HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09-11 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, February 9, 2011, at
4:45 p.m. in Common Council Chambers - Third Floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street,
Ithaca, New York.
Agenda
1. Additions or Deletions to Agenda (Items 1 -5, 15 min.)
2. Mayor's Communications
3. Communications and Hearings from Persons before the Board
4. Response to Public
5. Reports
Special Committees of the Board
Council Liaison
Board Liaisons
Superintendent and Staff
Other Department Heads
6. Approval of Minutes
7. Administration and Communications (20 min.)
7.1 2010 DPW Accomplishments & 2011 Goals - Report
7.2 Preferred Topics for 2011
8. VOTING ITEMS
8.1 Buildings. Properties. Refuse. and Transit (10 min.)
8.1 Resolution for Award of Contract for Construction Materials Testing Services
for the City of Ithaca's 2011 Construction Program - Capital Project 756 -
Resolution
8.2 Highways. Streets. and Sidewalks (15 min.)
8.2 Widening of Road at the Intersection of Aurora and Prospect Streets -
Resolution
8.3 Parking and Traffic (10 min.)
8.3 To Amend Vehicle and Traffic Schedules XXV, Reserved for Parking for
Persons with Disabilities for Chestnut Street
8.4 Creeks. Bridges, and Parks (10 min .1
8.4 Approval in Concept to the Installation of Fencing around Auburn Park -
Resolution
8.5 Water and Sewer
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS
9.1 Buildings, Properties Refuse and Transit
9.2 Highways, Streets and Sidewalks
9.3 Parking and Traffic (10 min.)
9.3 To Amend the Vehicle and Traffic Schedules to Create Reserved Parking
Spaces for People with Disabilities on North Tioga Street and East Court
Street along the Tompkins County Court House — Discussion and Resolution
9.4 Creeks. Bridges, and Parks
9.5 Water and Sewer
10. New Business
11. Adiournment
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 BoarU of Public W arks meets on the second, Ihim and fourth W ednesdays of the month at 4:45 P.M. All meetings are voting
meetings, which opens with a public comment period. Meeting agendas are created 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 February 9. 2011
7.1 2010 DPW Accomplishments $ 2011 Goals Report
7.2 Preferred Topics for 2011
See the agenda for January 26, 2011, and bring the supplied materials.
This is a review of last year, an overview of next year, and a request for you to weigh in. The
discussion will start but not end with this because there is also the 2011 Work Program that
is drafted by the operating divisions which we will review. We have held a coordinating
meeting for the work program with NYSDOT and with NYSEG, and they are generally in the
same position we are. They think they know what they are doing this construction season,
but they know that something will change. Our work program is always a combination of
things we have to do (broken, deteriorated, wom out), things we want to do (better materials,
reduce maintenance demands, lower energy bills, safety improvements), and things we are
asked to do (move the spoils site, build a new Tea Pavilion).
You are also requested to think about what topics, or projects are important and not
addressed here, for consideration in 2011. A recent example is Govind's recent request to
review the one -way streets around the Commons, particularly Aurora Street. Carolyn has
asked to return to the Sidewalk Program, the skate park in Wood Street Park and the
Commons Rehabilitation Project are certain to be topics of conversation. In preparation for
the state budget impacts, the Mayor has opened the topic of the City's budget with Common
Council. Everything from consolidating services, to eliminating programs and reducing staff
was raised as discussion ideas by Council. Since the DPW makes up 40% of the City's
budget, the BPW can participate actively and valuably in this discussion.
8.1 Resolution for Award of Contract for Construction Materials Testina Services
For the City of Ithaca's 2011 Construction Program — Capital Project 756
Resolution
Attached are the bid tabulation and a recommended resolution for award of a contract.
8.2 Widenina of Road at the Intersection of Aurora and Prospect Streets —
Resolution
We need to make a decision following review of the possible widening of the intersection for
a left hand turn lane. The engineers need to finish the design and submit it for approval.
Please see comments and materials with the agendas for January 19th and 26th. This is a
judgment call. There is no right answer. We have provided alternate resolution for the
Alternates 0 and 1, as discussed at our meeting January 26th, covering restricted No Left
Turn movements and actually providing a dedicated left hand turn lane as alternative
approaches.
8.3 To Amend Vehicle and Traffic Schedules XXV Reserved for Parkina for Persons
with Disabilities for Chestnut Street
Attached is the resolution written following the Board's discussion of the request to install
disability parking on Chestnut Street.
Page 3
8.4 Approval in Concept to the Installation of Fencing around Auburn Park
Resolution
Attached is a resolution written following the discussion of the additional fencing proposed
for Auburn Park by the Drop -In Center
8.3
the Tompkins County Court House
The County is looking for some designated on- street handicapped parking. Attached is a
part of the e-mail correspondence with Tim Logue. I find the county's approach unsatisfying.
