HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-05-12 Board of Public Works Meeting AgendaBOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING
A meeting of the Board of Public Works will be held on Monday, November 5, 2012, 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 the Public
S. Reports
Special Committees of the Board
Council Liaison
Board Liaisons
Superintendent and Staff
Other Department Heads
6. Approval of Minutes
6.1 October 15, 2012, Regular Meeting Minutes
7. Administration and Communications
8. VOTING ITEMS
8.1 Buildings, Properties. Refuse and Transit
A. Recommendations to Divest Unused City Property — Resolutions
1) Resolution: Parcel 68.-2-9.2 — 700 East Seneca Street
2) Resolution: 344 Elmira Road Frontage — "Garcias Restaurant"
3) Resolution: 340 Elmira Road Frontage — "Burger King Restaurant"
4) Resolution: 338 Elmira Road Frontage : 'Monroe MufFler'
5) Resolution: 334 Elmira Road Frontage — "Jiffy Lube"
6) Resolution: 330 Elmira Road Frontage — Vacant
7) Resolution: 328 Elmira Road Frontage — "Arby's Restaurant"
8) Resolution: 326 Elmira Road Frontage — "Wendy's Restaurant"
9) Resolution: 324 Elmira Road Frontage — "Moe's and Walmart"
10) Resolution: 323 - 325 Elmira Road Frontage — "Friendlys Restaurant'
11) Resolution: Parcel 111.-9-3 —1105 Giles Street
8.2 Highways. Streets and Sidewalks
8.3 Parking and Traffic
8.4 Creeks. Bridges and Parks
8.5 Water and Sewer
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS
9.1 Appeal of Water Bill for New York State Dept. of Transportation Third Street
Office
9.2 Request for Reserved Parking for Persons with Disabilities Parking Space for
522 Dryden Road
9.3 Request for Reimbursement of Pavilion Fee from Ithaca Motion Picture Project
and Friends of Stewart Park
9.4 Request to Increase Pavilion Rental Fees from Ithaca Youth Bureau
9.5 Request to Move Water Service from City to Bolton Point from Beta Theta Pi
Fraternity
9.6 Sidewalk Program Proposed Policy
10. New Business
11. Adjournment
If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully
participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 607 - 274-6570 at least 48 hours before the
meeting.
The Board of Public Works meets on the second, third and fourth Wednesdays of the months at 4:45 p.m. All meetings are voting
meetings, opening with a public comment period. Meetlng agendas are created from prior public input, Department operating, planning
issues, and requests made to the Superintendent. The Board reserves the right to limit verbal comments to three minutes and to request
written comments on lengthy or complex issues. This information may then be used to create committee agendas, with the speaker or
author invited to attend.
Notes for BPW Aaenda. November 5. 2012
8.1A Recommendations to Divest Unused City Property —Resolutions
Attached are resolutions that cover a number of properties that the Board has considered for a
recommendation to Common Council to dispose of them. This process has started and
stopped several times over the last ten years, presumably because it is easier to hold on to
something that you own rather than actually go to the effort to dispose of it, especially if it
resides quietly in the background. It was restarted last year by Common Council inserting a
revenue in the 2012 budget from the sale of unused city land. I believe the initial list of
properties for consideration had around 140 entries, and the Elmira Road frontage property
would have been one entry. We have some distance to go. The survey or property mapping
was last provided with the agenda for our October 22, 2012, meeting.
9.1 Appeal of Water Bill for New York State Dept. of Transportation Third Street Office
I am not sure where this unresolved water bill issue has been residing for the last several
years. A review of the information provided indicates that the NYSDOT facility in Ithaca has
routinely been getting minimum bills for a 2 inch meter. In 2006 the water bills were running
around $300. Then in early 2007 we sent a bill for $1200, and shortly thereafter one for
$11,000. It is not surprising that they objected. It appears that we should send an adjusted
water bill similar to the November 2007 bill of $315.84.
9.2 Request for Reserved Parkin for Persons with Disabilities Parking Space for 522
Dryden Road
The Board, at its last review of a request for an on- street handicapped parking space in a
neighborhood, indicated that they thought these requests should usually be handled by staff.
Staff has pointed out to me that the current system requires Board approval of individual
requests. Presumably this could be changed, where the Board would hear only appeals of
decisions made by staff, based on the adopted policy. It is possible that staff would have to
develop a set of rules to implement the policy which will serve as guidelines for applicants. The
Page 2
current request is provided for your consideration. It appears reasonable due to the installation
of the bike lane on Ithaca Road and the residential parking permit system on adjacent streets.
9.3 Request for Reimbursement of Pavilion Fee from Ithaca Motion Picture Project
and Friends of Stewart Park
The Ithaca Motion Picture Project would like to have the city waive the pavilion fee and refund
it to them following their event on October 13, 2012. Over the years I have routinely turned
down requests to waive fees for special events in our parks. I feel that the fees are already
token fees that don't begin to reflect the cost of providing the facilities being used. In addition, I
am not willing to try to distinguish between the large number of worthy, nonprofit, community-
oriented events that all think it would be good to waive the fees. I have been overruled by the
Board in a few instances; the Pud's Run event being the one that sticks in my mind. I don't
recommend waiving this fee.
