The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-16-11 Board of Public Works MeetingAgendaA meeting of the Board of Public Works will be held on Wednesday, February 16, 2011, at 4:45 p.m. in Common Council Chambers - Third Floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. 1. Additions or Deletions to Agenda (items 1-5: 15 min.) 2. Mayor's Communications 3. Communications and Hearings from Persons before the Board t. Response to Public MM 7. Administration and Communications (10 min.) 7.1 Departure of Fellow Board of Public Works Commissioner — Resolution 8. VOTING ITEMS 8.1 Buildings, Properties, Refuse, and Transit (10 min.) 8.1 Consent to Lead Agency Designation for Seneca Way Apartments — Resolution 8.5 Water and Sewer (10 min.) 8.5 Authorization for a Shared Services Agreement with New York State Department of Transportation for Sewer Line Installation 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS 9.1 Buildings, Properties, Refuse, and Transit 3.2 Highways, Streets, and Sidewalks (45 min.) 9.2A Wood Street and South Street Traffic Diverters — Discussion 9.21B Converting Aurora Street to Two-Way Traffic — Discussion 9.2C Request for Awning at 215 Dryden Road - Discussion 9.3 Parking and Traffic (15 min.) 9.3 TO Amend the Vehicle and Traffic Schedules hJ Create Reserved Parking Spaces for People with Disabilities on North TiOg8 Street and East Court Street along the Tompkins County Court House —Discussion and R8SOlUtiOO 1.5 Water and Sewer (15 min.) 9.4 Fees for Use of City Real Property — Continued Discussic! 10. New Business 11. Adiournment If you have a disability that will require special @rrangern8DLShDbern8deinorderforyOutOfu|k/parti{joate 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 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 0orequest written comments on lengthy or complex issues. This information may then bo used 10 create committee agendas, with the speaker author in dodtouttend Page 2 7.1 Departure of Fellow Board of Public Works Commissioner — Resolution I have taken the opportunity to draft a resolution thanking Ms. Brock for her work with the BPW. Please feel free to add, subtract, or otherwise modify my draft to produce the Board's "thank you" statement. 9.2B Converting Aurora Street to Two-Way Traffic — Discussion This has been a request for years. The original decision to convert to one-way was not eas but was deemed desirable at the time. Tim has provided a glimpse and indicated that a lot I Page 3 information is available if the Board wants to go back over this decision. One-way streets are safer for bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles. They provide a lot more capacity, while allowing substantial curb side parking. Conversion to two-way in a heavily trafficked area has a lot of impacts which we can discuss. Unfortunately, it is not easy to run an experiment to see if the original decision is still valid (worth the various costs) because of the cost to make the change. We can review this and expand the study as requested. 11 1 ISO III I illillill 610 1 We have requested the forms from Allen Treman Marina for their boat slip lottery. We can make them available • Wednesday. The lottery has not been filled (over filled) in recent years so slips been available at a fixed price lately. The price is set in Albany. We did not check any private marinas. • Tompkins County — Downtown Parking, MOU • 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 11, 2010 g� Ir WHEREAS, Cynthia Brock was appointed to the Board of Public Works on November 2008, and served on the Board through December 2010, and i WHEREAS, she brought her high level of community participation and contacts, initially honed with various civic associations and the PTA to the Board, and combined it with her professional interests and training in management and organizational systems to assist t Board in addressing and resolving a wide range • issues before it, and I WHEREAS, Cynthia's search for improvements, long range solutions, fairness and savings leave her to challenge staff and standing procedures as well as the public holding preconceived ideas or assumptions, prior to applying her energy, education, research, and experience to create, individually or jointly, new or improved approaches for the Board's consideration and implementation, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby thanks Cynthia Brock for her leadership, insight, creativity, passion and many selfless hours dedicated to public issues during her years • the Board. Page 5 WHEREAS, 6 NYCRR Part 617 ft State Environmental Quality Review Law and Chapter 176.6 of the City Code, Environmental Quality Review, require that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and state environmental law, and WHEREAS, State Law specifies that for actions governed by local environmental review, t■ lead agency shall be that Scala which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, and Affel I MR RNFZOMG Mnl ai 0 WHEREAS, the Planning Board has indicated its intention to act as lead agency for the s : » ®» review of a proposed site plan for Seneca Way A partments, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works may be an involved agency for 2® purposes of environmental review of this action, now therefore be it OMMO ' 2# ? . - . 0, 00' I & 4 1 a- I ill I FRIOVIDIMU a- 0 RIMURK-7421LIF11 0 2 am - . Page 6 CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY D - FOR P1_ _ VELOPMENT Telephone: Planning &Development – 607 ��foAyC L' 9n�� Ip<�el pment/IURA – 607- 274 -6559 Email: planning @cityofithaca.org mail: iura @cityofithaca.org Fax: 607- 274 -6558 1 1 Fax: 607 - 274 -6558 January 26, 2011 C1 T Y OF ITHACRI Mayor Carolyn Peterson, Chair, City of Ithaca Board of Public Works, City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Steven Beer, Chair, Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals, City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Mr. Carl F. Ford, F.E. Regional Director, NYSDOT, State Office Building, 333 E. Washington Street, Syracuse, NY 13202 RE: Seneca Way Apartments REQUEST FOR LEAD AGENCY STATUS The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has a pending application for site plan approval in connection with the above- referenced matter which has been determined to be a Type I Action under both the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance ( "CEQRO ") and the State Environmental Quality Review Act ( "SEQRA) and is subject to environmental review. In an effort to coordinate review under SEQRA and CEQRO, your Board or Agency has been identified as having "approval" authority over some aspects of this project. It is the Planning and Development Board's intention to act as Lead Agency in this review. Attached please find the CEQRO Full Environmental Assessment Form ( "FEAF ") Part 1, and supplemental information provided by the applicant. These are the minimum materials required under SEQRA and CEQRO for lead agency coordination. It is respectfully requested that you advise the undersigned within 30 days of your consent to the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board serving as Lead Agency for this project. In the event that you do not respond within thirty (30) days, the Planning Board will undertake Lead Agency status at that time. You may indicate your consent by countersigning this letter in the space indicated below and returning it to this office. Please contact Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner, at (607) 274 -6557, if you have questions. