulant during this project would cause learning curve for staff to learn a new chemical. 8.513 Award of Bids for "Water Supply Project: Water System Improvements — Contracts 2A and 2B — Resolution 8.5C Award of Bids for "Water Supply Project: Giles Street & Interconnection Building — Contracts 3A and 3B — Resolution 8.5D Resection of Bids & Authorization to Re -Bid for "Water Supply Project: Giles Street & Interconnection Buildina — Contracts 3C -HVAC and 3D- Plumbina — Resolution 8.5E Acceptance of Proposal for Professional Enaineerina Services For Control Systems Intearation for The City of Ithaca Municipal Water Supply Project — Resolution Common Council authorized the funding of the Water Treatment Plant Rebuild Project on April 3, 2013. Following that decision, contracts need to be awarded to the appropriate bidders for various services. These are just the first with more to follow. 9.1 _Boat Slip Rental Fees This is a continuation of the discussion from April 8t ". Please bring the documents that were provided in that agenda. 9.2 Request to Use DeWitt Park for Homeless Conference A request was submitted on April 8, 2013, for the use of DeWitt Park on Sunday, October 6, 2013, from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. for a National Homeless Conference. The press release, dated April 1, 2013, stated that a "representative from each of the 50 states to discuss and find solutions to ending homelessness in America." In my conversation with the applicant, it was indicated that he is hoping for 3,000 to 6,000 people to attend this conference. However, the application lists "Unknown" as the number of expected attendees. Rev. Dr. Henery from the First Presbyterian Church has forwarded a letter to the City reiterating the regulations and policy of the use of DeWitt Park. According to the 1856 Page 3 Agreement between the church and Ithaca, the park was to be kept and maintained as a "Public Walk and Promenade" and the public square must allow the "free ingress or egress of the members of [church] Society to and from said House of Worship..." With the number of people expected at this event, and the fact that it is held on a Sunday morning, it is my recommendation that this request be denied and the event be located elsewhere. 9.3 Request for Modification of Parking Regulations on East Falls Street Mr. Allen Lambert has requested that on- street parking regulations on the 300 block of East Falls Street be modified. See the enclosed letter, petition and e-mail stream to begin a discussion. 9.4 Request to Improve Water Quality on Woodcrest Avenue A map has been provided for the replacement of water mains in the Woodcrest Avenue area, along with estimates for the cost of replacement by street. 9.5 Green Garage Trash Facility Program Improvements — Resolution Director of Engineering Tom West has provided a memo explaining the need for a change in policy regarding the City's trash compactor, and the use of it by Commons businesses. A proposed resolution is provided for your consideration. 10.1 Safe Routes to School Project and Bike Boulevard Plan Update Junior Transportation Engineer Kent Johnson has provided a memorandum that gives an update on these projects and the next steps the City and ICSD will need to take in the near future. ICatkU Clehrwuro, Executive AssLstawt For Rai Pevliavv.iv Arativ-o Superiwtevw1evL-t o f Public Worhs Ap rU 17, 2023 Page 4 8.2A Authorization for the Use of Right of Way by the Food Truck Association for Food Truck Roundups at Thompson Park — Resolution WHEREAS, the Food Truck Association of Ithaca has submitted a proposal for Food Truck Roundups to be located at various locations around the City, beginning with Thompson Park, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has expressed interest in permitting mobile vending on City streets, and WHEREAS, Department of Public Works staff has met with Food Truck Association organizers to assemble a revocable license agreement to permit a Food Truck Roundup adjacent to Thompson Park, and WHEREAS, the Assistant City Attorney and staff members of the Special Events Committee have been provided an opportunity to review and comment on the terms of the agreement, and WHEREAS, though a group from Leadership Tompkins is currently working on a project to create a pilot mobile vending program within the City, the Board agreed that authorizing the Food Truck Roundup on a trial basis would not detract the work of the Leadership Tompkins group, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby authorizes the Superintendent of Public Works to execute a revocable license agreement with the Food Truck Association of Ithaca for the use of the parking lane adjacent to Thompson Park, and directs staff to monitor the activities of the Food Truck Roundups on a trial basis. Page 5 8.213 Resolution to Amend Vehicle and Traffic Schedule IV: One -Way Streets, Schedule XII: Parkina Prohibited at All Times, and Schedule XX• Continuous Parking for 200 Block of Prosuect Street WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works is authorized by Section 346 -4 of the City Code to adopt and to amend a system of Schedules in order to administer the Vehicle and Traffic Law, and WHEREAS, the Office of the City Engineer proposes the installation of a contra -flow bicycle lane in the 200 block of Prospect Street as detailed in a memo delivered to the Board dated April 11, 2013; the plan for which necessitates the relocating of on- street parking from the south curbline to the north curbline, and WHEREAS, this proposed action modifies the one -way nature of the street; the street will be two -way for bicyclists, with a travel lane for motor vehicles only provided in the westbound direction, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works concurs, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the following amendments to the Vehicle and Traffic Schedules shall be made: Schedule IV: One -Way Streets. Prospect St. from Hudson St. to Aurora St., westbound — except bicycles (revised entry) Schedule XII: Parking Prohibited at All Times. Name of Street Side Location (From/To) Prospect Street South Aurora St to Hudson St (new entry) Schedule XX, Continuous Parking. Name or Street Side Location Prospect Street Seutb From Aurora St to Hudson St (revised entry) North Page 6 CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street, Suite 202 Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 OFFICE (--)F ME CITY ENGINEER April 11, 2013 releplione: 607/274-6530 Fax: 6074274-6587 TO: Board of Public Works FROM: Kent Johnson, Transportation Engineer < -j U_ RE: Prospect St. contra-flow bicycle lane Existing conditions: A number of - I . [ I ru east/west streets on South Hill I-N designated as "one-way" due to narrow widths and/or as an inexpensive La Proposed measure intended to discourage cut- -1r., New uphill contra-flow through traffic. This condition has bike lane bike lane -j inadvertently created a condition in which bicyclists are either directed to 0AAK 16' follow an inconvenient, circuitous route F or they choose to disobey posted regulations to reach their destinations. Existing uphill bike zl Of particular impediment to j lane bicyclists is the west-bound one-way — All F ; , Of designation of the 200 block of Prospect St. which could, if two-way, New uphill serve as a key bicycling connection V bike lane planned between downtown and the South a Hill/Ithaca College area. The Ithaca Bicycle Plan (1997) Figure 1: The above map provides context for the proposed recognizes this situation and change. The new uphill bike lane on Clinton/Prospect St. will connect to the proposed contra-flow lane; bicyclists will then travel recommends that this segment allow for on Hudson St. for three blocks to the existing uphill bike lane that begins at Hillview Place. The final short segment of uphill bike lane east-bound bicycle traffic. on Hudson St. may be painted very soon. At the City line is the new multi-use trail to Ithaca College. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 0 Recommendations: A contra -flow bicycle lane is recommended for installation along the 200 block of Prospect St. This condition would be facilitated by a 5 ft wide, east -bound bicycle lane adjacent to the south curb; a 7 ft wide parking lane adjacent to the north curb; and the remaining 10 ft would constitute the west -bound shared motor vehicle/bicycle travel lane. A standard double - yellow centerline would be placed 5 ft. north of the southern curb to establish the bike lane, which would also include bike lane symbols and signs. This strategy would not reduce existing motor vehicle access or reduce existing parking supply (the parking would be relocated from the south side to the north side of the street — there is space for about 19 cars on each side of the street). Additionally, locating parked cars on the north side of the street will improve the ease with which curbside vehicle doors can be opened; currently, the slope along the south curb obstructs vehicle doors in most locations. Contra -flow bicycle lanes are accepted roadway designs and are supported by AASHTO, FHWA, and MUTCD guidelines. To fund this change, the existing Capital Project #325 (aka Bike Plan funding) will be tapped. The estimated costs include: $1,290 (contractor fee for pavement markings) and in -kind City support to make revisions to the signs. To relocate the existing on- street parking from the south side of the street to the north side of the street and to modify the one -way designation, the BPW needs to amend applicable portions of the City Vehicle and Traffic Schedule by passing the attached resolution. 