They have a good sized off - street lot which could provide fully accessible parking for
disabled individuals, in the number they are requesting (2) for the public they serve. They
dedicate all their off - street parking to their private purposes and depend on the city's off -
street and on- street parking to supply their public needs. There is a fair amount of dedicated
parking spaces around (within a block of) the Court House that provides fully and partially
accessible spaces. If they need spaces right at the Court House, then it seems that they
should supply them immediately adjacent to the handicapped entrance to their building,
which is inside their parking lot. Alternately, we could look at all the on- street dedicated
spaces around the churches, Town Hall, and the Post Office which are nearby and
redistribute them. Lastly, we could just say yes to their request.
Pending (New or Returning) BPW Items:
• Fire Commissioners — Wood and South Street Traffic Diverters
• Tompkins County— Downtown Parking, MOU
• Aurora Street @ Commons — One -way versus Two -way Traffic
• Sidewalk @ 104 Worth Street — Review and Recommendation
• Cass Park Docks — Set Rental, Lottery for Use
• Cascadilla Boat Club — Use of Boathouse
W.J. Gray, P.E.
Superintendent of Public Works
February 4, 2010
Page 4
8.1
Resolution
WHEREAS, bids were received on January 17, 2011, for Construction Materials Testing
Services for the City of Ithaca's 2011 Construction Program, and
WHEREAS, the 2011 General Fund Budget included capital funds for construction materials
testing for various City projects under Capital Project Number 756, and
WHEREAS, CME Associates, INC., 527 South Main Street, Central Square, New York,
13036, submitted the low base bid for Construction Materials Testing Services not to exceed
$15,086.40, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the contract for Construction Materials Testing Services for the City of
Ithaca's 2011 Construction Program is hereby awarded to CME Associates, INC., 527 South
Main Street, Central Square, New York 13036 for their low submitted bid of $15,086.40, and
be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor be and hereby is authorized to execute this contract, upon the
advice of the City Attorney, and that the Superintendent of Public Works be and hereby is
authorized to administer the same.
Page 5
,
z
09
§
/ } {}
!
_
{
{
;)n
!0
a
i63,
§
-
(
§
}�
/
§
( /|
�
\
)
|
z
-
f§
Im§
|(7
|
! \§
§;
§0 k
!�
8.2 Addition of "No Left Turn" Sian at the Intersection of Aurora and Prospect
Streets — Resolution
(Aftemate #0)
WHEREAS, currently the City of Ithaca and Delta Engineers, Architects, & Land Surveyors
are working on a project to replace East Clinton Street Bridge and to reconstruct Prospect
Street, and
WHEREAS, the East Clinton Street Bridge is located in the City of Ithaca and carries East
Clinton Street (State Route 96B) over Six Mile Creek, and Prospect Street is a continuation
of Route 96B from the eastern limits of East Clinton Street to South Aurora Street, and
WHEREAS, as part of this project, the City Traffic Engineer has recommended keeping a
single eastbound lane of 16 feet width all the way up to the Prospect Street intersection, and
WHEREAS, keeping the full 16 feet all the way to the intersection would allow motorists and
bicyclists to share the space side by side more easily and this also will allow enough space
for a left turning vehicle to stay near the center line and to not block a right turning vehicle,
which would have enough room to get around the corner, and
WHEREAS, the City Traffic Engineer has also recommended prohibiting east bound left
turns from 4pm to 6pm on weekdays in order to eliminate the primary cause of congestion at
the intersection without penalizing pedestrians, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works hereby determines that the
design and right -of -way (ROW) maps to be prepared by Delta Engineers, Architects, & Land
Surveyors should reflect one lane eastbound approaching South Aurora Street, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That in accordance with the powers delegated to the Board of Public Works by
Section 346 of the City Code, the Board hereby adds "No Left Turn from Prospect Street to
South Aurora Street from 4pm to 6pm weekdays, east bound "entry to Schedule VI of the
Schedules of Traffic Regulations of the Board of Public works, effective with the completed
construction of the Prospect Street Reconstruction Project.