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, CITY OF 110-ya John Schroeder, Chair Site Plan Review Application Report _ L M= City of Ithaca Ithaca, New York December 22, 2010 Location and Setting -_ _' -- a `�� Cl o fl o i Figure 2: 140 Seneca Way Project Context 3 ITHACA URBAN RENEWAL 6 -2 CITY OF ITHACA a 7 21 are J 5.2 ITHACA URBAN R €NOMAL 7 Figure 3: 140 Seneca Way Property 2 EAST toy . 3 3.92 Ac STATE Location and Setting Figure 4: New looking from Green Street Figure S: View from Gateway Commons 3 Project Description 140 Seneca Way is a mixed residential/commercial project targeted at residents looking for a quality, urban and sustainable lifestyle within the lively business district of downtown Ithaca. The project will include 38 apartments (32 one- bedroom and 6 tNvo- bedroom) and ±9,300 square feet of office space over a 14 -space parking garage. An additional 41 space will be located in two parking lots on the east and west sides of the building. Apartments will be spacious with upscale finishes, premium appliances, quality casework, walk -in closets, washer /dryers and ample storage. Building amenities will include a private health club, roof terrace, indoor bike storage and additional secure storage. The emphasis on one - bedroom floor plans is driven by market research, which indicates the project will fill an important need downtown as it attracts empty nesters and young professionals into the urban core. Residents will live less than 1,000 feet from the center of the Commons and along bus routes to Cornell, Ithaca College and most other destinations in and around Ithaca. The commercial space will also address the significant need for Class A offices and will help attract and retain quality businesses within this important business district. The primary commercial tenant will be Warrant Real Estate. The project is located at a prominent gateway location into the City on the former Challenge Indus- tries property along a transitional zone from residential into commercial. HOLT Architects have creatively addressed the significant design challenges presented by the site topography and rock conditions by benching the garage /foundation into the slope, thus reducing the scale to an appropriate level for the residential properties to the north and establishing a distinctive posture for the building addressing the business district to the south and west. The building's mix of apartments and offices provides an ideal transitional use into downtown from the abutting district that is primarily residen- tial, but also includes commercial, institutional and multi - family properties. The 140 Seneca Way project will revitalize a now vacant site with a new urbanist development model that embraces smart growth strategies consistent with the Downtown Ithaca Alliance Plan. The new development will put a now tax - exempt property back on the tax rolls. The current owner (Challenge Industries) has attempted to sell the property for over 2 years with little interest or no interest until the currently proposed the plan. The project schedule anticipates a construction start for June 2011 and completion by March 2012. 10 (10/20/2010) Bill Gray - Fire Commissioners Request Regarding Traffic Devices on Wood & South St. Page 1 1 iq From: Bill Gilligan To: BPW CC: Gray, Bill; Dorman, Tom; Clairborne, J.R.; doreeno@ithacaha.com Date: 10/20/2010 12:02 PM Subject: Fire Commissioners Request Regarding Traffic Devices on Wood & South St. Attachments: BFC—LTR—BPW—WOOD—ST.pdf; BFC—WOOD—ST -Oct 2010.pdf Dear Mayor Peterson and Members of the Board of Public Works: The attached letter is a request from the Board of Fire Commissioners that you review and consider taking action with regards to the traffic calming devices located on Wood and South Street. I have also attached documentation to provide background on this request, which was initiated in 2007. Your consideration and action on this matter would be greatly appreciated by the Board of Fire Commissioners, the Fire Department, and the Ithaca Housing Authority. Sincerely, 310 WEST GREEN STREET III ii � rz a�yorwA-] - U4111ffi�-� OFFICEOF TEL (607) 272-1234 BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS October 11, 2010 FAX (607) 2722793 Dear Mayor Peterson and Members of the Board of Public Works: I'm am writing to you on behalf of the Board of Fire Commissioners, to bring your attention to an outstanding request and ask your assistance in resolving an issue with the traffic calming and traffic diverting devices that are installed on both Wood and South Streets. Our understanding is that the diveiters and speed humps on these two streets were originally installed as "temporary" remediation measures for traffic issues in that area. In the fall of 2007, a request for removal of the diverter located on Wood Street was made by Ms. Brenda Westlake, the Executive Director of the Ithaca Housing Authority. She recently confirmed that the Ithaca Housing Authority was still very interested in having the diverter located on Wood Street altered or removed. In 2007, the Board of Fire Commissioners sent a memorandum to Superintendent of Public Works William Gray supporting the JHA request and further stating that from the Fire Department's perspective it would improve public safety by improving the accessibility of fire apparatus to the residences in that area and in particular to the Titus Complex, which has a high volume of calls for Ithaca Fire Department service, In addition to the public safety aspect of this request, the Board of Fire Commissioners is also interested in having these devices removed or altered as deemed appropriate by the Board of Public Works to lessen the wear and tear on Fire Department vehicles caused by these devices. We would appreciate it if the BPW could review the status of these devices as soon as possible and take the appropriate action to address the concerns raised by both the Ithaca Housing Authority and the Ithaca Fire Department. Enclosed with this letter are copies of previous correspondence on this matter. Thank you for your Consideration of this matter. Sincerely, ellz-1101�� 45�®rlc William Gilligan, Cbairel�tlllaca Board of Fire Commissioners Cc: T. Dorman W.Gray E-11C. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" 0 Recycled Paper CITY OF L. k. 108 East Green Street, Suite 202 Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER Telephone: 607/274-6530 Fax: 607/274-6587 To: William Gray, P.E., Superintendent of Public Works From: Tim Logue, Transportation Engineer Date: October 26, 2007 Re: Wood Street Traffic Diverter In your September 25th letter to Brenda Westfall, Executive Director of the Ithaca Housing Authority, you asked me to review the traffic diverters and speed humps on Wood Street and South Street and to make a recommendation as to their future. I visited the area and collected the most recent data shown below. Wood Street between Plain Street and Fair Street (300 block) Count taken week of September 21-23, 2005 (Wed - Fri) Average Daily Traffic = 857 vehicles Ave AM Peak Hour = 42 vehicles Ave PM Peak Hour = 86 vehicles Average Speed = 20mph 85%ile speed = 26mph 1.8% of the vehicles were traveling faster than the 30 mph speed limit South Titus Ave between Albany Street and Plain Street (300 block) Count taken week of April 10, 2006 (Mon - Fri) Average Daily Traffic = 849 Ave AM Peak Hour = 30 vehicles Ave PM Peak Hour = 77 vehicles Average Speed = 21mph 85%ile speed = 27mph 2.2% of vehicles traveling faster than the 30 mph speed limit Based on this information and my visit, I would recommend removing the old diverters at the intersections of Fair Street with Wood Street and South Street mostly on the basis that they are unnecessary and unsightly. The semi -diverter at Fair and Wood Street also likely restricts turning movements into the relocated Titus Towers 11 driveway. I would recommend keeping the mid-block speed humps in place. `An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 40% I do not know if the Board of Public Works continues to support the goal of discouraging vehicular traffic on Wood Street and South streets. There are still signs posted on the semi -diverters stating "No Thru Traffic: Except Emergency Vehicles." However, it is clear that motorists at the intersections have no qualms about crossing over the diagonal bumps. Due to the capacity improvements at the edge of the neighborhood (along Route 13 and West Spencer Street), and based on observations and the above traffic counts, it does not seem that there is a significant volume of cut-through traffic. It seems to me that most through motorists have found alternate routes and that these streets see fairly average volumes of traffic for residential streets in the city. If the Board desires to retain the semi-diverters on Fair Street for some reason, I would recommend removing the existing signage and replacing it with object marker signage. The existing signs are not obeyed and are not enforceable. The boxes of rocks are not well delineated with reflective markings for nighttime visibility. However, I would not recommend retaining the box of rocks. If the Board desires to replace the semi -diverters with some sort of traffic calming, I would note that a few years ago there was a good deal of outreach from the Planning Department and a few traffic calming concepts were considered acceptable by attending residents. Since that time, the southwest area has largely built out and the abovementioned road projects were completed. My sense is that the fears of overwhelming traffic in the neighborhood have not played out and so there has been less interest in traffic calming. My suggestion would be to remove the semi-diverters, to monitor traffic volumes and speeds in the spring, and then to decide whether replacement traffic calming is warranted. I don't see any reason to remove the mid -block speed humps on the two streets. They help to moderate speeds along a three block stretch and seem to be in fairly good condition. We could probably touch up the signage a bit by adding location arrows and make it more visible by pruning a few trees. Page 1 of 1 Tim • . n from o .. of Commissioners From: •• • : Logue, Tim; Gray, Bill Da12/14/2010 14 PM • : Information from Board of •. s - CC: Dorman, Tom; Parsons, Tom; Gilligan, Bill; Peterson, Carolyn; Tom Hoard ... Attachments: Information from Board of Fire Commissioners Hello good sirs, I hope all is well and your preparations for this holiday season are complete or well underway. I'm forwarding you via this message correspondence from the Board of Fire Commissioners to the Board of Public Works. (This same message was also shared with Council after a presentation a couple of meeting ago.) This regards the traffic diverters installed on South and `,Hood streets. In short, the fire commissioners and fire department administration are asking for attention to the request begun in 2007 by the Ithaca Housing Authority to remove the diverters. There were two meetings with the neighborhood at the time where comments were solicited. In 2010, there's still no definitive answer that's been directly communicated. More details are in the forwarded message and attached materials. Please feel free to contact the fire commissioners or IFD admin directly or grab me with questions or concerns any time. Also, the fire commissioners would like to know when this request will appear as an agenda item for the BPW so that they may attend the meeting as well. Thanks in advance for your attention to this. Take care, 1. R. J. R. Clairborne 2nd Ward Alderman Vice Chair, City Administration Committee City of Ithaca Common Council 108 E. Green St. Ithaca, New York 14850 607.272.4905 * jclairbo @cityofithaca.org * AIM: jr4cc05 www.cityofithaca.org * www.jr4cc.org "The Second Ward is Powered by the People!" file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \timlo\Local Settings\ Temp \XPgrpwise \4D07CDE7coimai... 2/4/2011 Page I of I Hi Everyone, As requested at Wednesday night's CC meeting, Board of Fire Commissioner, Tom Hoard, provided our office with copies of letters that he referred to during his report from the Board of Fire Commissioners. They are attached, as well as an e-mail below from Bill Gilligan, Chair of the Board of Fire Commissioners that was sent on October 20, 2010: "Dear Mayor Peterson and Members of the Board of Public Works: The attached letter is a request from the Board • Fire Commissioners that you review and consider taking action with regards to the traffic calming devices located on Wood and South Street. I have also attached documentation • provide background • this request, which was initiated in 2007. 