8.5A Request to Standardize Main Coagulant until a Year after the Completion of the New Water Treatment Plant — Resolution WHEREAS, Common Council has been requested by the Department of Public Works Water and Sewer Division Water Treatment Plant to standardize the main coagulant used at the Water Treatment Plant in the water treatment process until the new Water Treatment Plant is constructed and online for a period of one year, and WHEREAS, the new Water Treatment Plant will be constructed in the same footprint as the old Water Treatment Plant, thus the new plant will be simultaneously constructed as the old plant is deconstructed, and staff will have substantial additional workload in the coordination and continued operation of the remaining old processes, the set up of temporary bridging processes, and the startup of new processes, and WHEREAS, Water Treatment Plant staff is familiar with the coagulant currently used at the plant and know how it performs, what feed rates and concentrations to use as conditions change under seasonal and daily variations in weather and water quality, and WHEREAS, changing the primary coagulant would result in substantial additional staff workload in the learning, testing, and optimization of a new coagulant's performance characteristics under many different seasonal and daily conditions, and WHEREAS, it is deemed to be in the best interest of the City for reasons of efficiency, compatibility and economics to approve standardization of the primary coagulant used at the Water Treatment Plant to Polyaluminum Chloride as manufactured by Holland Company (PCH180), and authorize the City to purchase approved coagulant from the manufacturer, or a representative thereof, until the new Water Treatment Plant is constructed and operational for a one year period, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That pursuant to Section 103, subdivision 5 of General Municipal Law of the State of New York, the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that Common Council authorize the standardization to, and purchase and use of Polyaluminum Chloride as manufactured by Holland Company (PCH180) for the City of Ithaca Department of Public Works Water & Sewer Division Water Treatment Plant until the new Water Treatment Plant is commissioned and has been operational for a one year period, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Assistant Superintendent of Public Works for Water and Sewer be authorized to execute the purchase contract and to administer the same. Page 7 Page 1 of 1 Kathrin Gehring - Re: Coagulant From: Steven Thayer To: Chuck Baker Date: 3/21/2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: Coagulant CC: Scott Andrew Hi Chuck, You can send a resolution to the BPW to standardize on the chemical from Holland Co. until we get into the plant. Generally you would standardize for efficiency, compatibility and economic reasons. You can use the reasons you stated here as the reasons for standardization. If you need assistance writing the resolution, let me know. Thanks, Steve >>> Chuck Baker 3/20/2013 2:29 PM >>> Steve: If the water plant project continues forward with the rebuild option, I am requesting that until we are in the new facility, we do not change the main coagulant (let any bids out for it). We currently use a polyaluminum chloride from Holland Co. (PCH -180). We know how it works and under what conditions /feed rates. As we progress into the new facility we will be operating with temporary feed /storage setups and operating parts of both treatment processes (old and new). Judging the optimal feed and the process may be by the seat of your pants at times. We need to be using a product we know as all these changes occur. Once we are in the new facility and have been for a few months, I will gladly entertain other vendors /bids as long as they have pre - qualified. We actually have one vendor doing that now in anticipation of that time. Is this something we can just state, or is there some process, thru the BPW or CC that we have to do to accomplish this? At the moment, if things remain somewhat on schedule, we would not be in the new plant until late 2015. Let me know. Charles Baker Chief Operator City of Ithaca Water Treatment Plant 202 Water St. Ithaca, NY 14850 ph: 607 - 273 -4680 fax: 607 -216 -0460 email: cbaker @cityofithaca.org file://CADocuments and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\5166A5ADcoi... 4/15/2013 8.5B Award of Bids for "Water Supply Project: Water System Improvements - Contracts 2A and 2B WHEREAS, as a vital component of the City of Ithaca Water Supply Project, improvements to the City's water distribution system at the Elm Street Tank, improvements to the water supply reservoir access road, restoration and stabilization along the path of the raw water intake pipe, and the construction of a new water intake utility building are necessary to enhance efficiency and improve functionality, and WHEREAS, the City's Engineering Consultants, O'Brien and Gere, prepared design drawings, specifications, and bid packages, and WHEREAS, three sealed bids were received for Water System Improvements - Contract 2A, General Construction, and four sealed bids were received for Water System Improvements - Contract 2B, Electrical Construction, and opened on March 12, 2013, at 2:OOPM, and WHEREAS, the City's Engineering Consultants and Staff have reviewed the bids received and made recommendations for award, and WHEREAS, on April 3, 2013, Common Council provided project funding by amending Capital Project #510 Water Treatment Plant Improvements /Reconstruction by an amount not to exceed $30,700,000 for a total project authorization of $36,700,000, and now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby awards the bid for Contract 2A to Vacri Construction Corp., One Brick Avenue, Binghamton, NY for a total contract amount of $1,680,000 for general construction services, and be it further, RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby awards the bid for Contract 2B to Vacri Construction Corp., One Brick Avenue, Binghamton, NY for a total contract amount of $114,000, and be it further, RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works authorizes the Superintendent of Public Works to execute the respective contracts with Vacri Construction Corp. upon review and approval by the City Attorney. Page 8 8 S �" z S O O m O p 8 8 p8 O S8 C5 p8 d O m y 7 m V� N GO H9 m Q N i00 Q N o U O co �N 7 0 C � d � w Ua cO U �N C r O ty C 4i W 12122 S O S O p S p O p O p O O W O $ A.0 N OD o 8$.0 U CD T C4 8 G9 N 2 N CD N Lo CO O ¢a W mm 2m„N, N d ate- CD ftAp O E o IL 40 °o o° °0 °O °0 °0 8 °0 °0 °0 °o °° °o g U) w z O O S O O O O S � p 8 81,00 } m y 7 m co fVfa N 6�9 6n9 �Mvy M co N a�D M N (y u b4 is N! E m a w o E O) V1 p 3 w N U cix�$y3•$ o O 0 O 0 O S 0 0 0 S 0 ° c o r m O N S O N S S S N 0 CD a �� LSO C y E pp 0 pp o N to 49 vs Fa a LO Y3 G9 m N O yt C N NfvC C d 629 N � fa y 0 0 m U •� �a'C� EY U 8 °o o °o °o °O• °o• °o, 00• °0 8 S S `n z O O O O °O N i°O II °Op 10 °O $ °O °O °O m 7 d CO m m a0 6 69 n N °n M us M u3 is Lq w 40 O) RS ea 10 v W N O O' °r$ iV > d ° •C ea G9 y U � d {Y $ U 0 0 °0 8 8 °0 8 8 8 8 °o, 8 °0 8 0Z o N /a pQ x N N C CD 04 to .0 W Go to &B. (D U C O ooC ®- c d � ^ b4 h tl9 to �d O m d 9 E- O m Loa N 0 R O � N r 8 wQ Cy 7 7 C V m HC C F w E v e �Z c ? z c ° E w $ 3 a J to oC m w E w ~ 3 D E a m 0' Y O N ? m o m E LL .m 0 3 CL E `o o 2 ° o a m Y z >C 0 S x W O E � U Z ° m E m m o �? E Zo E z d aEi a 0 C ' o o y Z. E a S F WS ;; o aci t7 aci 8) °� - v a r `u� v a° v v 5 w E w v a mLLr a00, O ,3 v E a el v m oo a o d ova m:: A A A A mao a10 to 0 » -, § § ;. CY m k {) a� 22 `f -JSK % k �� w -2 CD �I 2 IJ¢ t{ _ �]! k IL C #� } §■ CM # M ■ & a B $ §m L� § \ 8 m W ■ £Ik} -© �2 2 2 %j C _ § S t; § E @ as § _ f L� 0c § §cN § a CD | JEME LU a $ /� CL 6s 6 # ° m co z co a - � B ` ° k I >z ` « ~ -• § §� 10-- �f 2 2 R k 2IL k- _ �k 2C § m k J 2 § ( § cl ! . m A q a ■ k `■ �) 2 ` �B c_ Dc I § § >. M \ cu § k �K2 2 ..l § °� &�z �� ■uo