Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-14-10 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 Wednesday, July 14, 2010, at 4:45 p.m. in Common Council Chambers - Third Floor, City Hall, 106 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. "'please Note: This meeting will be followed by a Special Meeting at 700 p.m. to look at information on suicides related to bridges in the Ithaca community. Agenda 1. Additions or Deletions to Agenda 2. Mayor's Communications 3. Communications and Hearings from Persons before the Board 10 min. 4. Response to Public 5. Reports —15 min. Special Committees of the Board Council Liaison Board Liaisons Superintendent and Staff Other Department Heads 6. Approval of Minutes — 20 min. 6.1 April 7, 2010, Board of Public Works Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes — Resolution 6.2 April 21, 2010, Board of Public Works Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes — Resolution 6.3 June 9, 2010, Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes — Resolution 6.4 June 23, 2010, Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes — Resolution 7. VOTING ITEMS 7.1 Buildinas Properties. Refuse. and Transit— 10 min. 7.1A Award of Contract for Professional Services for Design of Solar Thermal Domestic Hot Water— Resolution 7.1B Authorization to Install Air Conditioning at Southside Community Center — Resolution 7.2 Highways. Streets, and Sidewalks — 5 min. 7.2A Award of Bid for a New Asphalt Hot Box/Recycler — Resolution 7.3 Parkina and Traffic 7.4 Creeks. Bridges, and Parks 8. 7.5 Water and Sewer— 15 min. 7.5A Protest of Sewer Repair Invoice for 214 Hudson Street — Resolution 7.6 Administration and Communications 8.1 Buildings, Properties, Refuse, and Transit -10 min. MA Request to Discontinue Use of City Property from Fall Creek Associates — Discussion 8.2 Highways, Streets. and Sidewalks 8.3 Parking and Traffic —10 min. 8.3A Reserved Parking for People with Disabilities on East Court Street and North Aurora Street— Discussion 8.4 Creeks, Bridges, and Parks —15 min. 8.4A Fall Creek Streambank Stabilization & Access Improvements Project — Discussion 8AB Wood Street Park: Skate Park Improvement Project— Update 8.5 Water and Sewer 8.6 Administration and Communications — 20 min. 8.6A BPW Review of Charter— Discussion 8.6B City Budget Guidelines 2011 9. New Business 10. Adioumment 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 274 -6570 at least 48 hours before the meeting. The Board of Public Works meets on the second, third and fourth Wednesdays of the month at 4:45 p.m. All meetings are voting meetings. which opens with a public comment period. Meeting agendas are mated from prior public input, Department operating and 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, July 14, 2010 8.1A Request to Discontinue Use of City Property from Fall Creek Associates — Discussion Please see information from the June 9, 2010 meeting agenda. 8.3A Reserved Parking for People with Disabilities on East Court Street and North Aurora Street— Discussion Please see information from the June 9, 2010 meeting agenda. 8.4A Fall Creek Streambank Stabilization & Access Improvements Project — Discussion Scott Doyle, Tompkins County Senior Planner, and Rick Manning, landscape architect, will present the project concept to the Board and provided the following description. See attached diagrams and photos: The Tompkins County Planning Department received DEC funding in 2007 to develop and implement Stream Buffer Protection and Management tools. These tools include model stream buffer easements, ordinances and planting plans for use in both urban and rural settings. As a part of this project, the County assessed a number of streamside properties across the many watersheds and municipalities of Tompkins County. After consulting with Andy Zepp of the Finger Lakes Land Trust, former City Forester Andy Hillman, as well as other City staff, the Fall Creek bank along the City -owned parcel adjacent to the High School (Tax Parcel a 2. -2 -7) was identified as one such high profile location that could be improved to help demonstrate aspects of a healthy stream buffer. It further appeared to be a positive way to improve pedestrian and fishing access within this important natural corridor as well as provide for service - learning opportunities for local students. The County's Flood Hazard Mitigation Program provided the seed money to frame the project by hiring landscape architect Rick Manning to develop a plan for the site. It is the project's intention to implement a cost - effective design that enhances the site through a partnership with the City of Ithaca, the Ithaca City School District, NYSEG, Tompkins County, as well as NYS DOT and DEC. 8.413 Wood Street Park: Skate Park Improvement Project— Update JoAnn Cornish has provided an update for the Board. 8.6A BPW Review of Charter— Discussion BPW members had requested 20 minutes at a series of meetings to discuss BPW Charter provisions during their June 9, 2010 meeting. Article V of the Charter is with the June 16, 2010 agenda. Attached here is Commissioner Brock's "History of the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works" dated July 2010, which gives an overview of how things started and then transformed to the current Charter provisions. 8.613 City Budget Guidelines 2011 Staff has started the 2011 Budget. Attached is a copy of the guidelines in the Mayor's memo dated June 4, 2010. If the 2010 budget were adjusted only for labor contracts and if the Page 3 following assumptions are used: labor is 60% of DPW budget, labor is 67% DPW contract and 33% Admin contract, and those contracts increase at 4% and 1 % respectively, the budget would grow by 60% (.67 (4 %) +.33 (1%)) = 1.81% with no other changes. In order to produce a 0% budget, we will have to cut more than 2% from the 2010 budget to make room for labor, fuel, utilities, and materials cost adjustments. A 2% budget cut taken from the other 40% of the budget is actually a 5% cut in those areas we control. We are lucky because we may actually be able to do that. If our budget was 80% labor, which is more typical city wide, you could not create a 2011 budget without considering staff reductions. This would not be sustainable with current workloads and current asset inventories (streets, buildings, parks, water system, wastewater system). W.J. Gray, P.E. Superintendent of Public Works July 9, 2010 For Your Information: 1. Special Meeting on Bridges —I have attached an article from the Cornell Chronicle that I believe represents their current thinking in an FAQ format. It is dated July 8, 2010. 1 have also attached a recent (2010) research article, received from Cornell, about a bridge in Toronto which was fitted with barriers and seems to have shifted suicides. This will probably be the basis for a system wide request for barriers. 2. Thank You to Water & Sewer — See the e-mail exchange with Howard Raskin. 3. City's Experiment with Artesian Wells — See the e-mail exchange with a recent City visitor who was worried about a water main leak. Page 4 7.1A Award of Contract for Professional Services for Design of Solar Thermal Domestic Hot Water WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca received a grant from New York State Energy Research and Development Agency (NYSERDA) stimulus funds for the design of solar thermal water heaters for three City buildings, and WHEREAS, proposals were received on June 7, 2010 for professional services for design of the solar thermal water heaters for the Department of Public Works Streets and Facilities Building, located at 245 Pier Road; Cass Park Main Building, located at 701 Taughannock Blvd; and Ithaca Youth Bureau Building, located at 1 James L. Gibbs Drive, and WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the two proposals received, and WHEREAS, staff recommends award of contract based upon experience and fee, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works hereby awards the contract for Professional Services for Design of Solar Thermal Domestic Hot Water Heaters to Taitem Engineering, PC, 110 South Albany Street, Ithaca, NY for the City's portion of the fee for services of $13,500.00, and be it further RESOLVED, That, upon finalization of the agreement between the City of Ithaca and NYSERDA, the contract for professional services shall be awarded to include completion of construction documents for a total fee not to exceed $20,120.00, with the funds derived from Capital Project 758 for Energy Reduction. Page 5 O�:�THACq CITY OF ITHACA 106 East Green SLreeL, Ithaca, New York 14650 -5690 OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER Telephone: 607 /274 -6530 Fax: 607/274 -6507 EoRacE9 To: Board of Public Works From: Chris Tllger Date: June 16, 2010 Re: Solar Thermal Domestic Hot Water Heaters -Award of Design Contract I recommend award of contract for Professional Services for design of solar thermal water heater projects, Capital Project 758, to Taitem Engineering of Ithaca, NY for a not-to-exceed fee of up to $13,500. The projects to be undertaken at the Youth Bureau, Cass Park and the Streets and Facilities buildings will provide solar heated water for domestic use. Funding for these projects comes from stimulus funds distributed through the New York State Energy Research and Development Agency ( NYSERDA). On June 7, 2010 the Office of City Engineer received proposals for professional services for the design of solar thermal water heaters. Three firms were invited, two firms replied. Following is a summary of the proposals: Finn Fee for Services Reimbursible Estimate Total Fee Taitem Engineering $19,868 $252 $20,120 IBC Engineering $35,900 $1,710 $37,610 Renovus Energy NA NA NA The project consists of three parts: The Streets& Facilities part requires a replacement electric hot water heater along with a new solar thermal system. The project scope includes souping, schematic design, preliminary design, construction documents and contract administration. The Ithaca Youth Bureau part requires installation of solar thermal domestic hot water system. The project scope also includes seeping, schematic design, preliminary design, construction documents and contract administration. The Cass Park main building part requires installation of a solar thermal domestic hot water system. The project scope also includes souping, schematic design, preliminary design, construction documents and contract administration. Upon execution of the agreement, a notice to proceed will be given for souping, schematic design and preliminary design development at a cost of up to $11,004. At this stage of project development NYSERDA will be able to finalize a contract with the City and the remainder of the design process will be completed and bid for construction. NYSERDAwill provide up to $115,812 for design and construction. The City's share of this project will be $13,500, Energy savings are estimated at approximately $2,500 per year. I recommend Taitem Engineering based upon experience in alternative energy design and fee. Page 6 7.1B Authorization to Install Air Conditioning at Southside Community Center - Resolution WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency has funded a proposal to install an air conditioning system at the Southside Community Center gym to allow a more comfortable atmosphere during summer months, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has funded up to $5,000 to fund an alternative for demand control ventilation strategy, an HVAC energy saving measure, and WHEREAS, the project has been developed in consultation with City Engineering, Department of Public Works, and Claudia Brenner, and WHEREAS, the project is ready for award and staff of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency is seeking approval for the installation of the air conditioning, which will become the property of the City of Ithaca, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works hereby authorizes the installation of an air conditioning system at the Southside Community Center in accordance with the construction drawings dated November 2, 2009. Page 7 7.2A Award of Bid for a New Asphalt Hot Box /Recvcler WHEREAS, bids were received on May 25, 2010 for one new Asphalt Hot Box/Recycler and WHEREAS, staff has visually inspected the two (2) lowest bid machines and WHEREAS, staff has determined that the lowest bid machine does not meet the written specifications and WHEREAS, staff recommends that the Board of Public Works award the bid to the second lowest bidder which meet all of the written specifications, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works awards the bid of the new Asphalt Hot Box / Recyclerto Pavement Technologies International Corp. of 1525 Western Avenue, Albany, NY 12203 for their total bid of $27,005.00 and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board authorizes the Acting Assistant Superintendent of Public Works, Streets & Facilities Division to enter into a contract with Pavement Technologies Intl. Corp. for the purchase of the Asphalt Hot Box. Page 8 Bid Fact Sheet for New Asphalt Hot Box /Recycler Viking Cives USA They are the lowest bidder; however, they do not meet our specifications as detailed below: 6.6 Our specifications called for the overall height of the hopper and trailer to be no more than 78" with the top doors closed. Their machine is 91 Y" high. 6.7 Our specifications called for the overall height with the top doors open to be no more than 90 ". Their machine is 108" high with the top doors open. (These two items are critical because we have to load the box from over the top.) 6.9 Our specifications called for the top doors to be shock assisted and use no more than 15 lbs. of pressure to operate. Their machine utilizes a handle that slides out from the top center of the doors and there is no shock assist. 