5 M • 11211 I R I • I I a I I m1i Lei 9 N &,no ItZI 0 i0a MIZIe., 1111 IWO I S.:1551 III-104F.1 � L111611 11vtW,111 11216� Sincerely, If you would like hard copies of this information, please let me know. Thank you, Sarah Sarah L. Myers City Clerk's Office Information Management Specialist 607-274-6570 - phone 607-274-6432 - fax file:HC: \Documents and Settings\timlo\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4D07CDE7coimai... 2/4/2011 •paw g CITY OF ITHACA 31 O' WEST GREEN STREET r1'hip,CA, iNEW YORK "9 x.850 , OFFIOE OF TI=L f60'7) 272.1234 J30APDQFPI89OOMMisSI0NER3 FAX (607) 272 -2793 0: City of Ithaca -Board of Public Works 'die T�ono� able Carolyn �'etex'son -hair , ftwp: Rob* S, Romanowski, fair -Board of Fire Coy mz SSian,ers Date; December 12, 2007 ; Re: , Mid -Block Speed H-gmps on Wood and South Streets On August 23, 2007, a request was fol *arded to the Super3ntehd6t Of �qjiG W!#, s by Brenda Westfall, Eiecufte Director of the Ithaca Housing A.uthoh;•ity, to remove the temporary traffic diverters and speed humps on Woods Street. ,A..repl * to this request was sent to Ms, Westfadl by Supexitstendentay. On October 26, 2007,'dim Logue, City ramsportaton lgineer, replied to this :: coxresp4nnence after investigating the trg situation?: at b.otla Wood Sheet cl :SQuth Streei. We.hecoxii.menOe the removal of the �i��ez�eRs and ih. speecl.iz�znp� oii boils ,, ,i terser io s with Fair Street. ihis'recom�mendati®n is entiusiasticAll' supported by the �,. Cth04 Fire.De�artx neat as access to the Titus To complex, has beech severely, 0onaprozrnised by, these divexters as well as the speed lz�imps. It was disap aintixig to further mad that li�xw Logue did not t econhxnaeucl reinaaval of the m cl�l?Icick speed liuimps as well. Ve recotz' mend�the rexrnova of the South and Wpm ; Siheetmzd -bloel speed,h ps and the installation of the xbtersecti6z ele�atons as' , _ ;�replacerrientSr .. . The JBoard.of dire, Comillissiohex.s and:tze Dire Depariment'fi11y i�Adexstand-the c`ityy °s commttme'nt.to faraffic ca izng,.but the speed liihz zps are whea%g lhav c o the :.._ 1 ejpai nxheui's e$icleS aiatl bpdgets,.as',Nell as increasing emergency remonse'tmes; Out laiest casualty wthp #6 pumper true% which had to have its reaz'sl xzz gs hep�aced. `i'hia. sxt�xatio lies eq�uipweriit.t;ut of serry de a� resi �icts tie t ieZ i ,s otxse to 6.tgo jw ; es ec ally,in i. 6searoas hahsinig our elderly anid in fi citizens�l of irn:.;the pit 'apd'z the to wri.' Your: cansicle'zatizoxz to our request will, be de epXy appre0atedby bothZae Depai t ent and tae Board. Cc; Co><x*ssioneir Raymond Schlathex 3 0, g &a o 196 ' August 31, 2007 ITHACA HOUSING AUTHORITY 800 SOUTH PLAIN STREET ITHACA, NY 14850 (607) 273 -8629 _ I t t Mr. Bill Gray, Superintendent Board of Public Works City of Ithaca 108 ,Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Mr. Gray: Our property at Titus Towers is currently undergoing construction and as part of that construction, our Wood Street entrance. was relocated several feet to the oast in an effort to remove it from City property. There is a speed bump and island located on the street at that entrance as well. We are formally requesting that the island and speed bump be removed for the following reasons: • Since the driveway was moved several feet to the east, the speed bump is now located immediately in front of the driveway entrance, which makes it difficult for IHA to maintain our driveway during the snow plowing seasons • Each car entering the parking lot has to drive over the bump, whereas before ` the bump was to the east of the driveway and did not pose a problem. • Our residents in wheelchairs will have an easier time navigating through the entranceway without the island and speed bump, • It is my understanding that Wood Street is now a through street and the island creates an eyesore to the neighborhood and serves no purpose at this point. Thank you for your considerati®n. If you would like to discuss this or visit the site for clarification of my request, please feel free to contact me at 273 -8629, ext, 243. Sincerely, Brenda C. Westfall Executive Director BCW /do Hearing Impaired (607) 273 -9-172 _ F 1 (607 )273 -i l D t 310 WEST GREEN STREET OFFICE OF TEL (607) 272-1234 BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS October 11, 2010 FAX (607) 272-2793 Dear Mayor Peterson and Members of the Board of Public Works: I'm am writing to you on behalf of the Board of Fire Commissioners, to bring your attention to an outstanding request and ask your assistance in resolving an issue with the traffic calming and traffic diverting devices that are installed on both Wood and South Streets. Our understanding is that the diveiters and speed humps on these two streets were originally installed as "temporary" remediation measures for traffic issues in that area. In the fall of 2007, a request for removal of the diverter located on Wood Street was made by Ms. Brenda Westlake, the Executive Director of the Ithaca Housing Authority. She recently confirmed that the Ithaca Housing Authority was still very interested in having the diverter located on Wood Street altered or removed. In 2007, the Board of Fire Commissioners sent a memorandum to Superintendent of Public Works William Gray supporting the JHA request and further stating that from the Fire Department's perspective it would improve public safety by improving the accessibility of fire apparatus to the residences in that area and in particular to the Titus Complex, which has a high volume of calls for Ithaca Fire Department service. In addition to the public safety aspect of this request, the Board of Fire Commissioners is also interested in having these devices removed or altered as deemed appropriate by the Board of Public Works to lessen the wear and tear on Fire Department vehicles caused by these devices. We would appreciate it if the BPW could review the status of these devices as soon as possible and take the appropriate action to address the concerns raised by both the Ithaca Housing Authority and the Ithaca Fire Department. Enclosed with this letter are copies of previous correspondence on this matter. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, William Gilligan, Chair, Ithaca Board of Fire Commissioners Cc: T. Dorman W.Gray Enc. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program' Recycled Paper . -c � 541 CITY OF ITHACA 108 Vast Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 DEPARTIMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS William J, Gray, PE. Superintendent l City Engineer Telephone: 6071274 -6527 Fax: 6071274 -6587 September 25, 2007 Brenda C. Westfall Executive Director Ithaca Housing Authority 800 South Plain Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Wood Street Traffic Diverter Dear Ms. Westfajl, This letter is in response to your request dated August 31, 2001 to remove the diagonal traffic diverter on Wood Street diagonal to your western most driveway for the Titus Towers, facility. By copy of this letter I will forward the request to Tim Logue the City's Traffics Systems Engineer and ask him to provide the background and a summary recommendation to the Board of Public Works. The traffic diverters and speed bumps in this neighborhood (both Wood Street and South Street) were installed as part of the immediate mitigation measures for traffic calming while the City was contemplating major developments in the Southwest. A traffic plan was developed which was designed to facilitate traffic movements in an organized pattern and once it was fully implemented then temporary devices oil Wood and South Streets were to be removed. That traffic plan has never been completed. A change in the City's administration changed the City's approach to traffic management and Southwest development. ' While it may take a modest amount of time to review files and collect any data that is necessary for analysis of your request you should feel free to contact Mr. Logue or, myself to check on progress. I expect to take Mr. Logue's recommendation and your request it to the Board of Public Works in the next two months for their review, Very Truly Yours, William J. Gray, P.R. Superintendent of Public Works City of Ithaca, New York CC: Carolyn Peterson, Mayor Tina Logue, Transportation Engineer WJG /jm An Equal Opportuniry Employ-er with a commitment to workforce ditersi#ication." �� . SOUTH OF THE CREEK TRAFFIC CALMING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING TITUS TOWERS 11 Monday, February 4, 2008 7:00 p.m. 1. Welcome and Introductions (10 min) 2. The reason and impetus for the meeting (5 min) 3. A short(ish) history of traffic management and calming in the South of the Creek neighborhood (20 min) a. In the context of Southwest Development b. A pilot project for the City's Traffic Calming Program c. Iterations of plans after the Six Point Traffic Plan d. Changes in traffic volumes in the area since 4. The matter at hand - what to do with the old diverters - Board of Public Works agenda and options (30 min) a. Do Nothing b. Leave diverters in place, but with some modifications (e.g., planters, change signage, modify end by Titus driveway) c. Remove diverters and watch d. Remove diverts and implement a traffic calming plan for the area (could include plan development and neighborhood balloting) e. Start traffic calming planning process all over 5. What should the neighborhood do at this point? List items of agreement. What to do with non- consensus items? Which items should be communicated to the Board of Public Works (and potentially Common Council)? How should they be conveyed? (30 min) Note: depending on how many people attend, we may want/need to do some of this work in smaller groups in order to be more productive - or, at least, the facilitators may need to keep the discussions moving. December 12, 2007 Minimization of damage and liability from leaks Proiect Development Approach Document meter accuracy Replace only those meters that fail accuracy test, and cannot be repaired Prevent meter failure Project Scope Large meter replacement with Automatic Meter Reader (AMR) system installation Large Meter AMR System Retrofit Small Meter replacement with AMR Small Meter AMR retrofit AMR Drive -By System all hardware, software, interface to the existing billing system, and training City Wide Leak Detection System Ongoing (3 years) water utility performance, consulting services, large meter accuracy guarantee, testing Large meter replacement with AMR system installation replacement of 22 meters, isolation valves meters not previously tested to be tested to determine accuracy Large meter AMR system retrofit meters that passed AWWA testing or that Johnson Controls has repaired and passed test (20) Remove existing registers, install new registers and connect to Master meter transmitters Johnson Controls responsible for repairing any damaged meter vaults, sidewalks, curb stops, roadways, replacing isolation valves Proiect Benefits NYS Local Government Records Management Grant: $48,000 (system must be installed by the end of June 2008) Mutually agreed to billable usage increases: $79,398 per year City has earmarked $116,243 for project Billable usage based on 2007 rates (water and sewer) Proiect Results In Customer Service Improvements Eliminates safety hazards Accurate meter reads Reduced system losses Financial benefit totaling $226,199 annually Installation within six months Ongoing large meter testing /repair services Third party financing does not impact City's debt capacity Superintendent Gray stated that if the Board agreed, he would proceed with writing a resolution that would authorize the start of a capital project. Commissioner Tripp stated that she would like to hear from satisfied customers of Johnson Controls who have had similar systems installed about their experience before the Board makes a decision. Superintendent Gray stated that he would work with the Board to establish a time frame for implementation of this project. Wood Street Traffic Diverter Superintendent Gray explained that the traffic diverters and speed bumps in this neighborhood (both Wood Street and South Street) were installed as part of the immediate mitigation measures for traffic calming while the City was contemplating major developments in the Southwest. A traffic plan was developed which was designed to facilitate traffic movements in an organized pattern and once it was fully implemented, the temporary devices were scheduled to be removed. That traffic plan has never been implemented. A change in the City's administration changed the City's approach to traffic management and Southwest development. .