r,o 8.5C Award of Bids for "Water Supply Project: Giles Street & Interconnection Building — Contracts 3A and 313 WHEREAS, as a vital component of the City of Ithaca Water Supply Project, improvements to the City residuals handling facility and the construction of a new public water supply interconnection building are necessary to enhance efficiency and improve functionality, and WHEREAS, City Engineering Consultants, O'Brien and Gere, prepared design drawings, specifications, and bid packaging, and WHEREAS, five sealed bids were each received for the Giles Street Interconnection Building, Contract 3A, General Construction, and Contract 313, Electrical Construction, and opened on March 12, 2013, at 2:OOPM, and WHEREAS, the City's Engineering Consultants and Staff have reviewed said bids and have concluded that the offers submitted by Streeter Associates for Contract 3A, and Vacri Construction for Contract 313, have been identified as the apparent low bidders, and WHEREAS, on April 3, 2013, Common Council provided project funding by amending Capital Project #510 Water Treatment Plant Improvements /Reconstruction by an amount not to exceed $30,700,000 for a total project authorization of $36,700,000, and now therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby awards the bid for Contract 3A to Streeter Associates, 1012 East Woodlawn Avenue, Elmira, NY for a total amount not to exceed $4,048,000 for general construction services, and be it further, RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby awards the bid for Contract 3B to Vacri Construction, One Brick Avenue, Binghamton, NY for a total amount not to exceed $223,000, and be it further, RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works authorizes the Superintendent of Public Works to execute the respective contracts with Streeter Associates and Vacri Construction upon review and approval by the City Attorney. Page 9 °o °o S K S W 2 mC O O �p lV s NMS T -�4a�ani c m U F °O S o S °o °o S °O °o g °o v�S w �� � am �� ooQ uS o :0 a E p a m m O O O S C O S C co C O S S O O O O S p S IA O yj W� i Z o m O N LOV W a ro' aN W imp mO H N CO 1t°v app f? mN� f0 S OC,m IE Ci U0. Y 3 ° o °o o° °o S S °O °o °o g 2 o to mSm�p po Oo y m a NNNN fN0 S,9f V 7& O U c 4 0 _ p� o YI i9 F N yN O® s 8 S °o O S $ °o S S a LD c m S Cd N� ' e Qp f0 FoOE f9 f9 DD�a m CL w [L °O, E• E �m o o m o S 0 °o o ci U ° 0$ o W1� c r` m M u� u m 'V 2 2 p6 IY «N UJ�' N O {p O (J m Z N «p a y m O S O �p CND O O O O O O «M O O fy O {q O LL m m m = L �Opp i9 C N pO 10 Ua °Vid m d rs f9 a ySy�Oy� °o °op, °o S °po C m ® O p oSo p O ui qp S M CP M CD m �2 LL W TM pp ^$m Cp CP w o .2 '» m 0. In j S S Yp1 W V 9 m n y� J qq J 1LL� J V V V V U) _ C C7 O a W a c E C7 U F Z c E J e 0 V w ° aL E C7 �4 m E Lu o 3 g IL G 2 2 w ° > G LL N o� c m m a� m .gc4 Y W Q Q z a pD V N ma C4D �Ei a 44N Qf• QW mUO ml1O E qm O o g m OC ® c m c •v g S mm W E cEpZ�` n °CU —m 78 � rn NN nL S - E °o U, 2 C 9 O c E E �m 8 6i -0 o O n O m 'O U °m d d N f9 �� W 4 `� a °i U O g A O Lu Z °�`°'° N o s E �P1 d Y S pp p W O E 132 m EL o a C�tOtpp � � o p ° W ®p Z (Y�i � � N 7 r N Z 2 Y 6 -52 0. 0 0 o W Z Lu m c d N c�� to N p p W V u R U CL9z 90 O O 6 cCm 03o `o 700 z N J p 9= ° d N ZN Wa C (wp O O O C O W Z O 7 4 8 O m ap m C p 6 P Q ® E1 W U m o 8 8 8 gc > � s S $ 6 m 4m `� $ d v' a c > O m 0. i 9 W d O c m o qq 0 em1 O c G m � Z W � Al ami E o E 3 5 W fi a � 9 d d W m m p CC D � O YK ca a x LL o O eq O ° Zj O � ~ A o 5=W � 7ppLLSFe 6-0 Om— v E h o�IL a �w mR .m�e m W - LL mq� m00 - 8.5D Resection of Bids & Authorization to Re -Bid for "Water Supply Project: Giles Street & Interconnection Building — Contracts 3C -HVAC and 3D- Plumbina — Resolution WHEREAS, as a vital component of the City of Ithaca Water Supply Project, improvements to the City residuals handling facility and the construction of a new public water supply interconnection building are necessary to enhance efficiency and improve functionality, and WHEREAS, City Engineering Consultants, O'Brien and Gere, prepared design drawings, specifications, and bid packaging, and WHEREAS, only one sealed bid each was received for the Giles Street Interconnection Building, Contract 3C, Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC), and Contract 3D, Plumbing, and opened on March 12, 2013, at 2:OOPM, and WHEREAS, the City's Engineering Consultants and Staff have reviewed said bids and have concluded that the bids submitted by Ackerman Plumbing Inc. for Contracts 3C and 3D are the sole bids and are substantially higher than the Engineer's estimate for the work, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works, at the recommendation of the City's Engineering Consultants and the Assistant Superintendent of Public Works for the Water & Sewer Division, hereby rejects the bids for Contracts 3C and 3D and authorizes the rebidding of Contracts 3C and 3D. Page 10 �m o° d aL) N 64 a W M O O m C Q1 O O a N ER E O O O W Z La U C a C m O I� O CR 1- CD >- 0 m ci 0 > d CY v � G N Im E 0 6111� T 40 s_ v LU °z^ .000 0) m L o co Q C ql O OG N o0 CO r- Q co !- d w T T E w 3 (A 0 W J J m v ' M a C �L O �+ ` a v m Z 2 o Q P m U) c U_ > w = U a 3 M w N U O C7 p i � a E C Z = Q O y :R Q. J E m `Q H a7 m O E U Q t p Y m = N 3 O M X ii o V C N N :� m r o Z y OQa Paz 0a o Ul H0Q 0U) .� E p_ W p m a mVp mC90 § Im q J2 2 �a w J IL m o c o © o § 2 2 2 O § �w c L m k 2 J0 2 k c .CL w > $ _k # » / �aZ� �mM� -0 0 0 CD W �k� / -� 0 k 0 N §co B d 2 2 v000 2 ® CD co CL @ . V �■ E § V\ _j -i k $ � V B � 2 § m � � E E E ■ ■ 2 0 0 E E q § - 2 ■ m -0 E ■ E m IL © m8 = x c @ r O0 �� - �� 0 �� LU � _ 0 3 Z ■� 0 m E 3 f � z 06■ k w � � ■ $ .. m�� 0 -3 _ /IL Im Z o 0 mein m (3 B 8.5E Acceptance of Proposal for Professional Engineering Services For Control Systems Intearation for The City of Ithaca Municipal Water Supply Project WHEREAS, in the construction of its new Water Treatment Plant the City of Ithaca, New York has need of qualified Control Systems Integrators (CSI) offering professional engineering services for the design, coordination, fabrication, configuration, implementation, testing, startup, and commissioning of a complete, integrated, uniform, and fully operational Process Control Systems (PCS). A CSI is required in order to effectively implement fully the design intent of the project functional system requirements and instrumentation design currently under development, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Water Supply Project is broken out into four distinct design packages, each with custom integration work. Staff considers the "Professional Services" option as the best option for this project. The Professional Services option maintains one single contract with total responsibility for the control and monitoring of the distribution and treatment systems under all contracts. The project and the City of Ithaca will benefit from this approach by maintaining consistency throughout the project, allowing standardization of instrumentation equipment, control panels, Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) cabinets, and the system integration for the systems, including PLC, Operator Interface Terminal (OIT) and SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) programming. This approach also will allow standardization of naming conventions, tagging, alarming, screens, logging, colors, text, etc., and WHEREAS, a CSI hired under a "Professional Services" contract separate from the Prime Contracts gives the City of Ithaca total control of who provides the integration services and the opportunity to take advantage of technology developments after preparation of the contract documents. It is recognized that some additional work will fall to City Staff in the management of the CSI and its coordination with other Contracts and Contractors., and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2012 the City of Ithaca advertised in a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Professional Engineering Services For Control Systems Integration for The City of Ithaca Municipal Water Supply for design, coordination, fabrication, configuration, implementation, testing, startup, commissioning of a complete, integrated, uniform, and fully operational PCS for: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. and, Intake Utility Building, located on Slaterville Road Elm Street Pumping Station, located on Elm Street Giles Street Press Building, located Giles Street Interconnection Building, located on Water Street Water Treatment Plant, located on Water Street Repeater Station, located on Coddington Road WHEREAS, The City received three proposals as of February 1, 2013, from the following Professional Engineering Firms: Page 11 Robert P. Lee, PE bobleeCa)-northpointusa.com North Point Technology, LLC 530 Columbia Drive, Ste. 102 Johnson City, NY 13790 John Conway 0conwavO-asgrp.com