11.1 Our specifications called for the machine to be delivered within 60 days of date the bid was awarded. They offered a 90 day delivery. Pavement Technologies Intl. Corp. They are the second lowest bidder and they meet all of our written specifications. Cvncon Equipment They are the highest bidder and they meet all of our written specifications. Page 9 �0 _ . - ®!�� � |i § | ©� ;§| | . � § ; ! §■ !� }/ | ■ ° ! §!E §§ | .. -7 / | \f M XM ! _ § \ WO 0 § ° § - § - � k § \ I I I I 1 19 1 1 1 1 W. - 222 § e§ | ,- • | �#2E \ §|E§ ;0 |& � o`. § | � 7.5A Protest of Sewer Repair Invoice for 214 Hudson Street —Resolution Submitted by Commissioner Tripp WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has heard the complaints of Mr. Perialas regarding the charge for the replacement of his sewer lateral at 214 Hudson Street, and WHEREAS, the matter has been reviewed by Erik Whitney, Assistant Superintendent of Public Works, who summarized his findings in a letter dated April 7, 2010, and WHEREAS, a meeting held with Dave Hunt, Working Supervisor on the project, Mr. Whitney, and Board of Public Works Commissioner Tripp has determined that there is sufficient cause to believe that the timing of the lateral failure at 215 Hudson Street was accelerated by improper compaction during a 1990 rebuild of Hudson Street, and WHEREAS, the failure of the lateral occurring during the winter season caused considerable additional labor to replace this admittedly elderly pipe, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby directs Mr. Perialas' bill to be reduced by 50% to $1,830.38 to reflect the Board's acceptance of Mr. Perialas' argument about the hastening of the work by improper compaction but also to reflect the value of the new lateral replacing a 100+ year lateral at 214 Hudson Street, Page 10 e T O1 -F- x Lw SL 4.., xo •� u' • �� Ny¢jN ^� GYUGA STREET E LL a �e .� wbNbBw3AV .� �•, 'hhJiH pa a- eiainozen y oa so c e n" ,, i, f bbN b3N�Os *'GybGN a 0 0 w � o 0 � s N U U b � Cd � .ry •~ V �v O �V Q� �o ri co^} -1 �Nq1 4Cp G 6 SAB Wood Street Park: Skate Park Improvement Project— Update— 5 min. Update - REDESIGN AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE ITHACA SKATE PARK July 9, 2010, by JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development, City of Ithaca The Ithaca Skate Park opened to the public in the summer of 1999 and serves a diverse population ranging from preschool to adult. The park is located within the Wood St Park located at the intersection of Elmira Road/NYS RT 13 and Wood St in the City of Ithaca, NY. The park is being replaced due to outdated design, large areas of standing water, restrictive lines limiting the number of active users, and kinks in the transition. Designs that relate the skate park to the larger community and promote interaction between skaters and others me especially valued. The redesign will include: • Foundation design for challenging soil conditions, high water table • Drainage system for 10 year stonn event • Capacity for 10 simultaneous users • Beginning, intermediate, and advanced skill level elements • Street and transition elements The original design of the park relied on a 1 % grade to drain water off the concrete plaza. With portions of the park sinking, this drainage plan no longer functions properly. The park was retrofitted with diagonal drains in 2009 by the Department of Public Works and funded through a $100,000.00 capital project. The new park addition will need to be built above current grade elevation based on the high ground water conditions of the area. City of Ithaca staff from the Engineering Department and the Planning Department has been working together with members of the skating community to write a Request for Proposals to hire a consultant that will work with the City on the redesign of the Skate Park. With the City's assistance the consultant will be expected to lead multiple public workshops to obtain comments, concerns, ideas and general feedback from the public regarding the skate park redesign. Based on the input from City staff and officials, existing background information, and input received during the public process, the consultant will be expected to finalize a conceptual design for approval, prepare a preliminary cost estimate, prepare construction drawings, specifications, and bid documents as well as provide construction management services. To date, the City has approved a $100,000.00 capital project, Benderson Development has donated $2,500.00 for bleachers, the skate park community has received a NYS EPA Parks Grant for $60,000.00, and there is a commitment from the skate park community to continue to raise money through donations, fund raisers, and grants until the project is completed. Staff is in the process of collecting comments and making revisions to the RFP and will be distributing the document to firms within the next few weeks. Copies of the RFP will be made available once the document has been finalized. Page 11 Item T" of the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works July 2010 To better understand the function of the Board of Public Works and its present position in the Charter and Code of the City of Ithaca, this paper provides a brief overview of the history of the BPW and Its structure. It is my belief that the BPW's practice and its chartered structure addresses the concerns raised regarding its role within Ithaca's government as to financial oversight, transparency, accountability and independence. History Looking hack through publications from the early 1900s, it is clear that Ithaca's first foray into the management of its public works stemmed from the need to manage the quality, supply and distribution of the community's water. Prior to the infamous typhoid epidemic of 1903, and even prior to the City's incorporation in 1888, the Village and later the City of Ithaca attempted many times to establish and fund a municipal water supply system, but such initiatives in 1870, 1900 and 1902 were all defeated by popular vote. It was the commencement of the building of the 30 -foot dam for the Ithaca Light and Water Company in 1902 and the subsequent typhoid epidemic of 1903 which led to the successful vote for the City to acquire its own water supply in 1903 and thus the Ithaca Water Board was chartered. There was a tremendous amount of public debate regarding back room negotiations for the acquisition of the Six -Mile Creek dam and filtration plant from the Ithaca Light and Water Company rather than expanding the use of the City's existing springs. However, extensive flooding throughout the northeast in 1906 and a severe drought in 1908 successfully compelled public opinion to support the City's expensive takeover (approximately $16.5 million in today's dollars ($658,000 in 1905)) ofILW's water filtration and distribution systems. By 1908 the City built its sewer systems which expanded its total water expenditures to $931,0001 Prior to 1903 various small providers throughout the City supplied water to the community and charged their own rates to homeowners for water and fire hydrant service. At this time, many cities of similar size, such as Gloversville, Middletown and Rome, had already acquired and managed their own water systems. A study taken in 1901 showed that Ithaca residents were paying 50% -100% more for privately provided water than similar communities paid for municipal water? I'Value of Ithaca Water Works System Placed at $658,000 by the Appraisers" Ithaca Daily /ournal, Evening Edition, December 28, 1906. See Scrapbook Public Works 1930s. held at the City of Ithaca Water and Sewer Department. r "Rates Charged for Water in Various Places Mentioned: Statistics for 1901 -Table 1 ", Unknown Newspaper (presumably the Ithaca Daily journal), Unknown Date. See SRaobook. Page 1 History of the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works July 2010 The creation of the Ithaca Water Board /Board of Public Works The Ithaca Water Board was appointed by Mayor George W. Miller on April 27, 1904 as directed by the NY State Legislature, and by December 9, 1908, after the creation of the City's sewer system, the City's Board of Public Works had replaced the Ithaca Water Board.3 The Ithaca Water Board was chartered pursuant to Section 1 Chapter 181 of the laws of 1903, "An act to establish and maintain a water department in and for the City of Ithaca': Within ten days after th is act shall become a law, the mayor of the city of Ithaca shall appoint, subject to confirmation by th e common council of said city, a board of water commissioners to be known as the Ithaca water board, which, exclusive of the mayor, shall at all times consist of six members, residents and taxpayers of the said city, and no more than three persons belonging to the same political party, exclusive of the mayor, shall at any one time be members of said water board. Two of the first commissioners appointed shall hold office until January first, nineteen hundred and four, two of them until January first, nineteen hundred and six, and two of them until January first, nineteen hundred and eight; and when appointed their respective terms of office shall be designated by the mayor. All other water commissioners shall be appointed by the mayor, subject to confirmation by the common council, and their terms of office, except when appointed to fill vacancies, shall be for six years. The mayor of said city shall, ex officio, be a member, and the president, of said water board, but shall have no vote therein upon any question of appointment, employment or removal of any appointee or employee of said water board. In case of a vacancy from any cause the mayor shall appoint a commissioner for the unexpired term. Each commissioner shall hold office until the appointment and qualification of his successor.. 