- Ae, \ 07 December 12, 2007 He asked staff to review the traffic diverters and speed humps on Wood Street, and make a recommendation as to their future. Traffic Engineer Logue visited the area, collected data, and has recommended the removal of the old diverters at the intersections of Fair Street with Wood Street and South Street mostly on the basis that they are unnecessary and unsightly. The semi- diverter at Fair and Wood Street also restricts turning movements into the relocated Titus Towers 11 driveway. He further recommended keeping the mid -block speed humps in place. Traffic Engineer Logue's recommendation stated that if the Board of Public Works continued to support the goal of discouraging vehicular traffic on Wood Street and South streets that the existing signs posted on the semi - diverters stating "No Thru Traffic: Except Emergency Vehicles" should remain. However, it is clear that motorists at the intersections have no qualms about crossing over the diagonal bumps. Due to the capacity improvements at the edge of the neighborhood (along Route 13 and West Spencer Street), and based on observations and traffic counts, it does not seem that there is a significant volume of cut - through traffic and motorists have found alternate routes. These streets see fairly average volumes of traffic for residential streets in the City. The recommendation further explained that if the Board desires to retain the semi - diverters on Fair Street for some reason, the recommendation would be to remove the existing signage and replace it with object marker signage. The existing signs are not obeyed and are not enforceable. The boxes of rocks are not well delineated with reflective markings for nighttime visibility, so he recommends that they not be retained. If the Board desires to replace the semi - diverters with some sort of traffic calming, it should be noted that a few years ago there was a good deal of outreach from the Planning Department and a few traffic calming concepts were considered acceptable by attending residents. Since that time, the southwest area has largely built out and the abovementioned road projects were completed. The fears of overwhelming traffic in the neighborhood have not played out and so there has been less interest in traffic calming. Traffic Engineer Logue recommended that the semi - diverters be removed and that traffic volumes and speeds be monitored in the Spring. After that a decision can be made regarding whether replacement traffic calming is warranted. He further recommended that there doesn't seem to be any reason to remove the mid -block speed humps on the two streets because they help to moderate speeds along a three -block stretch and seem to be in fairly good condition. The signage could perhaps be touched up a bit by adding location arrows and visibility could be improved by pruning a few trees. Rick Grossman, Wood Street resident, was invited by the Board to participate in the discussion of this item. He explained that he is a 20 year resident of the Wood Street area and that he is aware of the different traffic calming measures that the City has implemented throughout the City. He is concerned that the recommendation from the City's Traffic Engineer was given to the Board before it was given to the neighborhood and that the neighborhood should be given a chance to respond to the recommendation before the Board takes any action on it. He further stated that it would be remiss to remove the diverters and then see if traffic calming is needed in the neighborhood. He explained that due process is needed with involvement of the whole neighborhood because this would have a significant impact on it. He also requested that the Board give the neighborhood an opportunity to respond to the recommendations from the Traffic Engineer and thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak to them on this topic. Commissioner Schlather stated that the neighborhood should be consulted and given the opportunity to discuss the recommendations at length. He further stated that he was contacted by the Chair of the Board of Fire Commissioners regarding the diverters on Wood Street to see if the Board could perhaps make a recommendation to replace the diverters with something a little less dramatic to protect the fire trucks as they go through that area to respond to various calls. The Chair of the Board of Fire Commissioners indicated that their Board would make a written recommendation to the Board of Public Works regarding this item. December 12, 2007 Common Council Liaison Coles thanked Commissioner Schlather for his comments. She explained that the reason the residents of the neighborhood were not sent an e- mail about this topic was because after the initial discussion by the Board on this topic she was going to contact the neighborhood for their input as well. She stated that both she and Rick Grossman respect Traffic Engineer Logue very much and they both feel that there are sufficiently good reasons why this item should come back to the Board after the neighborhood has had an opportunity to provide their input. She further stated that if the traffic diverters were removed, there should be some traffic- calming device already in place to keep traffic through that area low. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the current pattern of traffic flow through the neighborhood to Wegmans, Cecil A. Malone Drive, and the southwest area, the recommendations from Traffic Engineer Logue and what other traffic calming measures could be implemented in this area. Superintendent Gray stated that his view of traffic calming is different and the City felt that the traffic load had to be shared between Albany and Plain Streets. He further explained why the City installed speed humps in this area and that there isn't agreement on what should be done here. Commissioner Chapman stated that he highly respects Traffic Engineer Logue's work and abilities and noted that he is very community oriented. This item was brought before the Board by Traffic Engineer Logue as a "heads -up ". The Board would not proceed with a decision of such importance without the input from the residents in the neighborhood. There are other reasons why the diverters need to be looked at, such as speed issues, enforcement issues, and public use of the street. He explained that there are better ways to accommodate what the community wants and the City needs in this instance. The Board requested that this item come back to them for review and consideration, in February 2008, after the neighborhood has had an opportunity to review the recommendations and provide input. Franklin Marketplace Superintendent Gray explained to the Board that the owner of the Franklin Plaza, located at 423 -435 Franklin Street (intersection of Route 13 and Third Street), expressed an interest earlier in the year on working with the City to clean up and landscape a small patch of land bordering her building and Route 13. Currently the land is being used as storage for DPW equipment. She has made three requests: ® Removal of the DPW equipment ® Landscaping ® Installation of curb, curb cuts and sidewalks Superintendent Gray stated that as the City's industrial operation (Water and Sewer) has gotten more sophisticated neighbors (mutual housing for community garden, service center for wastewater plant, Franklin Marketplace for strip mall), it has tried to be a good community member and upgrade its appearance and operations. The City is about to build a new cold storage building and can do other things to improve its appearance but it will