Applied Sciences Group, Inc. 4455 Genesee Street, Ste. 103 Buffalo, NY 14225 Richard E. Gell, PE Rick. Gel l(cD-obg.com O'Brien & Gere Engineering 333 West Washington Street I P.O. Box 4873 Syracuse, NY 13221- 4873 and, WHEREAS, DPW Water & Sewer Division Engineers and Water Treatment Plant Staff met with two of the three proposing firms on February 14 and 20, 2013, for an in -depth presentation, review, and discussion, and WHEREAS, DPW Water & Sewer Division Engineers and Water Treatment Plant Staff have thoroughly and diligently reviewed all three of the proposals received. Based on their review, Staff recommends acceptance of the proposal from O'Brien & Gere, Mr. Richard Gell, PE, 333 West Washington Street, Syracuse NY 13221 -4873, and WHEREAS, it has been verified with the City Controller that funds for this purpose have been reserved and are available under the existing Capital Project 510, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Assistant Superintendent of the City of Ithaca DPW Water & Sewer Division be authorized to prepare a contract for professional services between O'Brien & Gere and the City of Ithaca in the amount not to exceed $500,000, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Mayor of the City of Ithaca be authorized to accept the proposal from O'Brien & Gere for Professional Engineering Services for Control Systems Integration for The City of Ithaca Municipal Water Supply and execute a contract for these professional services on behalf of the City of Ithaca upon completion of the City's prescribed contract review process. Page 12 City of Ithaca Water Supply Project Cash Flow Projection 12/20/2012 Sum $ 150,000 $ 3,500,000 $ 500,000 $ 750,000 $ 300,000 $ 325,000 S 200,000 250,000 i 600,000 4,000,000 15,000,000 225,000 450,000 3,050,000 29,300,000 - - - " -- '1V° > 204,315 $ 165,024 $ 248,846 $ 165,024 $ 206,935 4,0001000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 200,000 $ 204,315 $ 204,315 $ 3,069,96; Total Estimated Project Cost $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 36,369,969 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 200,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 300,000 $ 559,053 $ 2,030,817 $ 5,787,060 $ 5,825,157 $ 4,619,108 $ 2,354,315 $ 1,940,024 $ 2,823,846 $ 1,990,024 $ 2,431,935 $ 2,404,315 $ 2,404,315 $ 36,369,969 $ 36,369,969 CADOCUME °1 \kgehring \LOCALS -1 \Temp \XPgrpwise \Cash Flow projection quarterly-breakdown 12_20 12 O'Brien & Gere CITY OF ITHACA - Department of Public Works 1+tm9.2 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Phone: (607) 274 -6527 Fax: 274 -6587 Permit Application to Close Street or Use of Park Applications are to be submitted to the Superintendent of Public Works in order to obtain permission for closure of a street or use of a city park. Please allow two weeks to obtain approval. Certificate of Insurance naming the City of Ithaca as co- insured is to be attached to this application. Date of Event A 0 Zot'.? Time Event Starts Time Event Ends 3 Applicant's Name 6o C o4!y Today's Date Address `7 U Sg' 4&A4 /IYkwc -n, � Phone Number CC/ 7- s �!— ��z3 N Sponsoring Organization �©% bC TI�k"kvZ:�) Location of Event (Name of Park or Streets) 2>eL%A t � P'K TT 6 6 � o /P ° Purpose of Event: fe� 1 t J 71Z� C t�k �S S Cc j l-a-er-ot c-e— ff041 (MT Number of Participants 4�q&tv , (If more than 50, an Assembly Permit must be obtained.) Will amplified sound be required? Y /NO If yes oise Permit must be obtained.) Does your request include any special provisions? E NO (use of electric, traffic control, etc.) If yes, explain: (If barricades are required, please indicate where they should be placed.) 1,e 411i4ev -7G Other relevant information: Rived by: ❑ Approved ❑ Denied DDS Letter Sent to Appircant: cc: Mayor's Office Ithaca Police Department Ithaca Fire Department Streets and Facilities of Public Works Date: _-A ER 0 8 2013 Date: office of the Superintendent and Engineering Division Revised 3/09 Updated Press Release April 1, 2013 Who: 1 st ever United States Homeless Conference What: A conference of at least one representative from each of the 50 states. To discuss and find solutions to ending homelessness in America. Where: Dewitt Park, Ithaca NY 14850 When: Sunday, October 6, 2013 from 6:30am to 6:30pm. Opening Remarks: Ithaca, NY Mayor, the Honorable Svante Myrick is scheduled to open up the conference. Moderator of this special day in Ithaca New York is Ithaca's very own citizen Carl J. Humphrey. Carl is an accomplished author about the homeless in America. Special Music by: Albert Moses Gravy Train, a band of modern love pioneers looking to spread the good word in sound, made up of Ithaca College students and Alumni. Either all or part of this band will be in Ithaca that day. To get involved in this special day email Carl at cdarlhumphrey69@gmail.com and on facebook at www .facebook.com/ /carl.humphrey.965. RECEIVED Dept. of Public Works APR 0 9 2013 Office of the Superintendent and Engineering Division Updated Press Release April 1, 2013 Who: 1st ever United States Homeless Conference What: A conference of at least one representative from each of the 50 states. To discuss and find solutions to ending homelessness in America. Where: Dewitt Park, Ithaca NY When: Sunday, October 6, 2013 from 6:30am to 6:30pm. Opening Remarks: Ithaca, NY Mayor, the Honorable Svante Myrick is scheduled to open up the conference. Moderator of this special day in Ithaca New York is Ithaca's very own citizen Carl J. Humphrey. Carl is an accomplished author about the homeless in America. To get involved in this special day email Carl at cdarlhumphrey @hotmail.com and on facebook at www. facebook .com/ /carl.humphrey.965. r RECEIVED Dept. of Public Works APR 0 3 2013 Office of the Superintendent and Engineering Division my—M First Presbyterian Churc MAY`.. rFI 315 North Cayuga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 232 -113 — www.tirstpresithaca.org . office @firstpresitbaca.org 1 April 2013 fi�nn( i /► UITY OF ITHAOA" '1`0: Ithaca Department cat` @'trli$ic Works JoAnn Cornish. Director of Planning and Development Downtown Ithaca Alliance Svante L._ Myrick, Mayor Ithaca Festival J.R. Clairborne, Second Ward Joseph "Seph" Murtagh, Second Ward Daniel Kral]. Chair. Parks Commission First Presbyterian is proud to be a vital part of the Ithaca downtown community and is actively interested in preserving and enhancing its stature and presence in Ithaca. In particular, along with the long history of the church's ownership of DeWitt Park and the management of the park by the city, the imminent Commons project now provides an opportunity to reaffirm prior agreements dating back many years. As requested and on behalf of our Session (the elected congregational representative body), this letter is a continuing confirmation of the current standards and regulations vis a vis DeWitt Park and the 1942 DeWitt Park Usage Policy and City of Ithaca that states: "rhat the Board of Public Works' primary interest is to maintain DeWitt Park as a contemplative space In keeping wide its function as a Veteran's Memorial and a common space for several churebes That requests to use the park will be reviewed by the Superintendent or the Superintendent's designee on a case -by -case basis with the exception of requests Mat involve amplBred sound. including music, and/or the sale of prodncts..T That requests which involve amplifeed sound and/or sales of products will be denied by the Superintendent of Public Works or his designee. ^ As plans are being readied per the Commons project, we do recognize the need to perhaps move some activities to the park. However, we do see it appropriate and judicious to follow the above agreement as well as the 1856 document that clarifies use (such as care of trees and shrubbery and a fence surrounding the park, etc.), the city's responsibility /liability and our ownership of the park. As such, our position is that while we shall consider some flexibility in terms of the. Commons project, that there be no change nor establishment of precedent in these understandings, according to the above documents. We shall need to participate in any discussions of temporary use(s) during the construction that would deviate from the 1"2 policy :n order to guarantee and maintain this wonderful and historic park as a permanent space for its intended purpose. Cordially aqd ott be of the Session. r. ames R. every astor C: Clerk of Session RECEIVED Dept. of Public Works APR 0 32013 OMM1ee of the Superintendent one Brigineering Division Pagel of 3 Kathrin Gehring - Re: E Falls St failure -- 2m From: Svante Myrick To: Proulx, Chris; Date: 4/4/2013 7:24 AM Subject: Re: E Falls St failure -- 2 CC: Mohlenhoff, Deb; Logue, Tim; Gehring, Kathrin Hi Kathy, Can we add this item to an upcoming BPW agenda? Mr. Lambert, please direct your request in writing to Kathy Gehring at kgehring @cityofithaca.org. Svante Myrick Mayor, City of Ithaca 108 E. Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 607 - 274 -6501 >>>'T Allen Lambert" 04/03/13 11:54 PM >>> At 4/3/2013 12:59 PM, Chris Proulx wrote: Allen, As I have explained before, on- street parking regulations are the jurisdiction of the Board of Public Works, not Council, and not a staff /administrative decision. TAL: 1) you did mention that BPW must approve changes BUT... (a) that was first time such was mentioned to me. Since I assumed it was an admin matter I first talked to Mayor Cohen whose admin made the change; he said nothing about who was responsible (and did nothing). (b) I talked to Mayor Peterson who also said nothing about BPW. She turned it over to my Rh Ward rep at the time (no one explained to me why it went to elected official rather than admin) who also said nothing about BPW (and who did nothing). And it went to Logue, who said nothing to me about BPW but undertook a 'survey" (not unlike the current one) and who did not reply to my follow up inquiry about 'survey" and denial of change (which he did not attribute to BPW). (c) I talked briefly to Mayor Myrick who told me to write my rep (you), nothing said about BPW (d) you took It to Logue who did another 'survey" (without my input which I expressly requested and which I ha ve already analyzed). (e) And why was I not told to go to BPW to begin with? 2) Since Mayor is chief admin and elected reps (Council) are responsible for laws and policies, why do they not take responsibility? You can see my perplexity that some unelected, unaccountable board which has not communicated with me has the final say. 3) I find this form of govemance, quite objectionable. Why bother to elect reps? Does not CC set the policies for and define the role of BPW as well as hold it accountable? 4) Why is it so difficult to get a simple change that is rational, makes whole street consisten4 and recognizes that original problem for which this was a nominal solution has disappeared and therefore no longer requires the unique 'solution" which is so burdensome. (And which fact is implicitly recognized by City Traffic Judge who keeps dismissing tickets for me on the explanation I have given you folks:) Why is all that not sufficient for BPW? Why do 1 have to wend years and much effort and frustration returning situation to rational and nomnal? Mat kind ofgov't is so stupid and recalcitrant? (And we wonder why so many people do not like or trust govt.) file: //C:\Documents and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise \515D2ACOcoi... 4/15/2013 Page 2 of 3 5) When someone like me has this much trouble getting something taken care of, and even finding out the actual process to follow, imagine the difficulty for more ordinary citizens and rural residents 6) Why does no one, including traffic engineer, ever reply to my actual argument and evidence? 7) SO WHAT STEPS SHOULD I TAKE NOW TO GET THIS JOB DONE RIGHT -- TO MAKE SURE THAT BPW HAS GOOD INFO AND ANALYSIS, ETC? I don't want to show up to a BPW mtg only to And out that Logue has made some recommendation (based on who knows what new rationale) about which I am ignorant and do not have rebuttal at hand. How do I get my current statement to BPW? Who are they? How do I send them a copy of my communications and argument? It sounds to me that from your conversations, many residents agree with your desire to change the parking regulations. I suggest you and your neighbors communicate that to the BPW. Why did we not get told this to begin with? Why should we have to spend more of our time? The evidence ana logic and history are all there --the conclusion is so obvious that only a moron could miss it. Why can't they make a rational decision without our protest? Many (student renters) do not really care because they do not live on the street for long and do not have cars on the street. Other, more permanent, residents do not think, for the most part, that it is worth the trouble to write a letter to govt. When City Admin cannot even produce an official looking letter (letterhead, title, signature, etc) why should citizens trust them to pay attention to what we say? (Look how much trouble I have had and how mach energy l have devoted to it --without result:) You have the option of (1) responding to the letter, Respond to which letter? I have already responded to the one from Logue (I guess it is from him even tho' no identification of author and authority is made). (2) or if you prefer, writing your own letter and gathering signatures of your neighbors, or (3) speaking at the scheduled BPW meeting where this meeting will be addressed. I am sure Tim Logue will inform you and me of when that meeting date is scheduled. I don't want to wait until mtg, which would probably be too late. I want names and addresses so I can send my account to BPW now. In addition, a written statement is better in multiple ways --it can be longer, more detailed, provide time to ponder, etc While the BPW will seek input from staff, they are generally concerned with meeting the needs of residents. "Needs" as defined by whom and of which residents? How do they And out? Certainly not by the "survey" from admin staff.' Is not Congress supposed to be concerned about citizen needs? But what does their behavior demonstrate? Pardon my skepticism. I have had several experiences with County tax appeal board (and admin) which changes its criteria each time so they can ignore the compelling evidence and argument presented in rebuttal of their previous denial. We have several sections of City streets where parking regulations have been file://CADocuments and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\515D2ACOcoi... 4/15/2013 Page 3 of 3 changed (added or removed regs) in exactly this manner, including in Fall Creek on W. Falls and W. York. - Chris file://CADocuments and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\515D2ACOcoi... 4/15/2013 Pagel of 4 Kathrin Gehring - Re: E Falls St failure — 2 From: "T. Allen Lambert" or To: "Tim Logue" <timlo @cityofithaca.org >, "Kathrin Gehring" <kgehring @cityofithaca.org> Date: 4/15/2013 3:00 PM Subject: Re: E Falls St failure -- 2 CC: "Chris Proulx" <cproulx @cityofithaca.org >, "Svante Myrick" <MayorMyrick @cityofithaca.org> At 4/15/2013 01:23 PM, Tim Logue wrote: Hi Allen (and all), I went by the 200 block of East Falls Street and the southside of the street is signed No Parking M -F, 9am to 6pm. Though I didn't look, my parking rules map shows the 100 block is the same. Below, you are saying you are looking for the rules to be the same in the 100, 200 and 300 blocks of East Falls Street, but, I don't think that is what you are asking for because you also said it would be just odd /even with no daytime restrictions. I'm confused. Can you help clarify? Thanks, Tim TAL: Thanx for double - checking and seeking clarification. I just looked at 100 and 200 block of E Falls and you are right about south side signs saying "no parking 9 am - 6pm ". I do not remember such signs on the 300 block, or receiving tickets for such a violation, but my memory could have failed on that (chemotherapy accelerates memory loss over that of simply aging). The basic GOAL is to eliminate the relatively recent change on 300 block which requires changing sides during the middle of the day (I pm). It looks like I may have stated it partly wrong by confusing "same as before" with "consistency with the rest of Falls St. " I don't know when the 9 -6 rule for south side was implemented, but IF that is the long existing rule (existed, say, since the 1960s or 70s) of rest of E Falls then I would not argue against that being the status to which we should return. I can say that discussions with neighbors focused on removing all limits except odd/even during winter. No one proposed the southside 9 -6 rule, probably because no one knew of it (aside from me, only one other has lived here long enough to remember prior rule [and maybe I just do not remember that since I don't remember getting tickets). But I am certain that the main concern was the requirement to change sides in the middle of the day. Why the 9 -6 rule? If the intent is to lessen traffic congestion during peak hours, it is not very effective. Peak traffic seems to be 8 -9 am (before rule takes effect) and 4:30 -5: 30 pm. In principle I could see a reason for those times being regulated to one side, but in practice it seldom works because there are frequently cars on both sides during those hours (and I have never seen tickets given during peak times identified above; indeed, I will bet there is no parking person working after 4: 30pm) . Yes, it occasionally causes minor inconvenience, but not much. But, again, the main issue is the middle of the day move. If it simplifies your effort, I would say file://C: \Documents and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\516CI5174coi... 4/15/2013 Page 2 of 4 make 300 block consistent with the rest of the street. If it does not matter much, then just remove signs from 300 block, which would have effect of not regulating one side all day. Allen Lambert Tim Logue City Transportation Engineer Office of the City Engineer City of Ithaca 108 E. Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 274 -6535 timlo @cityofithaca.org >>> "T. Allen Lambert" 6:48 PM Monday, April 08, 2013 At 4/8/2013 04:48 PM, Tim Logue wrote: Hi Allen, Thank you for talking with your neighbors. This is what I had hoped you would do many years ago and I think it might have saved us all time and confusion. IAL: Yes, it would have. I wanted to so so, but you did not reply to my letter asking who had been contacted, etc., by your survey in 2006 No one told me to do my own petition until in this recent exchange with Proulx et al. And that is why I requested to participate in the design of the most recent survey. For clarity's sake and for the BPW, can you tell me what the previous parking rule was on that block ?. The records seem to indicate (and it's not all that clear) that the rules used to be odd/even on the north side of the 300 block of East Falls Street and the south side of the block was No Parking 9am to 6pm, Mon - Fri (with odd /even, too). Is this your understanding? TAL. Not what it was (there was no sign of daytime restriction and we never received a ticket during day on south side [our house] for 20 years). The previous rule for 300 block was the same as for the rest of Falls St and the City = during summer (April - Nov); during winter (Nov thru Mar) = odd /even, i.e., put car on side of road corresponding to address and date; no daytime restriction. Is this what your neighbors want also? I think it will be important to be clear with the BPW what you want. None of them was around during the last changes file://C:\Documents and Settings\kgehring\Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise \516C15F4coi... 4/15/2013 Page 3 of 4 (nor was I) and the record is unclear. TAL: The petition people signed says return to 'prior" status same as rest of Falls St. (make the whole street "consistent'). In discussions no one expressed interest in a daytime restriction. Had I thot there used to be a restriction I would have written it differently (omitted 'prior'). Now that you mention the above lack of clarity I can see why you wrote your survey the way you did. Had I been consulted we could have avoided confusion and done one that satisfied us both. (It would have taken two sides of page for explanation, etc) Thank you for reply and asking for clarification because none of us understood that you had the idea that there had been a previous daytime restriction. Sincerely, Tim Tim Logue City Transportation Engineer Office of the City Engineer City of Ithaca 108 E. Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 274 -6535 timlo @cityofithaca.org >>> "T. Allen Lambert" 4N 0 8:56 PM Sunday, April 07, 2013 >>> Ms. Gehring, This is my follow -up to Mayor's request (below). I request that this item be added to DPW agenda. Please let me know date and time for this matter to appear on agenda of DPW as well as the exact wording of the agenda item. (May I suggest some wording ?) And let me know whether we will be permitted to address BPW -- to summarize and to answer questions and to present the petition. I will be providing copy of petition and of history of situation and reasoning for change. I now have 20 signatures of residents and from all but two residences of the block -- ALL IN FAVOR of my petition (reproduced below). (I did not seek signature from 90 -year old frail man who never comes out of his house and who has not had a vehicle for years, nor from a house with a grad student we never see). file: //C: \Documents and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\516C15F4coi... 4/15/2013 Page 4 of 4 The petition reads as follows: "We, the undersigned residents of the 300 block of E. Falls St., in response to the (somewhat unclear) A¢A €AcesurveyA¢A €A ❑ of March 15 regarding the parking signage and rule requiring changing sides of the street at least twice a day (including at 9 am and 1 pm), request of the DPW that this current rule be rescinded and our parking be restored to what it was prior to this A¢ A€AcetemporaryA¢A €A❑ change and thereby to be consistent with the rest of Falls St. (and the City). Thank you. Allen Lambert At 4/4/2013 10:42 AM, T. Allen Lambert wrote: At 4/4/2013 07:24 AM, Svante Myrick wrote: Hi Kathy, Can we add this item to an upcoming BPW agenda? Mr. Lambert, please direct your request in writing to Kathy Gehring at kgehring @cityofithaca.org. Svante Myrick Mayor, City of Ithaca file://C: \Documents and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\516C15F4coi... 4/15/2013 M 300 block of E. Falls St. 15 April 2013 Dept of Public Works, City of Ithaca Dear members of DPW: We residents of the 300 block of E. Falls St' request2 that the current traffic signage and rule be eliminated. The current rule (which is unique in Ithaca) requires moving cars from one side of the street to the other at least twice a day, including at mid -day (1 pm). This is inconvenient and solves no problem. Inconvenience includes having to come home during the middle of the day and receiving occasional tickets for not doing so (for those who have to leave a car on the street). The rule was instituted relatively recently (history below) for a temporary problem which had already disappeared by the time this "solution" (rule) was implemented. Removing the current rule would leave two possibilities to implement: (a) having no daytime regulation (other than City -wide odd /even during winter months), or (b) having a rule which prohibits parking on one (south) side all day (9am to 6pm). The latter would make the 300 block consistent with the rest of Fall St. Our preference favors (a). But (b) would be acceptable because it would be less inconvenient than current. Our discussions centered on eliminating current rule rather than on alternatives. Several did express preference for (a) while no one expressed preference for (b), or even considered it much. However, that was my fault in wording of petition which treated "consistency with the rest of the street" as the same as no rule. However, I may have been mistaken about previous rule. There is a good argument for (b) in that the rest of Falls St. does currently have a restriction (no south side from 9 - 6). The arguments against it are (i) that I did not remember having such or receiving tickets for violating such on our block for 20 years, and (ii) does not really solve any existing problem in actual practice. History. During some Ithaca High School renovation in 1998 -99, part of IHS parking lot was blocked, so a few students parked on our block during the day from about January to April that year. One person who had a little beauty shop in the corner house complained that her customers had no place to park. The "solution" to her problem was the new signage and rule which was intended to discourage IHS students from parking on our block. However, the "solution" was both too late and would have been ineffective anyway (not hard for students to move cars across the street about 1 pm, and many left by then anyway [seniors done with classes by 1 pm]). I have approached previous mayors and my Council reps without getting help in addressing our current problem. Now we finally have it on your agenda for decision. Thank you for your careful consideration Allen Lampert for the neighborhood. ' The block consists of 16 bldgs, two of which are owner- occupied duplexes (one has only 1 occupant), two of which have been converted to multi -unit apts for grad students, and two homes also rented out to grad students, the rest are owner - occupied. Only two current resident families lived here in 1998 when issue began. 2 The "we" consists of 22 residents representing 14 bldgs who signed the petition. The 22 are unanimous about eliminating the current signage and rule. _.-----7 J COST IRANGE 24,000 99,0c, 44,000 58,000 14,000 mom: UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NEAR WOODCREST AVE rno.ECr: ear. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WATER AND SEWER DIVISION F, r 510 FIRST STREET 7 OF 1 ITHACA, NY 14850 —`W3 — =a.: — sazoEA 9.5 Green Garaoe Trash Facility Prouram Improvements — Resolution WHEREAS, the existing trash facility located at the Green Garage requires frequent costly repair and lacks secure locks, and WHEREAS, due to inadequate security a far greater number of people and businesses use the facility than pay for it, and WHEREAS, in order to provide the service and convenience of a centrally located disposal facility at a fair and equitable price, now be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works requests authorization of funds for purchase and installation of fencing, locks, compactor and trash bags for improving the functionality of the Green Garage trash facility, and be it further RESOLVED, The Board of Public Works authorizes the institution of a trash bag program for use at the Green Garage trash facility at a charge of $4.00 per 35 pound bag. Page 13 no 71 r, To: From: Date: Re: 1frM 9. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 OFFICE OF' THE CITY ENGINEER Telephone. 607/274 -6530 Fax: 607/274 -6587 Board of Public Works Tom West April 17, 2013 Commons Trash and Recycling — Costs and Alternatives I request that the Board of Public Works authorize the sale of trash bags for use in the City -owned trash facility located at the Green Garage. I also ask that the BPW request funding authorization to replace the existing trash compactor with a new trash compactor with electronic locks and security fencing with electronic locks. Our current trash facility and policy for serving the Commons business community is functionally and financially inadequate. We currently utilize a decades -old compactor which requires frequent costly repair and lacks secure locks. Because of the lax security we find that a far greater number of businesses use the facility than pay for it. The current trash facility is costing the City thousands of dollars per year in hauling and tipping fees. Following is a brief analysis of our trash and recyclable expenses as well as an analysis of several alternatives that would permit us to continue to provide a much - needed service. I have reviewed the bills for maintaining and emptying the compactors for 2012. The costs have been separated between recycling and trash. In 2012 we paid $27,750 for accepting 235 tons of trash. This included $17,600 in tipping fees, $8,300 for hauling, and $1,800 for maintenance. We also paid $6,900 for accepting 66 tons of recyclables. This included $4,000 for hauling and $2,900 for maintenance. Our total costs for 2012 were $34,650. We might anticipate receipt of approximately $22,000 from 6 customers who signed agreements and are still conducting business on the Commons. Unfortunately at least one of those businesses (Simeons) disputes its obligation to pay for the service while an unknown number of businesses or individuals feel comfortable using the facility without paying (reportedly: Cinemapolis, Casa Blanca, Funky Junk). I have evaluated four alternatives for avoiding these losses: • Close the facility and have businesses take care of their trash and recycling needs independently. • Install gates on the facility and station a monitor at specified times of day for access to the facility to paying customers. • Install gates on the facility and station a monitor at specified times of day for access to the facility to any customer who has purchased and is using a City sanctioned trash bag. • Purchase and install a new compactor with proximity card lock with access 24/7 to any customer who has and is using a City sanctioned trash bag. . Closing the facility Closing the facility would certainly eliminate the losses. Unfortunately, this would leave many businesses few good options for disposing of trash and recyclables. Undoubtedly some businesses would opt to place trash and recyclables outside of their businesses for weekly or bi- weekly collection. This solution will stress an already cramped Commons during reconstruction. It will also prove untenable for food service businesses that may resort to placing trash in alleys or public ways. Install gates and monitor The strategy here would be to have a City employee monitor open the gate to the facility between specified hours each day, seven days per week. The attendant would be responsible to identify if the user is a legitimate (paying) customer by checking identification. On the face of it this solution should serve to cull out non - paying depositors however, it would put a relatively vulnerable and low -paid employee in the position of barring non - paying users. In addition, it does not tie the cost of use to the amount of trash or recyclable deposited. Lastly, the facility would not be open during the hours when many businesses would prefer to dispose of trash _ say midnight to 2:OOam. Install gates and monitor for bagged trash This alternative would require that anyone wishing to deposit trash could do so by purchasing a trash bag from the City. The only thing the attendant would have to check is whether the user is depositing sanctioned trash bags. This ties the cost of disposal directly to the volume of trash being deposited; it also provides an easily identifiable validation that the trash fee has been paid. Users who object to using the proper trash bag can be recognized and reported to the attendant's supervisor or the police. This alternative still imposes limits on when trash can be deposited. This alternative also presents a cash flow problem in the event that users identify other alternatives for disposal and use of the facility compactors. In several scenarios the facility would fail to collect enough revenue if the use dropped by as little as ten percent. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a - :"ni nu l m rn l to workforce diversification." Install a new compactor and accept only bagged trash This alternative would include purchase and placement of a new, high capacity, sealed compactor with an electronic lock that requires an electronic key. Users would purchase the key for approximately $100 - $125 dollars per year. The key would unlock the compactor and record the user ID and time. The user could deposit bagged trash using bags purchased from the City. Although anyone could still use the recyclable compactor at least paying customers would be off - setting the cost of accepting recyclables. The facility could be open 24/7 to accommodate all users. Enforcement could be done scanning the contents of the compactor as they are dumped. In the event that unsanctioned bags are spotted the surveillance camera record and the key record could be reviewed to identify the offending user. First time offenders (or victims, in the event of a mis -used card) could be given leniency. Second time offenders could be fined and repeat offenders could simply have their cards turned off. Access to the recycling compactor could be limited to key card holders by installing gates with an electronic lock. Recommendation I recommend that we propose adoption of alternative 4.to the Board of Public Works. Project budget would include purchase and placement of a new compactor with electronic lock and key, purchase and installation of chain link gates with electronic lock, and purchase of trash bags. Project budget Compactor and installation: $35,743 Fence installation: $5,400 Trash Bags (500 cases) $21,675 Total Budget $62,818 The costs of purchase and installation could be charged against the Commons project, with assurance that revenues in excess of expenses would be credited to the Commons capital project. I recommend that a price of $4.00 per 35 pound bag would be sufficient to cover our expenses. This is consistent with the price charged to events organizers. "An E1231s1 Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." TRASH EXPENSES 2012 1 30 -Dec 6-Jan 7 3.56 267.00 160.00 430.56 2 6 -Jan 13 -Jan 7 3.38 253.50 160.00 416.88 3 13 -Jan 20 -Jan 7 3.51 263.25 160.00 426.76 4 20 -Jan 27 -Jan 7 3.85 288.75 160.00 452.60 31-Jan 150 150.00 5 27-Jan 3 -Feb 7 4.39 329.25 160.00 493.64 6 3 -Feb 10 -Feb 7 4.06 304.50 160.00 468.56 7 10 -Feb 17 -Feb 7 4.14 310.50 160.00 474.64 8 17 -Feb 24 -Feb 7 5.64 423.00 160.00 588.64 1 -Feb 150 150.00 9 24 -Feb 2 -Mar 7 4.69 351.75 160.00 1.10 517.54 10 2 -Mar 9 -Mar 7 4.45 333.75 160.00 1.10 499.30 11 9 -Mar 16 -Mar 7 4.16 312.00 160.00 1.10 477.26 12 16 -Mar 22 -Mar 7 4.48 336.00 160.00 1.10 501.58 13 22 -Mar 30 -Mar 7 4.11 308.25 160.00 1.10 473.46 31 -Mar 150.61 150.61 14 30 -Mar 6 -Apr 7 4.33 324.75 160.00 1.47 490.55 15 6 -Apr 13 -Apr 7 4.63 347.25 160.00 1.47 513.35 16 13 -Apr 20 -Apr 7 4.85 363.75 160.00 1.47 530.07 17 20 -Apr 27 -Apr 7 4.69 351.75 160.00 1.47 517.91 30 -Apr 150.82 150.82 18 27 -Apr 4 -May 7 4.61 345.75 160.00 1.47 511.83 19 4 -May 11 -May 7 4.6 345.00 160.00 1.47 511.07 20 11 -May 18 -May 7 5.39 404.25 160.00 1.47 571.11 21 18 -May 25 -May 7 5.22 391.50 160.00 1.47 558.19 31 -May 150.82 150.82 22 25 -May 1 -Jun 7 6.15 461.25 160.00 1.47 628.87 23 1 -Jun 8 -Jun 7 5.04 378.00 160.00 1.10 544.14 24 8-Jun 15 -Jun 7 5.22 391.50 160.00 1.10 557.82 25 15-Jun 22 -Jun 7 4.5 337.50 160.00 1.10 503.10 26 22 -Jun 29 -Jun 7 5.27 395.25 160.00 1.11 30 -Jun 150.61 150.61 27 29 -Jun 6 -Jul 7 5 375.00 160.00 540.00 28 6-Jul 13 -Jul 7 4.29 321.75 160.00 486.04 29 