Page 6
Widening of Road at the Intersection of Aurora and Prospect Streets Resolution
(Alternate #1)
WHEREAS, currently the City of Ithaca and Delta Engineers, Architects, & Land Surveyors
are working on a project to replace the East Clinton Street Bridge and to reconstruct
Prospect Street, and
WHEREAS, the East Clinton Street Bridge is located in the City of Ithaca and carries East
Clinton Street (State Route 96B) over Six Mile Creek, and Prospect Street is a continuation
of Route 96B from the eastern limits of East Clinton Street to South Aurora Street, and
WHEREAS, as part of this project, the City of Ithaca retained Delta Engineers, Architects
and Surveyors, to prepare a design for the widening of Prospect Street at the intersection of
South Aurora in order to allow two lanes (a right and a left) to approach Aurora Street which
eliminate a cause of congestion for the dominant right turn movement, and
WHEREAS, the proposed design (referred to as alternative #1 as prepared by Delta) will
accommodate a 40 -foot long bus (AASHTO S -BUS 40) to make a left turn onto Prospect
Street from South Aurora and a 30 —foot long SU vehicle (AASHTO SU) to make a right turn
lane on to South Aurora from Prospect Street, and
WHEREAS, even though the existing traffic island at the intersection would remain, for the
proposed design, 108 square feet of right -of -way (ROW) would be required at the southwest
quadrant of the intersection in order to modify the curb line and provide the sidewalk
connection, additional utilities would need to be relocated and there would also be minimal
impact to acquire sidewalk at the northwest quadrant of the intersection, and
WHEREAS, staff finds this alternative acceptable, but not preferable, and
WHEREAS, the Board feels this alternative is the best course of action, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the staff is hereby directed to modify the design and ROW mapping to
include Alternative #1 in the project.
Page 7
3
s ', I'I II II II III
Y\
11
1\
j�
hk
eg
a
T Wa9�
•
S
�—
rap
_gyp
o) a
EF §Q
ijx••
`
—
t
3
s ', I'I II II II III
Y\
11
1\
j�
•S't�
hk
T Wa9�
_gyp
ijx••
`
—
t
•S't�
d
C
v
v
R
elf
VIII
�d'3
To: Bill Gray, Superintendent of Public Works
From: Tim Logue, Transportation Engineer
Date: January 14, 2011
Re: Prospect Street Reconstruction- Recommendation of Alternative
for the Intersection at South Aurora Street
I've reviewed the four alternatives for the intersection of Aurora & Prospect Street as
provided by Delta Engineers for the reconstruction project. Three alternatives show a
widening of the intersection in order to accommodate two eastbound turn lanes (a
separate left turn lane and a right turn lane). Each alternative shows the additional right -
of -way acquisition that would be required and the vehicle types that would be
accommodated by the widening and the larger radfus. The fourth alternative is the
original plan, which is to keep only one lane on the approach and leave the curb radius
as is, which is already somewhat longer from our last construction project there.
I've modeled the intersection for delay based on a turning movement count from 2005,
which I would expect to be pretty similar to current conditions. Adding the left turn lane
certainly provides a real benefit to motorists and would likely reduce the delay for that
movement by more than half. The costs would include the increased property
acquisition and additional construction costs for the widening. Alternatives 2 and 3 have
additional costs, I believe, in that both of them require a significant increase in the curb
radius on the southwest comer and a significantly longer crosswalk (which means a
longer exposure for pedestrians to high volumes of turning traffic) across the mouth of
Prospect Street.
Based on the additional costs and the very large size of the intersection, I would
recommend against Alternative 2 and Alternative 3. Currently, TCAT does not have any
buses tuming through that intersection and there is a 9 ton limit on South Aurora Street,
so besides a few local deliveries, there should not be many tractor trailer turning
through the intersection (in any case, continuing down to Seneca Street would make
much more sense). I think Alternative 1 is acceptable if the Board really wants to include
separated turn lanes, but it too, takes what is already a fairly pedestrian unfriendly
intersection and benefits motorists at the expense of pedestrians.
My recommendation would actually be to choose fourth alternative, which would be to
keep the width of the combined travel lane (11 feet) and bicycle lane (5 feet) all the way
up to the intersection, but with the bicycle lane ending approximately 100 feet before the
intersection. This is the appropriate way to end the bike lane because it does not dictate
a direction for cyclists, who may want to turn left and will need to "take the lane' in
order to get into the proper position. However, keeping the full 16 feet all the way to the
intersection, but leaving it as one, albeit wide, lane, would allow motorists and bicyclists
to sbare the space side by side more easily. It would also allow enough space for a left
turning vehicle to stay near the center line and to not block a right turning vehicle,
which would have enough room to get around the comer. I think this alternative
provides most of the benefits of a separated turn lane, but without penalizing the
pedestrian movements through this very busy intersection.