always be an industrial operation. This is a topic that staff would like the Board's views on. Commissioner Chapman stated that the Board should keep in mind other long -term business owners in the area along the waterfront and just because the City has been there for a long time doesn't necessarily mean that it's best use of the land. There may be a better place for the City's commercial facilities. Commissioner Schlather stated that it may take time to move city facilities, if that is how the City decides to proceed, but that in the meantime there are places where communities co -exist with industry uses and also provide inviting shopping areas. The City should consider what it could do to clean up its area and develop it more into an urban landscape that would make it more attractive since that area also includes the Farmer's Market and the Sciencenter. :(2/4/2011) Kathrin Gehring - NYSDOT/Seneca St Page From: Govind Acharya <govind73@gmail.com> To: BPW <bpw@cityofithaca.org> Date: 1/27/2011 1:39 PM Subject: NYSDOT/Seneca St Hi all, Last night, I brought up the issue of Aurora St being one-way and the Mayor mentioned that one problem is that Seneca St being a state highway makes it difficult for it to happen. She asked Bill about it to clarify and his expression didn't clear it up for me :-). So, I'd like to know at the next meeting (or via email) what that issue is, if any. ThanksH best, Govind (2/4/2011) Kathrin Gehring - NYSDOT /Seneca Street Page 1 From: Tim Logue To: Gehring, Kathrin CC: Gray, Bill Date: 1/28/2011 11:48 AM Subject: NYSDOT /Seneca Street Hi Kathy, You asked me to prepare some information about Govind's email in regard to the idea of converting Aurora Street to two -way operation and what would need to be done, especially in relation to NYSDOT. My thoughts are below. NYSDOT owns Seneca Street from the Tuning Fork to Route 13. Any modifications we would like to make to the intersection of Aurora and Seneca street would require a Highway Work Permit from NYSDOT. To get a permit from them, we would need to submit drawings (stamped by a P.E.) of the proposed modifications for the traffic signal, signs, pavement markings and any other work. NYSDOT would likely require a traffic study of the impacts of conversion, especially a traffic capacity analysis for Seneca & Aurora, which would include an estimation of the demand for southbound travel. Since Seneca Street is one -way eastbound, we wouldn't have to look at southbound left turn (which would decrease capacity), but we might want to look at them ourselves for East MLK Jr. /State Street. We could work with the ITCTC and use their travel demand model to help make these estimates. There was a traffic study completed in 2001 for the Planning Department by SRF & Associates about downtown traffic circulation and some other ideas. I have a copy of it as a pdf if Govind or others are interested. Also, some of these ideas were studied in an environmental impact statement for downtown development in 2003 or 2004. Lastly, the BPW passed a resolution on July 12, 2006 rescinding an earlier resolution to convert Aurora Street between Court & Buffalo to two -way operation. Staff was fairly neutral about making it two -way and the BPW didn't see the benefits outweighing the costs. I'm assuming that the idea is to convert the length of Aurora from Court all the way through to East State /MLK Jr. Street. If so, the following things would need to be addressed: 1. New signal heads for southbound approach at Aurora & Buffalo, wiring, controller equipment, and new programming 2. New signal heads for southbound approach at Aurora & Seneca, wiring, controller equipment, and new programming 3. New signal heads for southbound approach at Aurora & East State /MLK Jr Street, wiring, controller equipment, and new programming. This traffic signal would also need to be analyzed for mast arm capacity. We might need a new pole and mast arm to support the signal heads. This signal is on the TIP for replacement with design beginning in 2011. 4. There may be modifications needed at the traffic signal at Aurora and Court. This signal is on the TIP for replacement with design beginning in 2011. 4. All signs on the west side of the street would need to be removed and /or repositioned 5. Parking meters would need to be relocated, at least some of them. 6. Remove all or most of the pavement markings (including the new epoxy markings at Court & Aurora) and restripe for two way traffic. There may be other things that I'm not thinking of at this time, but this should give one a sense of the scale of what would need to be done to make Aurora Street two -way. Hope that is helpful, Tim Tim Logue City Transportation Engineer Office of the City Engineer City of Ithaca 108 E. Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 274 -6535 timlo@cityofithaca.org (2/'2011 � Kathrin Gehring -Fwd: Proper Puss awning Page 1 From: Rachael Brown <rachael@properpuss.com> To: <kgehring@cityofithaca.org> Date: 2/3/2011 2:23 PM Subject: Fwd: Proper Puss awning ---------- Forwarded message ---- - - - - -- From: Rachael Brown <rachael@properpuss.com> Date: Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:21 PM Subject: Proper Puss awning To: kgehringe@cityofithaca.org Rachael Brown Proper Puss 215 Dryden Rd. Ithaca, NY 14850 607 269 0929 rachael@properpuss.com www.properpuss.com fA-Q Kv-1 *W 3 P1 P) Is 5) ..MAP SHOWING LANUJ Vr NtAL R. ac MAI MA hm m- HOWARD..." DATED 6/2/1980 AND LAST REVISED 912412009 BY JAMES J. DENKENBERGER. Q� P ;.9't FACE OF CURB -� BRICPC SURFACE � - Z�� 0 CONCR tAf3� a 98-' W, 29.00' 3 � FACE ON STREET LINE j i9 °50 29" E `r— 77 o y 45. 6 RIGHTS OF INGRESS & " - m� EGRESS SHARED IN COMMON OVER 2,,30' STRIP IJ i LI OVER 1.5, D I V V aa ��yy q a �y A. LEONARD !D LE NARDC ' (0 . .. ).433912-003 - ENCRO.� AGREEN NC. 64-10-4 ' , CITY f SEE 66 9.042 ACRES .00' BUILDING 9 °50 29" E N a 2' 5 I A° —°^ 3.6' JOSEPH A. LEONAR O ° w LEONARD LEONARDO. INST. NC.433912 - 004 TAX AP NC. 64-10-5 AR = . G 73 ACRES ® U ® _I ' 27.0 89 ®52'05" W 47.65' i► .. 9 9 ®52 ® J' 0. H 74. -._' 3.7'1 0 3'# )RNER MPS S ASPHALT DRNE - D- IN COA4MON G m 10� 0f � ., CONCRETE WALL ,V P0?1 ENS CE EPORCH i. N4s WOOD t.3 t DECK ® ' z BUILDING ° o No. 240 �' m � a JOSEPH A. & DONNA L. PETRILLGSE EENTRYE BOOK 844, PAGE 245 � TAX MAP NO. 64 -16- A =0.057 ACRES 2ND STORY -1 CONCRETE & STONE WALK PIPE ^ View Larger Photo - Image Mate Online Photo for 64.-10-5 in City of Ithaca Page I of I -M http:llasmsdg2.tompkins-co.orglbigPhoto.aspx?file=VOL317000328150070006400000100... 