13 -Jul 20-Jul 7 4.46 334.50 160.00 498.96 30 20 -Jul 27-Jul 7 4.36 327.00 160.00 491.36 31 -Jul 150 150.00 31 27 -Jul 3 -Aug 7 5.3 397.50 160.00 562.80 32 3 -Aug 10 -Aug 7 5.25 393.75 160.00 559.00 33 10 -Aug 17 -Aug 7 5.45 408.75 160.00 574.20 34 17 -Aug 24-Aug 7 5 375.00 160.00 540.00 35 24-Aug 31 -Aug 7 4.46 334.50 160.00 498.96 31 -Aug 150 150.00 36 31 -Aug 7 -Sep 7 4.85 363.75 160.00 0.37 528.97 37 7-Sep 14 -Sep 7 4.27 320.25 160.00 0.37 484.89 38 14-Sep 21 -Sep 7 2.87 215.25 160.00 0.37 378.49 39 21-Sep 28 -Sep 7 4.77 357.75 160.00 0.37 522.89 30 -Sep 150.2 150.20 40 28 -Sep 5 -Oct 7 4.54 340.50 160.00 1.10 506.14 41 5-Oct 12 -Oct 7 3.16 237.00 160.00 1.10 401.26 42 12-Oct 19 -Oct 7 4.4 330.00 160.00 1.10 495.50 43 19 -Oct 26 -Oct 7 3.92 294.00 160.00 1.10 459.02 31 -Oct 150.61 150.61 44 26 -Oct 2 -Nov 7 4.92 369.00 160.00 1.10 535.02 45 2 -Nov 9 -Nov 7 4.62 346.50 160.00 1.10 512.22 46 9 -Nov 16 -Nov 7 4.76 357.00 160.00 1.10 522.86 47 16 -Nov 23 -Nov 7 4.41 330.75 160.00 1.10 496.26 48 23 -Nov 30 -Nov 7 3.79 284.25 160.00 1.10 449.14 30 -Nov 150.61 150.61 49 30 -Nov 7 -Dec 7 5.24 393.00 160.00 1.10 559.34 50 7 -Dec 14 -Dec 7 4.58 343.50 160.00 1.10 509.18 51 14 -Dec 21 -Dec 7 4.42 331.50 160.00 1.10 497.02 52 21 -Dec 28 -Dec 7 2.46 184.50 160.00 1.10 348.06 31 -Dec 150.61 150.61 DAYS TONS TIPPING HAULING FUEL USEAGE TOTAL 364 234.47 17585.25 8320 38.92 1804.89 27,749.06 RECYCLING EXPENSES 2012 DAYS TONS 378 66.31 HAULING DAYS MAINT TONS 1 19 -Dec 3 -Jan 15 2.29 2 3 -Jan 16 -Jan 13 1.99 3 16 -Jan 30 -Jan 14 2.52 31-Jan 238.74 4 30-Jan 6 -Feb 7 1.28 5 6 -Feb 13 -Feb 7 0.99 6 13 -Feb 27 -Feb 14 2.29 1 -Feb 238.74 7 27 -Feb 12 -Mar 14 2.55 8 12 -Mar 26 -Mar 14 2.46 31 -Mar 238.74 9 26 -Mar 9 -Apr 14 2.13 10 9 -Apr 23 -Apr 14 2.72 30 -Apr 238.74 11 23 -Apr 7 -May 14 2.37 12 7 -May 21 -May 14 2.68 13 21 -May 31 -May 10 1.95 31 -May 238.74 14 31 -May 4 -Jun 4 0.74 15 4 -Jun 18 -Jun 14 2.59 30 -Jun 238.74 16 18 -Jun 2-Jul 14 2.63 17 2 -Jul 16 -Jul 14 2.27 18 16 -Jul 30 -Jul 14 2.16 31 -Jul 238.74 19 30-Jul 13 -Aug 14 2.63 20 13 -Aug 27 -Aug 14 2.17 31 -Aug 238.74 21 27 -Aug 3 -Sep 7 2.17 22 3 -Sep 11 -Sep 8 1.11 23 11 -Sep 25 -Sep 14 2.10 30 -Sep 238.74 24 25 -Sep 10 -Oct 15 2.21 25 10 -Oct 22 -Oct 12 2.20 26 22 -Oct 29 -Oct 7 2.20 31 -Oct 238.74 27 29 -Oct 5 -Nov 7 1.88 28 5 -Nov 19 -Nov 14 2.70 30 -Nov 238.74 29 19 -Nov 3 -Dec 14 2.15 30 3 -Dec 17 -Dec 14 2.69 31 17 -Dec 31 -Dec 14 1.48 31 -Dec 238.74 DAYS TONS 378 66.31 HAULING FUEL MAINT 0.00 130.00 0.30 132.59 0.00 130.00 131.99 0.00 130.00 132.52 238.74 0.00 130.00 131.28 0.00 130.00 130.99 0.00 130.00 132.29 238.74 0.00 130.00 132.55 0.00 130.00 132.46 238.74 0.00 130.00 1.20 133.33 0.00 130.00 1.20 133.92 238.74 0.00 130.00 1.20 133.57 0.00 130.00 1.20 133.88 0.00 130.00 1.20 133.15 238.74 0.00 130.00 0.90 131.64 0.00 130.00 0.90 133.49 238.74 0.00 130.00 132.63 0.00 130.00 132.27 0.00 130.00 132.16 238.74 0.00 130.00 132.63 0.00 130.00 132.17 238.74 0.00 130.00 132.17 0.00 130.00 0.30 131.41 0.00 130.00 0.30 132.40 238.74 0.00 130.00 0.90 133.11 0.00 130.00 0.90 133.10 0.00 130.00 0.90 133.10 238.74 0.00 130.00 0.90 132.78 0.00 130.00 0.90 133.60 238.74 0.00 130.00 0.90 133.05 0.00 130.00 0.90 133.59 0.00 130.00 0.90 132.38 238.74 HAULING FUEL MAINT TOTAL 0.00 4030 15.9 2864.88 6,910.78 2 Ke wawa § EaF- § � mm o e CL§ 2 § x � ( LO Cli In CD CM 0) ea M cm 9 ( 6 2q§ f$ 2 Ke wawa § EaF- § � § � o e { §§ 2 § x § � ( � u LU co Ill g g \ m 9 ( 6 2q§ f$ �vm5 S a7§ 22 2 Ke wawa § EaF- F-� § §i2& § � §Ir� Rd \Lu { §§ 2 Ke 6§m� EaF- F-� § 0 ) §Ir� Rd \Lu { §§ u�gy « »e q § CD CD 2 t E 2 \ Ke k kk� ( z° ))$& § �J &/ ] 1�- w 0 0 � m 0 z « CO) # > g z w w � « w CL 2 S Item 1.0.1 CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER Telephone: 607/274 -6530 Pax: 607/274 -6587 April 2, 2013 TO: Tim Logue, City Transportation Engineer FROM: Kent Johnson, Junior Transportation Engineer RE: Update for BPW regarding the upcoming Safe Routes to School project and the related Bike Boulevard Plan advancement This memorandum is for the purpose of updating the Board of Public Works on the recently awarded Safe Routes to School (SRTS) project to be undertaken jointly by the City and the Ithaca City School District, and the related elements of this project that will be advancing aspects of the recently BPW- adopted Bike Boulevard Plan. Background In the summer of 2011, staff approached the BPW with the concept of Bike Boulevards to determine whether the BPW had interest in seeing the concept developed further. The BPW did show interest, and in late 2011 the BPW tasked staff with developing a Bike Boulevard Plan. Staff developed such a plan during the first half of 2012 and the BPW adopted the plan on September 24, 2012 (the plan can be viewed on the City's website under Departments /DPW /Engineering/Traffic and can be seen in the 9/24/12 BPW agenda packet - Item 8.2). In the summer of 2012, City staff and Ithaca City School District staff worked together to develop an application to submit seeking federal Safe Routes to School funding. In developing the SRTS application, it became apparent that the Bike Blvd. plan (still in development at the time) contained routes that made very good connections to Fall Creek E.S., BJM E.S., and Boynton M.S. The Bike Blvd. routes (renamed as "traffic calmed routes" for the purposes of the application) were revised slightly so that they corresponded logically to the schools being served (routes that did not directly relate to one of the schools were not included in the application). These "traffic calmed routes" along with school zone sign improvements and educational /encouragement activities compose the SRTS application. A copy of the SRTS application has been posted here: http:// bikeithaca .orglbpac /wp- contpt/uploads /2013 /02 /SRTS- Applicationx pdf and an FAQ sheet can be viewed under "Projects" on the City's website. In the fall of 2012, with the approval of Common Council, the SRTS application was submitted, and in January of 2013 we were notified that we were awarded our requested amount of $297,950 for the SRTS project. This federal funding (administered through NYSDOT) is 100% reimbursable and requires no local funding. Of this funding, approximately $184,000 will be devoted to designing/constructing the traffic calmed routes, which will then establish approximately 80% of the Bike Blvd. network proposed in the Bike Blvd. Plan. $50,000 of the funding will be available for the ICSD to use on educational/encouragement activities and approximately $64,000 will be available for improvements to the school zones. ICSD activities will be developed over the coming months and will likely include such items as: walk -to- school days and bike -to- school days, "walking school buses ", and integration of SRTS topics into the curriculum. School zone improvements will include updated signs, and installing real-time vehicle speed display signs at each school. Schedule The SRTS project is just beginning. Regarding the traffic calmed routes and school zone portions of the project, we will hire a consultant for engineering and design this summer and preliminary plans should be available by the end of 2013. Final plans and construction documents will be finished in 2014, with construction planned for summer 2015. Regarding the educational /encouragement activities portion of the project, ICSD will begin to work on activity development in the summer & fall of 2013. Activities are planned to begin in spring of 2014 and continue until spring of 2015. It is hoped that there will be enough interest among ICSD staff, students, and parents that some of the SRTS activities will continue beyond the grant reimbursement period. Public involvement During 2013, there will be multiple opportunities for public involvement. Both the City and the ICSD plan to host public meetings and plan to provide project information on our respective websites (we have established a site under "Projects" on our website that so far just has an FAQ sheet). BPW involvement Some aspects of the work will require BPW approval (such as the plan to lower the speed limit to 25 MPH along the routes) and for some aspects we may seek additional direction from the BPW (such as deciding locations for traffic calming), so the BPW will be hearing more about this project as work progresses. Common Council involvement Within the coming weeks, a resolution will be provided to CC to establish a Capital Project and funding in the first instance for this project. Project information If anyone has questions /comments about this project, or would like to learn about how to be involved in this project, they are encouraged to contact me (Kent Johnson) at kjohnson@cityofithaca.org or 274 -6528. For questions specifically about ICSD activities, contact Margaret Boice, Assistant Superintendent for Business Services, ICSD (274- 2121).