8.3 To Amend Vehicle and Traffic Schedules XXV Reserved for Parking for Persons
with Disabilities for Chestnut Street
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works is authorized by Section 346 -4 of the City Code to adopt
and to amend a system of Schedules in order to administer the Vehicle and Traffic Law, and
WHEREAS, the Office of the City Engineer recommends approving a Reserved Parking for
Persons with Disabilities (RPPD) application from a resident at 653 Chestnut Street, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works agrees that this request is in accordance with the policy
for RPPD (as adopted in 2010), now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Schedule XXV, Reserved for Parking for Persons with Disabilities, be
amended to add the following entry:
Name of Street Side Location
Chestnut Street East In front of 653 Chestnut Street
Page 8
8.4 Approval in Concept to the Installation of Fencing around Aubum Park
Resolution
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has received a request for additional fencing along
the perimeter of Auburn Park from the Drop -In Children's Center, but forwarded through the
Parks Commission, and
WHEREAS, the Parks Commission provided a resolution of support for the additional
fencing, provided that it followed a modified design containing three large strategically
placed openings as shown in a drawing attached to their resolution dated January 11, 2011,
and
WHEREAS, the Board recognizes that support for additional fencing may not be universal in
the larger Fall Creek neighborhood, but understands that fencing is reversible in that it is not
an expensive or complex installation, and that the Drop -In Center is still interested in
providing play areas closer to the center itself, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby approves in concept the installation of
additional fencing at Auburn Park by the Drop -In Children's Center, and directs staff to
review shop drawings for the proposed installation submitted by the Drop -In Center for
conformance with the Parks Commission's resolution prior to providing written approval of
the installation.
Page 9
9.3 To Amend the Vehicle and Traffic Schedules to Create Reserved Parking Spaces
For People with Disabilities on North Tioga Street and East Court Street along the
Tompkins County Court House
WHEREAS, the Engineering Office has received a request from Tompkins County to create
two on- street reserved parking space for people with disabilities (RPPD) near the Tompkins
County Court House, 320 North Tioga Street, and
WHEREAS, the County's preference is to have one reserved space on North Tioga Street
near the Court House driveway and to have another reserved space on East Court Street
near the driveway, and
WHEREAS, both of these spaces would continue to be metered spaces, and
WHEREAS, the County Court House has an off -street parking lot, but is mandated by New
York State to provide employee parking and does not have enough room to provide public
parking, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works is authorized by Section 346 -4 of the City Code to
adopt and to amend a system of Schedules in order to administer the Vehicle and Traffic
Law, and
WHEREAS, the City Transportation Engineer has recommended that the request be granted,
and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works is in agreement with the request and
recommendation, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Schedule XXV, Reserved Parking for People with Disabilities, be
amended to add the following entries to the "metered" section:
Name of Street Side Location
Page 10
Page] of3
Tim Logue - Re: Court House & On- street handicapped parking
From: "Ed Marx" <emarx @tompkins- co.org>
To: 'Tim Logue" <timlo@cityoPthaca.org>
Date: 1/14/20114:39 PM
Subject: Re: Court House & On- street handicapped parking
CC: "Bill Gray" <BILLG @cityofithaca.org >, " Carolyn Peterson" <carolynp @cityo...
Tim,
The simple answer is that we are mandated by the State to provide parking for court employees, have
committed to provide spaces for some, but not all, county employees on a first -come, first -serve basis, and are
not able to provide parking for the public In our lots.
Ed
>>> 'Tim Logue" <timlo@cityofithaca.org> 1/14/20114:27 PM >>>
Hi Ed and Martha,
First, let me apologize that I've basically dropped the ball on this topic. I kept having little questions and have
been absorbed with other things, and this request hasn't progressed much. Carolyn just stopped into my office
to ask me how things are moving on this, as other requests for reserved spaces on the Board of Public Works
agenda. Unfortunately, I have another question, namely, why can't the County satisfy the requirement to have
reserved parking for people with disabilities in their parking lot? These spaces would actually be more accessible
than spaces in the street and would avoid some of the other issues like getting out of a car into traffic with a
walker or unloading a wheelchair, etc. It is usually expected that a land use that has a parking lot would use the
off- street parking spaces to provide accessible parking spaces. Also, in the case of the Court House, there is a
pick -up /drop -off space in front and a few reserved parking spaces within a block.
Thanks,
Tim
>>>On 11/8/19, Martha Robertson wrote: >>>
Tim and Carolyn,
Forgive me; I misspoke in asking Carolyn for two spaces on Tioga St. near that curb cut! I'm sorry about this.
Apparently the original request to Tim was for one space north of the curb cut on Tioga Street and one space
on Court Street, either directly east or west of the curb cut between the Old Jail and Courthouse. The public
uses both the courthouse and the Old Jail heavily, and one handicapped space near each entrance would be our
strong preference.
Thank you both so much for moving this along!
Martha
>>>On 11/5/2010 12:57 PM, Carolyn Peterson wrote: >>>
Hi Tim,
I just wanted to follow up in an email regarding our conversation on handicapped parking on
Tioga Street at the County Courthouse. The county's preference is two spaces near the curb cut
south of the building (but north of the curb cut I think).
ble://C:\Documents and Settings \timlo \Local Settings\ Temp\XPgrpwise \4D307C50mimai... 1/18/2011