1/26/2011 § 170 -12 ITHACA CODE § 170 -13 B. Factors to be considered. In considering whether to grant such approval, the Commons Advisory Board or the Superintendent may, in their discretion, consult with other appropriate City officials and boards, and shall consider the following factors: (1) Whether the proposed display ,rill be set up in a manner that maintains sufficient space for unencumbered pedestrian passage along the sidewalk ; (2) Whether there will be adequate supervision of the display by the business; (3) Whether all appropriate safety concerns are addressed; (4) Whether the display will be removed from the public street or sidewalk_ at the close of the hours of operation of the business. C. Conditions. (1) No permit shall be issued for a period in excess of one year. (2) Any permit may include such additional conditions which the issuing official or body may deem necessary or appropriate. (3) All permits shall be subject to the fees set forth in § 170 -10, above. § 170 -13. Awnings, signs, canopies, marquees and other building projections. A. The provisions of this section shall be enforced by the Building Commissioner and, as applicable, the Fire Department. B. Any person who seeks to constrict, install or maintain an awning, canopy, sign, marquee e or other building projection such that it constitutes an encroachment upon City property, shall require a license, as described herein. Any such awning, canopy, sign, marquee or other building projection for which an application for construction, installation or substantial replacement is received, after the effective date of the amendment of this chapter that was enacted on May 6, 2009, shall also require a building permit from the # Building Commissioner *and shall be subject to the provisions of this section. The Building Commissioner may require the submission of drawings or other materials prior to ruling on the request for such a building permit. C. Awnings. No person shall place or maintain any awning over any sidewalk unless the same shall be supported by metal rods and a frame. Every part of such awning and the supports therefor shall be at least seven feet above the sidewalk except for a nonrigid valance hanging no more than one foot below the rigid frame. Following the granting of a license for encroachment, the installation of a standard awning (See definition., ) shall not require the review of any other City agency other than the Building Commissioner, except for installations normally within the purview of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission or which are associated with properties described in § 170 -613, above. 1. Editor's Dote: See § 170 -2, Definitions. 170:12 08 - 01 -2009 D. Easement, may be temporary te.g., ror auJacenL CUM L1ut:uvn) U, yciiiiai L,i. ��•, u }..r� or access), and subject to conditions; runs with the benefited land. § 170 -5. Authority to grant approval for use of City property; no entitlement to approval. A. The authority to grant approval for a permit for a use located on the primary or secondary Ithaca Commons (for outdoor dining, mobile vending, events, exhibits, freestanding signs and temporary planters) is and shall be vested in the Commons Advisory Board or its designee, subject to the provisions of Chapter 157, Commons, of this Code. B. The authority to grant approval for a permit for outdoor dining or for a mobile vending cart or vehicle at a location other than the primary or secondary Ithaca Commons is and shall be vested in the Superintendent of Public Works or his/her designee (for example, the City Clerk). C. The authority to convey a permanent easement across or involving City land is and shall be vested in the Common Council, and no such easement shall be issued without the Council's approval. D. The authority to grant approval for a lease for use of City property is and shall be vested in the Common Council, except that the Board of Public Works is hereby authorized to enter into nonrenewable leases for a term not to exceed one year, of non -park property not currently used or needed for other City purposes, consistent with the provisions of § 20, Subdivision 2 -a, of the General City Law of New York State. E. The authority to grant approval for temporary and exclusive (or semi - exclusive) use of City parkland or a City natural area shall be vested in the Superintendent of Public Works (or his/her designee). F. The authority to grant approval for a license for any other use of or encroachment upon City real property (except for an encroachment upon parkland, or as otherwise specified herein) or for a temporary easement (not exceeding one year) is and shall be vested in the Board of Public Works. No such license or temporary easement shall be issued without a determination that the property is not currently used or needed for other City purposes, and a majority vote to approve or authorize the same, by the Board of Public Works. G. The authority to grant approval of any easement across or license to encroach upon or make nontransitory use of parkland shall be vested solely in the Common Council. H. The granting of any permit, license, lease or easement hereunder shall be solely at the discretion of the authorized officer, agency or board of the City of Ithaca, as set forth above. Nothing herein shall be construed to require the granting of such permit, license, lease or easement, nor shall any person be presumed to be entitled to such permit, license or lease, for any reason. The granting of any particular permit, license, lease or ca -sement shall not be deemed to create a precedent binding upon any other application. § 170 -6. Applicability of other Code provisions. A. The leases, licenses and permits provided for by this chapter shall be in addition to any permit required by Chapter 146, Building Code Enforcement, or other provisions of this Municipal Code or applicable laws, rules or regulations of the City of Ithaca or State of New York, and shall not release any person from any duty or liability imposed by the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code or any other applicable provision of this Municipal Code or others laws, rules or regulations of the City of Ithaca or State of New York. « -;t}, City tax parcels 70. -5 -1 and 70. -2 -22, and 9.3 • Amend the Vehicle and Traffic Schedules to Create Reserved Parking Spaces for People with Disabilities on North Tioga Street and East Court Stre �talo�n 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, 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 ' o • 57M=3;1 7=1=117C It ?dpt and t amend • a system f Schedules in orde • r t administer the Vehicle and Traffic 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 ,?mended to add the following entries to the "metered" section: T noN �_. �_ �, North Tioqa Street West One at the Tompkins County Court House East Court Street South One (1) space iust east of the driveway between the Court House & the Old Jail Page 5