4 It does not take more than a quick review of this legislation to observe how closely it correlates with the current BPW structure within the City Charter. That the BPW has continued to exist and function under the same basic structural format for the last 107 years is notable. The most significant difference in the current charter of the BPW and the original Water Board is primarily related to funding. Currently, all funding for the Department of Public Works must be requested by the BPW to Common Council for approval whereas in 1903 the Ithaca Water Board held direct power to bond its projects independent of Council oversight. Historical Precedent The US economic and political environment of the late 19th and early 20th century was one in which private industry held significant power. Corporations were chartered by the state and given broad authority with which to conduct their business. As was custom at the time, the Ithaca Light and "Must the City Ultimately go to Cayuga Lake for an Unfailing Supply of Water?' The Ithaca Daily/ournal, December 9,1908. See Scrapbook Laws of the State of New York P d at th One Hundred and T y-Sixth SeSS an ofthe Legislature (Albany: I.B. Lyon Company, 1903),l: 427. Page 2 History of the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works July 2010 Water Company had the perpetual, unlimited and exclusive power of eminent domain and could fake, hold or purchase any land, water or road it deemed necessary for the purpose of supplying water to its customers' This environment caused tremendous stresses in communities -- government and community leaders understood the limitations of free - market -led development in meeting the needs of the people, but were hesitant to institute more direct government involvement in business. By leaving infrastructural development solely in the hands of businesses, leaders understood that services would not reach areas of the community which would not provide adequate economic return; that prices would be established by the corporation; that institutional monopolies were unaccountable to the needs and demands of the community. On the other hand, the business community did not want to see a system in which publicly owned enterprises would be managed and controlled by public policies established by a communit/' s political leaders- in other word s, the mixing of business management and politics. In light of this economic and political environment, the structure created by the Water Board /BPW was an effort to find a middle ground between the competing perspectives of business and politics. This progressive, almost revolutionary, thinking for the time took utilities out of the hands of monopolistic private interests without ceding it entirely to politicians dependent upon popular vote. Board of Public Works as public authority While I have been unable to determine the origin of the design of Ithaca's BPW -the NY State legislature or Ithaca's community leaders - it is significant to me to observe that the structure of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, created in 1921, is nearly identical to the structure of the BPW, both as initially created in 1903 and in its current form. The establishment of the Port Authority of NY and N( was the hallmark fora new form of government - the public authority - and has been replicated throughout the United States. The New York State Citizens Budget Commission has outlined the importance and benefits of such a structure: Public authorities play a major role in delivering public services. They supplement direct government agencies in three ways: Provide a business -like organizational structure for public services that are financed primarily by user fees and whose capital investments are self - financed through bonds supported by user fees. Provide a stewardship for major capital assets and make long -run investment decisions with some isolation from the electoral cycle. Provide a mechanism for taking advantage of federal tax benefits for economic development and other purposes that otherwise would be treated as private activities. s This according to Laws of the State of New York. 1853, Chapter 465, as cited in State of New York Supreme for the defendants. (Boston: Geo. H. Ellis Co., 1906), 14. Page 3 History of the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works July 2010 Authorities are intended to strike a balance between political accountability and political independence. Unlike heads of direct government agencies, governing board of authorities are expected to be more independent of those who appoint th em, to make difficult and unpopular decisions outside th e arena of elected politics, and to be accountable to the public indirectly through reporting transparency in decision - making and long -run perlormance.b Not surprisingly, given such benefits, one can find over 6,000 local and regional authorities and over 1,000 state and interstate authorities in operation throughout the United Statm7 More than 640 public authorities have been created in New York State alone .8 This is not to say that public authority structures are Flawless. Critics ofpublic authority systems are concerned with possible misuse of power to incur debt, insufficient oversight of revenue backed by borrowing insufficient reporting to support accountability, and insufficient independence in governance. In the case of Ithaca, at least, such concerns are unwarranted. I would argue quite strongly based upon the evidence provided below that the present structure of Ithaa's Board of Public Works, as defined by its charter and evidenced in its practices, addresses such concerns. Power to incur debt, and oversight of revenue backed by borrowing While the Ithaca Water Board /Board of Public Works had originally been granted the power to issue bonds by the State Legislature, the current Ithaca City Charter firmly plants the power of the purse with Common Council. By Charter, the BPW must present its annual budget and statements of receipts and disbursements to Common Council for approval, funding and oversight. The power to issue bonds is held solely by Common Council. While proceeds derived from the City's utilities (water, sewer, etc.) are held separate from the general fund for the purpose of financing maintenance and upkeep of City utilities, Common Council has the power to apply any DPW surpluses to other debt held by the City.' Reporting to support accountability Accepted best practices for public authorities suggest the regular sharing of information with the public in a manner that is timely, accessible and subject to audit and review. In practice and as stipulated by the Charter, all meetings of the BPW are open to the public, allow public comment, and its meeting agendas, supporting documentation and minutes are publially available on the City's website. The Superintendent of the Department of Public Works, Assistant Superintendents of the Department of Water and Sewer and the Department of Streets and Facilities, and less frequently the departments and commissions which serve and advise the BPW, s Public Authorities in New York State Citizens Budget Commission. April 2006. 7 Walsh, Annmarie Hauck. The Public's 6 1 • The Politics d Practices f G tC porations. MIT Press, Cambridge. 1978 -Public Authority Governanre in New York State. Hevesi, Alan. New York State Office of the State Comptroller. August 2004, 3. 9 Ithaca City Charter. Section C -66. see also Ithaca City Code. Chapter 4, Article Ill. Page 4 History of the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works July 2010 regularly provide reports on day -to -day activities, conditions of capital assets, efforts and accomplishments, annual and long term plans and projects, and annual reports at the meetings of the Board of Public Works. As all meetings of the BPW involve the Mayor, liaisons to Common Council and the Disability Advisory Council, are open to the public and media, and as the budget of the BPW must be approved and adopted by Common Council, the actions ofthe BPW are implemented with the input, involvement and oversight of the public. Sufficient independence in governance In order to ensure that the public authority manages the utility apart from the pressures of politics, independence from political leaders - structurally and financially - is of foremost Importance. As advised by the NY State Citizens Budget Commission: The structure of authorities is designed to strike a balance between political accountability and independence. When the mix of accountability and independence becomes unbalanced, the potential benefits ofan authority structure are eroded. Accountability can be diminished if sufficient information is not made available to the public. An equally important risk in the authority structure is that the board does not function with sufficient independence. Insufficient independence can lead to three types of deficiencies in authority performance - patronage -like decisions, erosion of professionalism among senior staff, and inappropriate time frames for strategic decisions.i^ Currently, the greatest threat to the desired governance arrangements for authorities is that many elected officials and their appointees to authority boards share an expectation that the appointees will defer to the judgment of the person who appointed them on important board decisions including staff hiring. This culture should be changed to one in which board members consult the officials who appointed them and other elected leaders, but their final decisions should be based on their own judgments about how to best promote the agency's mission. While appropriate deference might be given to the views of the elected officials, the final judgment should be that of the board member and not of the appointing official." It is my view that the Ithaca Board of Public Works functions, and should continue to function, in an environment of sufficient independence from elected officials, and that this is in the public interest 1 do believe a higher level of professionalism between Commissioners and staff would be obtained through frequent opportunities for training or briefing of Commissioners as called for in the City Charter.ir The creation and expansion of BPW training programs will allow Commissioners to be better informed and educated on issues pertaining to the management of the DPW. i0 Public Authorities In New York State. Pg. viii. 1i Ibid. pg. x 13 Ithaca City Charter. Section C -S Page 5 of the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works July 2010 To further reinforce Commissioner's decision making independence the NY State Citizens Budget Commission advises: A final point should be made about compensation for authority board members.... (A public authority's) board members should serve voluntarily out of commitment to an organization's mission, and compensation should notbe created in part to avoid the temptation to convert these positions to a form of patronage by the appointing officials.13 As prescribed by bestpractices for public authorities, Ithacas BPW Commissioners do not receive any compensation for their work, and are prohibited from being an employee of the City. Conclusion While it was not my goal to compare the structure of the BPW to the management processes used by other municipalities, my research into the history and structure of the BPW has left me feeling confident in the foresight of our City's historic leaders. That the structure established for the BPW in 1963 has not only continued to this day, but has also been replicated and vetted throughout the US speaks to the validity and durability of its design. Recently New York State has been working to improve the oversight, accountability and independence of our state's public authorities by implementing the very same structures which already exist in the Ithaca City Charter. The City Charter very deftly created a business -like management structure for its public services, able to make longterm decisions independent from electoral politics, while also allowing for financial oversight, public input and transparency. Tensions between the BPW, CC and the Mayor are factored into the design of the structu re of City management, and indeed it is that tension which allows the various parties to fulfill their individual, primary, and sometimes disparate purposes. Cynthia Brock Commissioner, Ithaca Board of Public Works Submitted for consideration by the BPW on 14 July 2010 B Public Authorities in New York State. pg.48. Page 6 CITY OF ITHACA 108 Fast Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 (WIT P. 01''1'HEAIAI'Olt • CAROLIN K. PIi I'EIlSON 'rclrphune GII' 2 -i Gill l P°a: fill- 2 -1 -6926 MEMORANDUM TO: Department Heads FROM: Carolyn Peterson, Mayor A*-I RE: 2011 Department Budget Requests DATE: June 4, 2010 The process of preparing the FY 2011 City Budget is underway. Asa first step, please submit a preliminary budget request to the City Controller by August 1, 2010, as prescribed by the City Charter. After you submit your preliminary request, the Controller and I will schedule a meeting with you. I hope to start these meetings in mid - August. Throughout this year, we have all heard the controller's reports on the state of the national, state, and local economy. The reports are cautionary and of deep concern. In fact, the hiring and purchasing freeze that was implemented throughout 2010 continues. Budgeting for 2011 will still be difficult. As in previous years, your budget templates will be available to you on Munis. All budgets are to be submitted using this software. The Director of Information Technology will provide tech support to you as needed. The Controller's Office can also assist with the Munis budget implementation process. While both the national and local economy are showing some signs of improvement the state economy is still uncertain. As a result, the state has not adopted their 2010 -2011 budget. Due to the state budget delay, City State Aid forecasting for the future becomes more difficult. In addition, increasing costs for state pensions and health insurance and lower building permit revenue will continue to make the 2011 budget another difficult one. We are hoping the worst of the economic recession is over, but we are expecting the recovery process to take at least two years. As long as the unemployment rate at both the national and state level remain high, the recovery will occur slowly. We need to control costs and increase revenue sources wherever possible. Additionally, the property tax increase has to be kept at a minimum. The property tax levy goal should be no greater than last year's 2010 levy increase of 4.25 %, and, in fact, is desired to be even lower. -An Equal Oppormnin. Emploccr o ith a commitment to smrkforee diversification.' _ �� A. Present a budget, which would represent a 0% increase in overall spending from your 2010 budget, and would incorporate 2011 wage increases. This submission gives the city a measure against which to compare scenario B. I know this is a difficult scenario and may include staffing reductions. A realistic approach, however, is needed so that policy makers and the community can clearly see what the options are. Cutting utilities in half, for example, may balance a budget but would not be a true possibility. B. Present a budget, which would represent a 2.0% increase in overall spending from your 2010 total budget including 2011 wage increases. We will be providing an extra budget template for you to submit this budget request. Please note that the intention here is to create a budget with very little change from 2010. This limited increase will be difficult and may necessitate staff reductions to meet this goal. In addition, if you have further increases or budget changes beyond the two guidelines above, you may list these separately in your 2011 budget submission as an optional budget. Be sure to provide necessary detail for these items, including associated costs. Please keep the optional budget a realistic request, as it will be considered carefully among all proposals. All collective bargaining agreements are not in place for FY 2011, so please check the contracts that impact your department. Please also include a 2% increase for management salaries not covered by contracts. The salary increases for contracts in place are as follows: CSEA DPW -4% PBA 4% Exec. -4% The following units do not have bargaining agreements in place. Use the following estimated salary increases for 2011: CSEA Admin -1% Fir"% Funded vacant positions may still be carried forward, but the filling of any such positions is subject to approval. 2011 Budget Submissions, at a minimum, need to include: 1. Brief description of the services your department provides to the city; 2. Budget introduction which summarizes your budget and highlights any major changes to budget; include any possible retirements or changes in staff; 3. Detail of personnel, include listing by name, title, hire date, 2010 salary, 2011 projected salary, accounts to be charged for each staff member; 4. Summary listing of all department accounts: 2009 expended, 2010 budget, 2011 proposed budget; 5. Detail listing of accounts and what is included in each (i.e.: account 5405 Telephone — includes all telephone charges needed for current staff levels, include cell phones). Please be sure each budget scenario has the above detail included For departments that include program budgets — YB, GIAC, Fire, and Police — have summary total for each account and include detail for each program number. If applicable, please include any possible 2011 revenue adjustments for your department. Include possible revenue projections for 2011 and a schedule on when the revenue increase could be implemented. Consider the market value of the item and its relevance to city programs. If applicable, departments requesting staff increases please include any possible cost reductions associated with the staffing increase (i.e.: two additional staff would decrease overtime by $20,000). NOTE: as of this writing, due to the budget pressures I feel it fair to say that new positions may be very unlikely. Each line of your program budget has a text section available. The following lines will need documentation: 1. Any 200 line equipment purchases that cost $500 or more; 2. Line 430, Fees for Professional Services — indicate what type of professional services are to be performed and cost for each; 3. Line 435, Contractual Services — indicate nature of contracts and cost for each; 4. Line 440, Staff Development — indicate nature and cost; 5. Line 476, Equipment Maintenance — indicate all maintenance contracts /agreements. If you have any questions about your department's budget before or after you submit it, please consult with me and/or the City Controller. Comell Chronicle: FAQ on temporary bridge barriers x❑ C «nail Univetshy Search Cornell CHRONICLE ALINF July B, 2010 CU addresses questions about temporary bridge barriers This FAQ Is a follow -up to the June 17 Cornell Chronicle slay on a consultants' report with recommordafiuns an suicide prevendan and bridge safety. The experts were engaged by the university in the wake of several student suicides in the past yoar. What were the expert consultants asked to do, and what did their report say? The university asked three Aw.i leaders in the field of suicide Rohm Berke Nn arsity Phdograph prevention to visit Ithaca. A teat example of a visually Improved temporary banner has been Installed an the Thurston Avenue Bridge neat to the currant chain -link fencing.A consult with campus and City ofahac>Comell Bridge Safety Committee has been discussing community members, provide options for upgraded temporary barriers for consideration by the III education about current Common Council. research and best prectices, assess the challenges we face, and provide recommeMations on how the university and the city should proceed to address these challenges. They recommended using a multifaceted approach to suicide prevention and noted that Commit has been using such an approach. However, the consultants observed that In hindsight, one 'hole" In the approach was not having means restrictions on the bridges. A growing body of research demonstrates that restricting access to well - recognized, accessible jumping sites has a substantial probability of reducing deaths by this means, and perhaps suicide miss overall. The consultants recommended maintaining adequate temporary barriers until permanent means restriction could be planned and Installed on or under bridges, While the consultants did not recommend any padicolar permanent solutions for the bridges, the temporary barriers will give sufficient time for further community input and for designers to study and design possible alternatives that would provide effective no restriction "In a fashion that is respectful of the glorious beauty of the settings' The consultants' report is available at bttpalcanngcommunity.comell.eou Why were bridge barriers put up in March, and why werenY other means restrictions considered at the time? The university's first responsibility in March was to stop what was and is still feared to be an ongoing suicide contagion. The chain41nk fences that am on the brogan now were the most egeclNe method of means mortician that could be put up quickly — in a matter of days. These fences, while necessary in the immediate wake of the deaths last winter, are aesthetically http: //w .nms.wmell.edu/stories/Julyl 0 /BridgeFAQ.html Page l of 3 Search Chronicle Online Media Contact: Simeon Moss (607) 255 -2261 sfm4 @comell.edu Comall Chronicle: Anna Ju (607) 2559]35 aml9 @comull.edu Related Information: Expads advise CU le amtaintemporery Fridge tamers Consultants' report Caring Community Share: �Twitler 3Dgg ZO Recoil fdel.ici.ous ©Google 1>Z Yahoot MyWeb Facebook 4 Myspace 7/9/2010 Cornell Chronicle: FAQ on temporary bridge barriers unacceptable to the Comell and Ithaca communities, as well as the Comell administration, The university has identified less intrusive temporary fencing that could provide effective means restriction while options for permanent means restriction methods that are appropnate to each bridge am explored and designed. There are many posslblitles for effective means restriction on bridges, such as substructures and nets, modlfimtions to remove climbing footholds from railings, changing and raising miling profiles and lop treatment, landscaping, lighting arm using see-through materials. Designers will have free rein to be aealive and innovative. In addlllon, a committee is being formed to explore options for installing emergency telephones rear bridges as supplement to means restriction. Comell also has stepped up its already conceded outreach to vulnerable members of its community and expanded other misted programming addressing student mental health and safety. Have bridge barriers been recommended in the past in Ithaca? Yes, bridge barriers, among other kinds of means restriction, have been recommended by some members of the Ithaca and Comell communtes a number of times in the past. However, a substantial body of research establishing the effectiveness of means restriction to prevent suicide at jumping locations has become available only in recent years. Are the recant incidences of suicides from bridges different from past Incidences, when barriers were not recommended? Two things are different at this time. The first is that we experienced a number of suicides within a shod spare of lime, creating what researchers call a'cuidde cluster; whereby the notoriety of Incidences results in an imitative or contagion effect, Increasing the risk of further suicides. This effect is particularly noted among suicides of young people. The second difference compounds the gnat: the rise of the Internet and other social media means that news Is spread quickly and can be accessed arm replayed many times over. Local, national and International medla attention was Intensely focused on the recent bridge suidtles, dramatically enhancing the iconic nature of there's multiple jumping sites. Vulnerable individuals. especially young people, may W particularly drawn to public places that have become known as suicide sites. The rise or persistence of a place as an iconic suicitle magnet and the phenomenon of suicide contagion bath seem to be enhanced by the degree and length of the media attention one or more suicides receives. How many suicides have occurred from the bridges in question? Since 1990, there have been 27 known and probable suicidal jumps (rem city -owned and Comell -owned bridges and their adjacent gorge edges on Ead Hill in Itham- Of the 27 suicidal jumps, three were nonfatal but nonetheless mused very serious Injuries. Why am we hearing so much now about means mstricgons on bridges? In recent years, a number of scientific Investigations and studies on suicide prevenWn, means regiction to prevent suicide by jumping, and the efficacy of means restriction have confirmed the conclusions of a small number of earlier doilies, slowing that means restriction can be effective. Suicide by jumping is often an impulsive ad with a short (or no) planning period. The Imposition of an obstacle often Interrupts or slows the amen long enough for the Impulse to pass. People who am thwarted from jumping usually do not substitute another means of suicitle. A long-term follow -up study of people who had been lhwaded From committing suicide by jumping from Ban Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge found that mom than 90 percent did not later the by suicide. This 90 percent were dill alive or had died from natural muses. Why am the city and Goodell focusing on tempomry barriers rather than permanent solutions? Several suicides clustered! in a dose proximity of time and location, such as what Connell experienced in late winter, am known to cause an "imitation' effect on vulnerable members of the community, elevating their risk of suicide. No one knows for sum how long the elevated risk can lad, but the mental health Page 2 of 3 http: / /cacao. news. Comell. edu /stone julylO/BridgeFAQ.html 7/9/2010 Cornell Chronicle: FAQ on temporary bridge barriers professionals Gomel] consulted said that it is very likely to continue for the foreseeable future and strongly recommended that temporary barriers remain in place while permanent means restriction measures am expbretl and designed. A City of Ithaca -Comell Enron Safety Committee has been discussing keeping up temporary barriers with an aeemative (and improved) appearance for consideration by the Ithaca Common Council. Nev. an Architect Selection Committee, with representation from Cornell and the city of Ithaca, is conducting a search for amhilectumgengineering designers who can help develop innovative, effective and environmentally sensitive design options for long-term means restrictions on or under the bridges. Has there been a consideration of installing emergency phones on or near the bridges, and is that a sufficient alternative solution? The university Is examining the installation of emergency phones as a supplement to means restriction on bridges. In this we am guided by the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, the leading national network of crisis and suicide prevention hollines. The Lifeline Steering Committee's position is that the use of means restriction is the most effective way of preventing bridge suicdes and that emergency phones or signs promoting awareness of suicide prevention holllnes or services should be only a supplement to means restriction on bridges. Why is the Issue of suicide prevention and means restriction on bridges on or near the Comell campus a community issue? Cornell and Ithaca am united in our desire to prevent suicide. Of the 27 suicidal jumps from bridges and adjacent gorge edges on East HIII In the last 20 years, 12 were by Correll students, 11 were by other members of tine Ithaca community and four were by people from out of the area. Several of the bodges of concern am owned by the city of Ithaca, and all the bridges am accessible to the general public. Will the city or taxpayers have to pay anything for the construction or removal of the current or new temporary barters? The cument barriers — bath (heir construction and future removal — will be pald for entirety by Comell. Comell is pmposing to replace them at its awn expense with tempo ary barters that will be better looking and less intrusive than the current chain -link fencing, while options for permanent means restriction can be discussed and designed. What speck studies confirm the efficacy of bridge barriers and other means restrictions on Midges to prevent suicides? A list of scientific studies is Included on the university's Caring Community wabsite (htp 11caringcommunity.comell.soul). The list is pad of the consultants extended moon. Is them potentially a greater risk of suicides occurring from one of the bridges after the barriers have come down? Yes, there are studies of situations in which the overall rate of suicides In a given area decreasetl over a sustained period of time when means restrictions on a known suicide jumping site were in effect, only to have the rate rise again once the means restrictions were abandoned, and decrease again when means restriction was reinstituted, Is the fencing an example of the university restricting access on campus W natural areas and view sheds by tae community? No. The university allows and promotes community access to most normal areas on campus, many of which have beautiful view sheds. W I July story index I Cornell Chmnide Onion Home Page I Page 3 of 3 http:// www.news.wmell.edu/stories/julyl OBridgeFAQ.html 7/9/2010 BMJ 'Oepanneaa of PvOaay. Orts9ty of Tanana ON. rwa u a0eparonent W ps".". Sun,M Nealm Sciences Ca Re and Women i Cane tvapmL 2075 8asvlew Aveme. T.W. Ott Canada WN 3M5 CmespwherBt¢MSmpr mulka/a@Nammm M m's a: Wnmml. ae4 Eo1O11XbMa8a4 RESEARCH Effect of a barrier at Bloor Street Viaduct on suicide rates in Toronto: natural experiment Mark Sinyor, resident physician," Anthony I Levitt, psychiatrist in Chief' ABSTRACT ObjectWeTo determine whether rates ofsuicide changed in Toronto after a barrier was erected at Bloor Street Viaduct, the bridge with the world's second highest annual rate of suicide by lumping after Golden Gate Bridge In San Francisco. Design Natural experiment. Setting City ofTaronto and province of Ontario, Canada; records at the chief comneys office of Ontario 1993 -2001 (nine years before the barrier) and July 2003 -June 2007 (four years after the bander). Participants 14789 people who completed suicide in the city of Toronto and in Ontario. Main outcome measure Changes in yearly rates of suicide by jumping at Bloor Street Viaduct, other bridges, and buildings, and by other means. Results Yearly rates of suicide by lumping in Toronto remained unchanged between the pedods before and after the construction of a harder at Bloor Street Viaduct (56.4 v 56.6, P= 0.95). A mean of 9.3 suicides occurred annually at I lour Sheet Viaduct before the barrier and none after the harder (P(0.01). Yearly rates of suicide by jumping from other bridges and buildings were higher in the period after the bonier although only significant for other bridges (other bridges: 8.7 v14.2. P =0.01; buildings: 38.5 v42.7. P= 032). Conclusions Although the barrier prevented suicides at Bloor Street Viaduct, the rate of suicide by jumping in Toronto remained unchanged. This lack of change might have been due to a reciprocal increase in suicides from other bridges and buildings. This finding suggests that Bloor Street Viaduct may not have been a uniquely attractive location for suicide and that barriers on bridges may not alter absolute rates of suicide by lumping when comparable bridges are nearby. INTRODUCTION It is well recognised that restricting access to a means of suicide may delay or even prevent suicide among vulnerable people.' This principle has been shown successfully, m the United Kingdom with the imple- mentation of relatively simple strategies such m switch- ingtocarbonmonox de-freesourcesofgas,'r icling pack sizes of paracetamol (acetaminophen) and salicylates," and fitting cars with catalytic converters.' In both Canada and New Zealand firearm related suicides decreased after the introduction ofleg- islation for gun control," although some evidence sug- gests that these reductions were matched by increases in suicides by other means, such asjumping.a' Barriers to preventjumpirtg have been established at the Empire Stale Building, the Eiffel Tower, and sev- eral bridges worldwide.10" Recent arguments in favour of barriers on bridges used for suicide stem from studies in the 1970s that assessed the survivors ofsuicide attempts at Golden Gate Bridgein San Fran, cisco, thebridge with the world'shighestaonual rateof midde byjumping.'o to one study, fora of six survivors said that they would not have attempted suicide a any location other than Golden Gate Bridge and all six favoured the construction of a barrier at the bridge.m In another study, only 6% of 515 people who had been prevented fmmjumping off Golden Gate Bridge had subsequently completed suicide." Despile this evi- dence, 74% of respondents to a US telephone survey believed that most or all people prevented from jump ing off Golden Gate Bridge by a barrier would find another way to complete suicide." Studies evan,_g the intraduction of suicide barriers at Memorial Bridge in Augusta, Maine's and Clinton Suspension Bridge in Bristol, England's m well as the introduction of a safety net at Muenster Terrace in Bern, Switzerland" showed reductions in mean numbers of suicides of0.6, 42, and 2.5 persons per yearrespectively ateach location. Each article examined the change in rates of suicides by jumping from nearby bridges or buildings and con- cluded that bale, if any, substitution of location occurred However, these studies lacked andistid power because of the relatively small yearly decreases in numbers of suicides at each bridge as well as low rates of suicide in general. No study of a suicide pre- vention barrier has shown a smtisticagy significant drop in overall mtes of suicide in the vicinity. For more than adecade it has been debated whether e barrier a[Bloor Street Viaduct would be effective at preventing suicides in Toronto, Canada Since the con - struction of the viaduct in downtown Toronto in 1916, a[ least 400 people have jumped b thehr deaths from the bridge.° The 40 m high viaduct spans two major roads, is 490 an long, is double decked, and has an arched design with five lanes of traffic above a subway." With about 10 suicides ermually from 1993 BMJ I ONLINE FIRST I amlram Wes t M 6 tu 2002 (baseline data from this study), Blow Street Viaduct had the dubious distinction of being the am- mad most popular bridge fm suicide studied in the world after Golden Gate Bndge.1° The barrier at Blow Street Viaduct, named the "haniu an veil;' was constructed between April 2002 and June 2003. The barrier is about 5 m high and consists of thousands of thin steel rods specod closely together and supported externally by an angled steel frame."' It is not known whether the barrier has had any impart on Toronto's overall rate of suicides and on the rate of suicides by jumping. We examined coroner's dambefore and after the construction of the barrier, to determine if suicide roles had changed and whether or not people substi- tuted Bloor Street Viaduct for different locations or means ofa idde. METHODS We examined records at the chief coroner's office of Ontario covering all suicides in Ontario from 1 Janu- ary 1993 to 30June 2007. To be included in the data collection the death had to be ruled a suicide by the crooner's office according to the standard of a high degree of probability. Given the large number of charts, it was not possible to examine deaths classified under different categories such as accident homicide, or undetermined cause of death. Staff al the coroner's office provided a spreadsheet Listing all the cases coded as suicides in Ontatio for each year in the study. As it takes about two yews for a case to be dosed, complete data for 2007 were available only in 2009. The follow- ing information was included in the spreadsheet: data of suicide age, sex, region, municipality, and came of death, such as afall orjump from a height, hanging, or shooting. We grouped the suicides into four categories: all suicides in Ontario (exdudingToronm), all suicides in Toronto, suicides in Toronto by jumping (where jumping implied from a height, therefore people who jumped in subways were excluded), and suicides in Toronto by means other thanjumping. To determine whether the suicide was associated with a bridge or building we examined the charts for all smades in Tor- onto coded as a fall orjump from a height We also obtained the name and location of the bridge asso- ciated with the suicide. The barrier at Blcor Street Viaduct was under con- struction from April 2002 to June 2003 (co respon- dence between chief coroner's office and Mike Laidlaw, one of the engineers of the barrier). Accord- ingly we classified the nine years from 1993 to 2001 as being before the barrier and the four years from 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2007 as being after the barrier. To determine if those whojumped resided in Toronto or had travelled from outside the city, we obtained the postal codes of home residences for 1999 -2001 and for 1 July 2003 to 30June 2007. The population of Ontario and Toronto was obtained from moors data held by Statistic Canada for the years 1996, 2001, and 2006." We used these data to correct suicide rates for population over time. Linear population growth was assumed for the periods 1996 -2001 and 2001 -6. We estimated population growth by extrapolating backyards from 1993 -6 and forwards from 2006 to June 2007. Statistical analysis To examine differences between suicide rates before and after the barrier we carried out Poisson regression analyses. We analysed demographic data using two tailed, independent sample f tests for continuous vari- ables and two sided 9' testa for categorical variables. Data on postal codes were analysed using a one sided )? teal under the assumption that more people would travelfmm outsidethe city Incomplete suicide raBloor Street Viaduct( before thebarrier) thendotherbridgm in the period afterthebarria. Weconsidered aPvalue less than 0.05 to be statistically significant. RESULTS Annual ones of suicide by jumping in Toronto remained unchanged befom and afterthe mmtmction of the barrier at Bloor Street Viaduct (56.4 a 56.6, P=0.95; table 1, fig 1). A mean of 9.3 suicides took place annually before the barrier and none after the barrier (PG0.01; fig 2). After the barrier the annual rate of suicides by jumping from bridges other than Blom Street Viaduct increased significantly (8.7 a. 14.2, M.01) and from buildingsincreased non-signif- icantly (38.5 0 42.7, P-0.32). In 2002, the year when construction of the barrier commenced (but was not complete), 63 suicides byjumping occurred in Toronto of which 30 were from bridges and 19 from the Bloor Street Viaduct. Both the overall rate of suicides in Toronto and the rate of suicides by means other thanj umping decreased by 28 suicides per year in the period after the barrier (aft Toronto suicides per year: 253.4 s 225.4, P�0.05; Tor- onto suicides per year by other cream: 197.0 n 168.8, P-0.04). The decrease in overall rate of suicide inTor- onto bordered on ans iedcal significance whereas the decrease in the muse of suicides by other cream was sig- nificant The overall annual rate of suicides in Ontario (excluding Torontn) also decreased significantly in the period after the barrier (836.4 v 752.5, P=0.01). f 250 Barrie, unae,+ waiao zoo raa: = too — omi mean: Jumping too B 1993 1995 1992 1999 2001 2p03 2005 2001 Y. F$11 suicides in Toronto by jumping or other means before (19932001) and after Daly 2003 -June 2007) constriction of a suicide prevention banner at floor street vladua: conected per capita to suicides in 1993 population (not standardized for age) N' 2 of 6 MI IONIINE FIRST I bmjmm Table 11 Poisson regression analysis of annual suicide rates by jumping and other means In Ontario and Toronto before (39932001) and after Duly 2003 June 200]) construction of a suicide prevention barrier at Bloor Street Viaduct. Toronto 38S 45.8 Mean No el annual Meru No ofanndal 0.10 0.20 suicides pm6mder suicides post- bander Regression McIdanrermarate Subgroup 'Observed -'.. CsneOed' observM Owner codyidest Standard ever passe (95 %cot Omado (exdudlnsTommo) 880.1 936A 887.5 752.5 -0.11 0.04 son 0.90 (0.83 to 0.98) Tommo(nul) 261.2 253.4 241.0 225A -0.12 0.06 0A5 0.89 (0.79 to 1.00) Sulddememad 9.3 0 58.2 56A Building 39.7 38S 45.8 @3 0.10 0.20 032 1.11 (0.90 or 1.36) Bridge 18.6 179 15.3 14.2 -0.23 0.19 032 0.79 (0.55 to 1.15) Bloor Street Vladud 9.6 9.3 0 0 -2.92 0.119 10.01 OAS Win W0.311 Otherbddges 98 0.7 15.3 14.3 0.49 0.19 0.01 1,64 D.13 to 2391 na,a,neanc 2me lard 180.8 1618 b.15 MINE 0.04 086 0.04 to 0.99) •Cm,Med per room m wlddes In 1993 population; rat it edw ised rw age. tlncideme ere r W. of wlddes aRer barter mmWnd n'llh Eelprt banlee ril=l]. Demographics People in Toronto who used me ams other thanjumping to complete suicide after the barrier were older than three who completed suidde by other means before the barrier (48.0 years u 45.8 years, P<0.01; table 2). Overall m Toronto no other statistically significant dif- ferencesin age orsexwereevidembelweenthe periods before and after the barrier. People who completed suicide by jumping in Toronto tended to be younger than those who did so by other means both before and after the barrier. Furthermore, among people who completed suicide byjumping, those who used bridges tended to be younger and were more predominantly male drum those who used buildings. Of the 57 people who completed suicide by jumping from Toronto bridges from 1999-2001 (before the bar- rier), only two were known l0 live outside the city and bothjumped a< Bloor Street Viaduct (table 3). Of the 61 people who m npleted suicide by jumping from Toronto bridges from July 2003 to J. 2007 (after the barrier), nine lived outside the city. More people travelled from outside the city to jump from bridges aRer the barrier than before the harder (P-0.049). DISCUSSION The "luminous veil" was constructed a[ Bloor Street Viaduct in Toronto to prevent suicides. To be fully successful, uncurled to prevent suicides at Bloor Street Viaduct with no reciprocal increases in suicides by jumping at other locations m by other means. The bar- rier did arcomplish the that part of this goal with no suicides occurring at Blom Street Viaduct during the study period July 2003 June 2007, after the barrier's construction. Something about the barrier's arcbi4c- turd design, its aesthetic quality, or the publicity sur- rounding its construction was sufficient to dissuade people from considering suicide at that location. This result is in keeping with previous work showing that barriers help to prevent suicides at the location where they are placed.'s'1en" The overall raze of suicide in Ontario decreased significantly in the period after the barrier's construction. Asimilar trend was observed in Toronto, with a decease in the overall suicide one that bordered on significance. This decrease in Toronto's overall suidde one by 28 /year was accompanied by a statistically significant decrease in the same number of suicides per year by means other than jumping. No reduction occurtcd in the annual suicide one by jump- ing in Toronto. Indeed, annual suicides from other bridges in Toronto showed a statistically significant increase, by 5.5 after the barrier (a 63% increase from the annual rate of 8.7 before the barrier). When this figure Is compared with the 9.3 fewer annual suicides at Bloor Street Viaduct after the barrier, it might be speculated that most people who would have jumped a[ Bloor Street Viaduct chose other bridges instead. Increases in suicides by jumping from buildings may account for the remainder, although these increases did not reach statistical significance, perhaps bersuse of the small numbers involved. There are several possible explanations for why rates of suicide byjumping did not decrease in Toronto after the barrier was erected. One u that suicide bar- riers on bridges are not effective in decreasing overall suicide now because people may substitute a bridge with a barrier for a different location, such as another 9;oor!heel Vlatlu[e - -- 01M1er bridgez 20 Bamerunder- mcuon Is m 0 1993 1995 1997 1999 loot 1a03 2005 2007 Fg 21 Suicides In Toronto by Jumping from Bloor Street Viaduct and other bddges before (19932001) and after duly 2003 -lone 2007) owduru im. of a suicide prevention beater at Bloor Street VladucL corrected per capes to suicides in 1993 population (net undimltsed for age) BR I ONLINE EIBSr I Mi. p;¢ 3 al 6 bridge or a building. No study of a suicide barrier has shown a statistically significant drop in overall suicide rates in the vicinity. The removal of a suicide barrier on Grafton Bridge in Audkland, New Zealand was asso- ciated with a significant increase in suicides." How- ever, suicides by jumping from other locations decreased by the same number, resulting in an unchanged total rate of suicide byj umping.n That bar- riers on bridges would be effective was suggested by studies carried out in San Francisco; however, these studies were of people who had either jumped from Golden Gale Bridge and survived1e or contemplated suicide or made a suicidal gesture w the bridge that cameto the situation ofihepolice orwere broughtto a hospital.13 Theis two groups may be qualitatively dif- ferent form people who have been prevented from jumping at a location as a result of a physical barrier. Although some have argued thin barriers on bridges are effective a preventing suicide'' the evidence in the literature in favour of such barriers when there are other available buildings or bridges is weak, in part due to the scarcity of bridges with pre - barrier sol- cide rates of sufficient magnitude to make statistical calculations plsnsihle. A second explanation for the effect observed here is that barriers decrease ratesin some instances butthelin Toronto specific circumstances led to the barrier fail- ing to decrease overall suicide rates by jumping. The argument for putting a barrier on a notorious suicide bridge as a prevention tool is based on the aasumption that people contemplating suicide have a preference for that bridge over others in the area "Suicide mag- net" may be a particularly apt term and has been used to describe suicide bridges in the same that magnets have the ability to exert different amounts of pull and, presumably, the more pull a magnet exerts the hem interchangeable it is with other locations. The evi- ch ncepresentedhere shows that despite being the sec- ond most frequently used bridge for suicide, Bloor Steel Viaduct was a relatively weak magnet. Factors thin might make a bridge a stronger "magnet" are ease ofpediuman access, perceived lethality ofajump, and unique geographical features such as being over water. Blow Street Viaduct is easily accessed, jumps are highly lethal, and it is constructed over two major roads. However, numerous other bridges in Toronto fit this description. Other considerations are the bridge's aesthetic quality and that of the surrounding environment. Although Bloor Street Vloduct might have hem viewed as an impressive structure when it was completed in 1918, it is not aesthetically grand by 21 at century standards and nearby bridges are ofsimi- I ar seal a and afford a similar view. A final otmidemtion is the notoriety of the bridge. Although Blow Street Viaduct is sufficiently notorious to have become a minor pop culture reference notably in a song by the Barenaked lalies"i and a novel by Michael Ondaatje,as it u not a cultural iron like Golden Gate Bridge. Images and news about III. Street Viaduct are not ubiquitous in Toronto compared with Golden Gate Bridge. A survivor of a suicide attempt in San Francisco noted that for him "it was the Golden Gate Bridge or nothing;' ca but whether anyone would make such a hold abatement about Blow Street Viaduct is debatable. One indicator of whether a bridge might hold a degree of importance for people contemplating suicide is if they choose to travel large distances to jump al that location. For example when Gateway Bridge was opened in Brisbane, Australia, it became a "suicide magnet" after a well publicised suicide at the bridge's opening ceremony. Notably, 10040 of people who died by jumping at that location had travelled there from outside the city compared with ody 3840 of people who jumped from a nearby bridge." This pattern was not, however, observed with Blow Street ViaducL Indeed. postal mile data show that signifi- caudy more people travelled from outside the city to jump from other bridges in the period after the barrier than to jump from Bloor Street Viaduct in the period before line barrier (P- 0.049). A third explanation is that the barrier ABhur Street Viaduct old have decreased mtes of iiiddebyjump- ing under different circumstances. It is important to note that the barrier was a standdone intervention. Il has been argued thin optimal suicide prevention pro - grammceinvolve comprehensive strategies to provide Table 2 [ Demographic characteristics of people who comptebeci suicide by lumping or other means In Toronto before (1993 3001) and after Ouly 2003 -tulle 2007) the construction of a barrier at Bloor Street Viaduct Locator ofsulcides by lumping eleorSUeet - Suicide by means other StadaOcat Characteristic, Boltdiog:A VuduG:B Omer bridges:C Nan jumping:0 cmpadson• Mean ISO) .1 (Years): Bebrm.m.r 43.508) 38.1(12.5) no (15.6) ass (17A) DW Aaerbamw 45.8(17.8) 3&503.6) 48.0(12.2) of U Before versus aeerbmtu' as NS significant No 0W dan.le,- Boom barns, 357(59A) 86(793) at V8.5) 1622 VO.2) B=CgM ABerbuXer 183(64.5) 61(22.1) 223(10.1) C =D =A BeroreeemuaaRwbmdW NS NS Ns a,rat' loom.... 'Sonia,.. 11 pmoo. cage 4 of 6 BMI I ONIINE FIRST I b 7)t. Table 3 1 Loration of last known residence of people who died by jumping from Toronto bridges before (1993 -2001) and after Ouly 2003 -June 2007).7 construction of a suicide prevention barter at Bloor Street Viaduct No(%) compla0ngsuidde by lumping before No(at)complwing Ubbarder(n =57) suicide by lumping from -her bridges sler the t?odon orresidence Bloor Strad Viadud Other Midge banler(n=61) Taranto 17(19.81 33 MOM 41(67]1 Suburbs w beyond x(3s) 0(0) 9(14.0 Norededder. /unumwn 40.0 11(19.3) n(1g.o) •posmt rode, Wert m0able for 01, analysis only from 1999. tsaw 9a^ple mraned ham oubld. A. tlry in the veiled after the bam- X'y A, tl 1. ...0. education, combat stigma, and improve accessibility of services W people contemplating suicide." It is unclear whether a different resin t would have been observed if the barrier at Bloor Street Viaduct had been part of a more comprehensive suicide prevention programme. Furthermore, at least one prominent newspaper article published shortly after the barrier's omm metion speculated that it failed b prevent suicides because people werejumping aL other locations.- In Septem- ber 2003, the article reported that someone who had contemplated suicide at Bloor Street Viaduct aubso, quenflyjumped lrom a nearby bridge on discovery of the barrier. While results of the present study would seem to agree with the article's assertion, it is possible that the article itself may have influenced people con- templating suicide to consider other bridges. More- over, it could have contributed to a widespread public belief in the inevitability of suicide, which may have further dissuaded suicidal people from seeking help. The article and other media reports an suidde may have influenced suicide mina and could have con- tributed to the observation that rates of suicide by jumping did not change in the period after the barrier. Interestingly, during the study 1998 and 2002 were the years with the highest number of suicides at Bloor Street Viaduct (n =19); respectively, the year ofthelm- oner's inquest into suicide at Bloor Street Viaduct and the year in e barrier was cons tructed. This suggests that, al least in those instances, publicity may have influ- enced patterns of suicide byjumping in Toronto. Whether the barrier at Bloor Street Viaduct has had an impact all lacuna other than rates of completed sm- cide is outside the scope of this research. None the less, other reasons may exist as N why people mightwant to prevent suicides 9 a particular location. Several of the charts reviewed for this study noted vehicular trauma to the bodies of the deceased. This underscores the fact that there may be social consequences to peoplejump- ing on to busy roads, including psychological or phy- sical morbidity as well as mortality risk to bystanders as a result of motor vehicle collisions, damage to prop- erty, dismption to travel networks, and impact on the economy. By eliminating all suicides al Bloor Steel Viaduct in the period after the barrier, the barrier pro, vented such negative social consequences. Similar negative outcomes may, however, have increased at other bridges and buildings. Strengths and limitations of the Study The barrier at Bloor Street Viaduct is an opportunity for afascinatingnatural experiment Itprovides whatis perhaps the best scenario for testing whether such ban riers are effective because the bridge had the second highest yearly rate of suicides after Golden Gale Bridge and because, unlike other locations such as San I=- cisco, no bridges in Toronto span large bodies of water, meaninglhatessentially allsuicidesbyju opmg)nTon onto come to the attention of the comner and are recorded. Furthermore, demographic data for people who completed suicide byjumping from Bloor Street Viaduct (median age 36, 79% male) were similar to data recently reported for people who jumped at Golden Gate Bridge (median age 40,74% male).21 As in any natural experiment, however, this research has many uncontrolled variables. Firady, despite the relatively high rate of suicides by jumping at Bloor Street Viaduct, the absolute numbers may have been too low to achieve adequate power in a study of this kind. Secondly, despite the relative wmprehensive- ness of the chief coroner's records, it is possible that suicide rates by all causes were overestimated or underestimated in the period before or after the barrier owing to incompleteness or inaccuracy of records. Thirdly, the colonel's records might be prone to bier because people found dead beneath certain bridges or after falling from my bridge c r building are mom likely to have been ruled w having died by suicide than by rouses such as homicide or unintentional death Finally, it is possible that an ecological fallacy is open ruing. Suicide in itself is a rare event and suicides by jumping are uncommon to an even greater extant Despite the remarkably stable number of suicides by jumping in Toronto before the border, the possibility that rates ol'suicide at other bridges increased after the banier for reasons other than substitution of location cannot be discounted. These reasons might include chance fluctuations in rates, economic changes, social changes, or other interventions to restrict the means of completing suicide. It is conceivable that the barrier led to s reduction in suicides but that this was masked by one or more of these uncontrolled variables. fgldusptt5 No suicides oaurred a Simon, Street Viaduct in the four years after the construction of a barrier; however, sui- cide rates by jumping in Toronto were unchanged because of a statistically sigvifirm t increase in suicides by jumping from other bridges and a non-sigrtiBcaut in.. in suicides by jumping from buildings. This suggests that the availability of Bloor Street Viadud was not an essential element for people contemplating suicide byjumpingin Toronto. We speadale lusts dif lerent result may be observed if a bridge bolds a more powerful influence ou suicidal people. This may be the more for Golden Gate Bridge, for example, although further evidence is needed. A safety net might be installed st Golden Gale Bridge in the near future," so research similar to the present study might be possible in San Francisco. However, logistical challenges may be BA11 I ONLINE FIST I MI. p,4 5 of 6 bamem decrease or eliminate suicides at bridges commonly used for No study has shown a statistical drop in overall rates of suicide after the construction of a barrier on a bridge It is unclear whether barriers prevent suicides or simply result In people substituting one bridge for another or allempting suicide by other means WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS No suicides occurred at Super Street Viaduct in Toronto after the construction of a barrier Suicide rates by lumping were unchanged owing to a corresponding increase in lumps from other bridges and buildings in the area Therefore baniers may not decrease suicide rates when comparable locations are available greater hemose the major bridges in San Francisco are over wader, malting it more difficult to obtain accurate codas for salcide. This mmumb shows [hat constructing a barrier on a bridge with a high rare of suicide byj ump- ing is likely da reduce or e6mi name suicides at that bridge but it may not alter, absolute suicide rates by jumping when there are comparable bridges nearby. We all lad's Edhads (Attend sa m"Icrf; camtt fa Tom", Eat) and the enfre staff at Me Offire, of the Chef C. of Orders, mdudlrg rangy ZyaWemild awe L dfi T. Baker, and Karen WdIaon Amer. la' maWg this reward, mssab; ED Jo hm o1 and de determinants of ref ima l heats rouse at he uMrenMofTamnm medial scrod for fe turn thegrassa the Wt Alex (afrepNSrem of Research Deal, art BeNaoba. samrytrmk Heats 5derres Centre) In perfoiorg'o'ne o1Me'atisal a d, r, am Donald Redmaee' (duecmnof Ue COUaI Edderroc,Um Smaybot Heart Steams(bAwart Mond sparer (senior soormKmb- Lmaaea Agef M peseandi unit Banda) In trek advke and caned consultant MS developed tlg idea fm this study, mnVibuted to the study design, analysed Me dam, Interpreted INS results, and draNM the mmu5vlpt He B guarantal alcmnated to the study ddlgn, inaryretM the results. and Silk ally revised the manuscript. Both authors had lull across to all of Me data OrKi mmgstiteltal reports and tems) In the study and wl take responslbiCty, M the Integrity of the data and the amaacy of the data.1,am. King, This suit, received on fording Composite Mmadts All authors have completed Van udfied competing interest form at Wem.ianje.arg/col_dMason, defl(avadable an sepuest from me mpesp ohoing author) and dechm(1) no retinal UPOm to Me wbmWM wok it= thyme Other Upon nor mminyen(2) AIL has antl as a ruminant for Janssen mho, glossal. and ED 1nly Camda (3) no spouses, pmmem. or cmdren win marmships with rammeaial entities that might have an Interest In the mean IOed walk anal (4) no nom finaaial interests that may W rekvamm Me submitted wank. EMiml Wasigh This sW" was appowd by to Urnmony of Tormta's sdearrh ethics Ward. Dam sladnF No addiderel data oval note 1 Gunnell D. Watlkton N. Banked S. MenoG mailabif, and the promotion M saidae a wand ow, of leader trends in England and Wags 195019]5. Set PsyAlawyPWomrs, commlal 2013143. 2 omman N. The real gas dim Unhed Kingdom suidde tae, 1960 1971. fir/ Prev56cMM 1976;308693. 3 Hamem K 51mm 5, peeks J. Coppwh Johnston q Waters K et aL OK legislation an anaagesic packs: before and after study plans tend eRe[t on mismungs.&N 2000;329;10769. o HaMOn K. Townsend F, Oeeks 1. Appleby L Gumall D. stonewall O, in al. Effects of INslition rending pa[ksizes of pamcnamoland satictute on selfpomeming in the UK: before and after shad, BMI 20D1;322:11037. 5 Amaz T, Pppleb'/L. K.— K. ChanRS in rotes pfwl[Wd Gyro exh mstazphaaianan W England and wales. PsydNMM 2001;31:9359. 6 amounts At, Feiguswn OR fronded! U. reforms eydatan and woman hi Down related suicide deaths in Nm Zealand. Amit NZ I P,whiaby 2006;<0:253A. ] Dome am AA, Kingdom, F. Lemr0. Wendemem S. me Impart of Am central (Gm C-5 1) on wldae In Canada. pmu Start 7003;27;103 24. B slum lH.R mR.Reny OT.kmslAKellemmn ALHream regulatlms and ones of sukiae ArempMsm oftem metropolitan real. N flgl/Med1990:322:36A]3. 9 RkAt CLyounglG, FLwlarli Wagmq HDmk NA Guns and smade: 1"(414 MnTS of mme specific legisladan. qm / PSy2Mbpy unneR 7:3424. to Gunnell D. Wxxn Atsui[We byjumpN &Atli FYyrhimY XanO biderm6:1.6. 11 Added ON. P.Theaumramps.Afte nupsiluby300B;16s:tt26. ti Rosen DHumpin, svammrs.Afolanupnd San sad impel. estrRed1975dm Game and San Fbmisoo-0akentl May endges. We" am th y now?A: llinvo. 13 Seism RH. WM1erearegry new ?Arolge. SmoWayalsuiaitle atlemmera fiom am Golden Gate Bridge. snieitla 4'fe mrmr pehcv 1978;a:203-16. est ]A smut fingoa met Smose L eFThempt erion,yofsuldtle 2006; fiom a rational wrvry.SWdaeuh IhreIXBwmv 2e06:36;p. le 15 hfien,smePmfirm,2sukfae by lumping:geeFM aftbatl6e serindeenre.INPm sAl,Gu3:579. 16 mamdeki D.Nawmrs Al, Gunnell ll D.Hanom a suianthe amen mpflmsan btldge. England,on a[alDMems 7il90.26 Impll[at.A blpremMpn. ar/Ade her s20W:fect of a sad I] ale Be. on Snugger Sopme hat sA.Itdsefazaewnn n05 em MuensterTemce. Sufe'de uh ThrenBehw Ig Glen W,/Jmm3 1. and Mew ILMO [onatla 3003;Mmcalwan eel 19 UnimniryofWal Moo. BlmrSlrM Waduttsukldebaniertlesign etl. Mt. mro:// newsrepease .awaanpo.re /aNaNelnms.phot i -23]9. 20 Main, bar mammon. s. Wane lumiroome,n Ponce- faaNYaduR safety boners. Ions. www.amhfteuu rcuwatMm.ra/ faculrypm i . 21 SadzNaCanada. population and dmllingwunts WrTOmna and pd/pmf 92 5911demb /mge.ofe /[emus +ttensemenV2006 /aP ptl /Prel/9AS91JaD&lb a -3520 -a G.IGm1&CW &1=352O 2pmsaGro2=PR84de2=3580a' = D&G de5D8Cpde1= 352opoPR&Ude 35&DaY=Coupolo= ?SOBCatle1=352WO58G[vY-PRBCntleY-3580aq=CpuntB- =352 00058= rode =P8 un2=3ea0T2aun1ntea reit-Wo S5&Da a pun Dab=Cnunt85emr eamhTp 5earahrype= =parch a4punr 85earNTed—andNesearzMy1m-le fi smrthPRb1801= alaEamm= antl wwwl2sbaanra /mgtish/ %ofilor/R0t/Oebnz/Page.352 lan6'E6Grot&. eCode200GS Gw2= 2= PR8C=35U580a =FSGeo1 el=352MO= 35200058 = r35&0e2 =358nM x508COde1=35202058Ge2m =FlffiCM- Aunt umhl ntB = 352000S8Gm2�8C mm t= 3580atT = - m affirortMeK2pmm = 3SmGAa Y- 358D eta2ount -m mrghaaSommnN85eeginod e= =mm Data Oo& Al 4A&CmdW- YOmmoeSearzhiype= Beginse smends=m801= Amnedamtorn=. 22 raw soin,AmthUfSeneuafbaarkrsat SS742. roping sihs:a asearem AhsrNZ), Forg iaOy 2OR Ho:55]dJ. 23 Beauofts,I . eInSl,rargussonOMHprropa affiamn GL onernmgdide li PsYtHmay,20(ul[i 9 munfwmnatenalu2l apespi pa#NIl .Staiide 20(195 7. 20 BbaSttlnMnemlp(A SWddehom ne GWnen Lak Bntlge.AmJ 25 Barenaked Inks. War on drugs. Rmase Canards, 2003. 26 Candor jeMln Me SW,IdKnto Wrote Canaaa,1996. 27 Candor SWtltlehom Me+britlges.AU #NZ /P+Wuaey 1990;24:377-8). As]d). 29 CneKith.8- 1pphrgP.5uklde0:13. 0p: time Fort mom realistk aaMingk B eGen Paan a bridge. M. 29 HaWingKThenm wkitle bndge.fie GabepnaM 1.6SepR003. Accepted: 27 Ad i12010 pad 6 N 6 BAN I ONUNE FICST I bmladm Page 1 of 3 Bill Gray - RE: Kudos to the Water and Sewer Dept., ( Maybe W]G) From: Bill Gray To: Raskin, Howard Date: 7/6/2010 5:26 PM Subject: RE: Kudos to the Water and Sewer Dept., ( Maybe WIG) CC: Whitney, Erik Howard, Then I really can enjoy your note to the Mayor, and pass it on to Water and Sewer. I am lucky to have good crews in all my divisions. Sometimes a resident can see past the policy and the bills to the work of the crews. It is easier to talk about policies, and change them sometimes, than it is to generate pride of workmanship and a good service attitude in the crews. It is nice when it shows or is recognized. There are days when I wish I were out in the street working with the crews rather than trying to explain policies to a resident home owner — though today (this week) is not one of them. Thank you for your comments, Bill >>> Howard Raskin <hbrl @mmell.edu> 7/612010 4:32 PM >>> Dear Bill — Thanks for the follow up. I was definitely aware of the homeowners liability for the "city's portion" of the line No surprise there. I was just happy with the service and professionalism of the W &S employees and I didn't want to turn my email into a discussion of whether the city or the homeowner should pay for the connection from the water main to the curb box. You probably know where I stand on that issue..... Once again, I was really impressed by everyone I interacted with from W &5. Best, Howard From: Bill Gray [maiito:billg @cityofdhaca.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 3:48 PM To: Howard Raskin Cc: Carolyn Peterson; Debra Parsons; Erik Whitney; Kathrin Gehring Subject: Re: Kudos to the Water and Sewer Dept., ( Maybe WJG) Dear Mr. Raskin, The Mayor forwarded your note to her about the new water service you had installed recently. (Old age catches up with us all.) I enjoyed reading the note, but was left with a nagging concern. You referred to the portion of the water service out in the street as "the city's potion ". Under city policy (The Board of Public Works policy) the portion out in the street becomes the "city's portion" once it has been upgraded to a copper service. Had it been a copper service it would not (normally) have been described as "rusted and corroded" by your plumber. Until about 1950 (1947 I think) property owners could connect to the city's water mains (and sewer mains) with a variety of acceptable materials. Since they owned the house service all the way to the main they could choose shorter or longer lived materials (usually galvanized iron versus copper for water, and clay tile versus file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \billg\Local Settings\ Temp \XPgrpwise \4C336753coimainl... 7/9/2010 Page 2 of 3 cast Iron for sewer) and control the expense and benefits accordingly. About 1950 a decision was made that the city should require that copper be installed in the street for water services in order to reduce the number of excavations, disruptions, and costs involved with work in the streets. The pavements for city streets were becoming much more expensive and durable, and the number of other utilities and connections in the street were growing. Existing services belonging to home owners within the street right of way would be taken over by the city as they were upgraded to copper. New copper services would be taken over once installed by the property owner and inspected by the city. This is my long winded way of asking if anyone told you that you should expect a second bill for the work in the street? I would like to think that your comments were made about good service, independent of where the final bill might reside. My experience tells me that you may have been thankful that the city staff helped you get "your part" of the service replaced by cooperating and upgrading the "city's portion" as quickly as they did. I could be wrong about a second bill, and I will ask about it by copy of this e-mail to the Assistant Superintendent for Water and Sewer. I believe your city licensed plumber knew this second bill would result from work in the street and chose to avoid delivering bad news, but our staff or their supervisor should have been able to tell you that you were looking at an additional expense to replace the street portion. If the plumber could not connect to the old service at the curb valve I don't believe you had a choice about doing the work, but you should have been informed so you could have that discussion before the work was done. A lot of homeowners don't realize this liability exists, or what portions of their telephone, cable, electrical or gas service they are responsible for. They usually move, or their insurance covers the cost of the storm event that damaged those services, before they find out what they were responsible fa. Some water or sewer services can actually wear out in fifty to seventy years, depending on the materials used. When the home owner understands that their buried water service connection belongs to them, and needs to be replaced, they may then accept it out to the street, but don't understand that many properties own it right out to the main itself. Thank you for taking the time to write your note. I realize that I may have just taken the fun out of it. While that was not my intention, I thought you deserved an immediate response in case my concerns are valid. Mr. Whitney, or his staff at Water and Sewer, should be in touch with you if they plan to send you a bill. I apologize for any surprises that this e-mail may represent. Bill Gray, Superintendent DPW >>> Howard Raskin <hbrl @knmell.edu> 6/25/2010 8:49 AM >>> Good morning Mayor Peterson — Several weeks ago, I was informed by my plumber that I needed new water service installed at my home; he needed to replace my old water line from the curb box to the service in my house. After my excavator dug the appropriate sized trench (looked like the Grand Canyon...very disconcerting) along the length of my driveway to the back of my house, my plumber came to install the new line. When he looked at the connection to the curb box and looked at the City's portion of the line, he was unsure if he should connect —the City line also looked rusted and corroded. It was late on a Thursday afternoon, but after a call to the City's W &S Department, George and another colleague came to my house in about 15 minutes; after consulting with my plumber, they decided that before my plumber connected my new service, the City had to replace their section of the line. George did his best to schedule me the following Wednesday, within a week, but still a bit long to wait. As it turned out, he was able to squeeze me in the following Monday. The City crew arrived at 7:30 on Monday and finished their work by noon; my plumber did his thing that afternoon and my trench was filled the next day. Everyone I interacted with from the City W &5 Department was professional, respectful, informative, and file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \billg \Local Settings\ Temp \XPgrpwise \4C336753wimainl... 7/9/2010 Page 3 of 3 courteous —from Mark Fuller who answered many questions and marked the street for the job, to George and his colleague who consulted with my plumber and scheduled the City's work, to the City crew who did the actual work (it was a crew that included Jaime, I can't remember the other worker's names). A great group of City employees. Sincerely, Howard Raskin file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \billg \Local Settings\ Temp \XPgtpwise \4C336753coimainl... 7/9/2010 Re: Fwd: Possible Water Leak Bill Gray - Re: Fwd: Possible Water Leak From: 'David Cedarholm" <deedarholm @ci.durhamnh.us> To: <billg @cityofithaca.org> Date: 7/6/2010 2:20 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: Possible Water Leak CC: <acedarholm2 @yahoo.com >, <ocedarho @twony.rr.wrn> Page 1 of 2 Big, Thanks for the detailed historical expalantion. 1 enjoy those curious links to days gone. My mother and sister who both live in Ithaca will also appreciate your explanation. Dave -- Original Message--- - From: Bill Gray <billg @cilyofithwa.org> To: David Cedarholm Cc: Erik Whitney <erlkw @cityofithaca.org >; Kathrin Gehring <kgehring @cityofithaca.org >; Ray Benjamin <RAYB @cityofithaca.org> Sent: Too Jul 06 11:51:26 2010 Subject: Re: Fwd: Possible Water Leak Dear David, Thank you for your note. We will have someone look, but I am reasonably sure you are looking at one of our few remaining uncapped artesian wells on the valley floor. Al the end of the 191h century a few of the industries in town drilled wells to get a safe, clean, and steady supply of water for their use. The valley is underlain by an aquifer that is captive and is (well was) pressurized by water flowing into it at higher elevations in the surrounding hills where the aquifer is exposed to the surface percolation of water. The demands were higher than the artesian aquifer recharge rate and it lost pressure. AI about the same time the city took over the private water system on Six Mile Creek and developed it to serve the community. (The story about the transfer of ownership and upgrade of the water system centers on something like 32 deaths to Typhoid early in 1903, a significant number of which were students, and a "young" but rapidly growing Comet University told the city to fix the problem or they would. In New York history a large number of the first municipal water systems were built between 1905 and 1915 due to typhoid and technology that had developed in England for sand filtration of water sources. As Cornell continued to grow it built its own water treatment plant in about 1922.) We get calls about the "leak" at the bank of the channel behind Carpet Warehouse from time to time. It is on private property so we have never taken any action to try and seal it or to cap if There are one or two others that we get calls on from time to time. If it turns out to be more interesting 1 will contact you so you can know where you concern led. We would much rather people asked questions, or pointed out things that look unusual or wrong, than ignore a potential problem before them. We do find problems with this kind of help. Thank you for your interest, Bill Gray, P.E., Superintendent DPW >>> Kathrin Gehring 7/6/2010 8:11 AM »> Anyone warm take a look? - Kathy >>> "David Cedarholm" <dcedarholm @ci.durham.nh.us> 7/5/20109:13 AM >>> Hi Kathrin: I've been visiting family in Ithaca this weekend and happened upon a possible water leak while kayaking one of your scenic file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \biUg\Local Settings\ Temp \XPgrpwise \4C333B96coimainl... 7/9/2010 Re: Fwd: Possible Water Leak Page 2 of 2 waterways. There is a very steady flow of clear water pouring out of hole in a standpipe located about 40 It north of the narrow bridge on Cecil A. Malone Drive on the east bank of the waterway next to the Carpet Warehouse. I'll he interested to know what you find. Regards, Dave P.S. I visit Ithaca at least once a year and think you folks to a greatjob! David Cedarholm, P.E. Dept. of Public Works 100 Stone Quarry Drive Durham, NH 03824 (603)868 -5578 dcedarholm &i.durhsm.nh.ws file: / /CADoctanents and Settings \billgV -ocal Settings\ Temp \XPgrpwise \4C333B96coimainl... 7/9/2010