9.4 Request to Increase Pavilion Rental Fees from Ithaca Youth Bureau
Attached is a request from the Youth Bureau to adjust the pavilion rental fees they use for
Cass and Stewart Parks. Council just adjusted the 2013 income estimates for the Youth
Bureau and added the purchase of the Zamboni to the 2013 Capital Projects list. You will also
note some staff discussion of the suggested changes. Staff was still feeling the impact of the
2013 budget preparation, with staff cuts, unfilled positions, work load shifting, and a general
sentiment that revenues were preferable to cuts. There is a long history of discussions about
these two parks and the fact that they are supported by the city's budget, but serve a much
larger population. The loose suggestions are that there should be a city resident schedule and
an "other" schedule because of the non - taxable property and the outside users. I believe the
Youth Bureau used a similar structure for their own programs until some of the outside
participants started paying subsidies to the Youth Bureau so their residents could access the
programs at the preferred rate. I am not sure they want to go through that again.
9.5 Request to Move Water Service from City to Bolton Point from Beta Theta Pi
Fraternity
We have received a request to allow a city property to disconnect from the city's water system
and reconnect to the Bolton Point system adjacent to their property. The property is a
fraternity at the dead end of a six inch main, at the far end of our distribution system, on
Ridgewood Road. They are trying to respond to a mandate from Cornell University to sprinkler
their property and have found they can not comply using the city water main as a source of
supply. I have asked Erik to review the calculations that bring them to this conclusion, but Erik
feels that it is likely that this old main will not meet their needs, following a set of flow tests
done on the mains to collect data. 1 believe that, following Erik's review, we should agree to
allow the transfer, subject to requiring them to return to the city's system once it is adequate to
meet the minimum requirements for the sprinkler system. We do serve small portions of the
Bolton Point system where it makes more sense for us to provide service.
9.6 Sidewalk Program Proposed Policy
Please refer to the agenda for October 15, 2012. This is provided as a place holder for our
return to the topic of sidewalks.
WLLLLane.J. grauE, P.E.
SuPevl✓�.te✓,.dEint
of PkbUa Worh..s
Nove✓kber 1, 2012
Page 3
MA Recommendations to Divest Unused City Property —Resolutions
1) Resolution: Parcel 68.-2-9.2 — 700 East Seneca Street
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns parcel 68. -2 -9.2 located on the south side of the 700 block
of East Seneca Street, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned parcel was obtained by the City as an opportunity to acquire
green space, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned parcel has not been developed or maintained or designated
as park, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a
need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned parcel by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expense for maintenance, without the generation of revenue (e.g., in the
form of property taxes) from it, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of parcel 68. -2 -9.2 located on the south side of the 700 block of East Seneca
Street.
Page 4
2) Resolution: 344 Elmira Road Frontage — "Garcia's Restaurant"
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 125 -1 -2.32, also
known as 344 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be
conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Byway Partnership dated 3/23/12, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of
the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a
need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal
next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 125 -1 -2.32 located in the vicinity of
344 Elmira Road.
Page 5
3) Resolution: 340 Elmira Road Frontage — "Burner King Restaurant"
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 125 -1 -2.31, also
known as 340 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be
conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Byway Partnership dated 3/23/12, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of
the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a
need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal
next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 125 -1 -2.31 located in the vicinity of
340 Elmira Road.
Page 6
4) Resolution: 338 Elmira Road Frontage — "Monroe Muffler"
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -2, also
known as 338 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be
conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Mary and Reuben Weiner dated 3/23/12, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of
the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a
need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal
next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -2 located in the vicinity of 338
Elmira Road.
Page 7
5) Resolution: 334 Elmira Road Frontage — "Jiffy Lube"
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -4, also
known as 334 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be
conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Mary and Reuben Weiner dated 3/23/12, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of
the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a
need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal
next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1-4 located in the vicinity of 334
Elmira Road.
Page 8
6) Resolution: 330 Elmira Road Frontage — Vacant
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -5, also
known as 330 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be
conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Mary and Reuben Weiner dated 3/23/12, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a sanitary sewer approximately one foot north
of the proposed right of way line, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned sanitary sewer requires a maintenance easement of
approximately ten feet north of the proposed right of way line, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not
anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca does not
benefit the City of Ithaca, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -5 located in the vicinity of 330
Elmira Road with an easement to the City to accommodate maintenance of the existing
sanitary sewer.
Page 9
7) Resolution: 328 Elmira Road Frontage — "Arby's Restaurant"
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -1, also
known as 328 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be
conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Mary and Reuben Weiner dated 3/23/12, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of
the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a sanitary sewer approximately one foot north
of the proposed right of way line, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned sanitary sewer requires a maintenance easement of
approximately ten feet north of the proposed right of way line, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not
anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal
next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -1 located in the vicinity of 328
Elmira Road with an easement to the City to accommodate maintenance of the existing
sanitary sewer.
Page 10
8) Resolution: 326 Elmira Road Frontage — "Wendy's Restaurant"
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -3, also
known as 326 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be
conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Jaygee Realty Company dated 3/23/12, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of
the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, said development by the tenant includes the installation of a sign between the
sidewalk and the existing curb, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a sanitary sewer approximately one foot to five
feet north of the proposed right of way line, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned sanitary sewer requires a maintenance easement of
approximately ten feet from the proposed right of way line, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not
anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal
next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -1 located in the vicinity of 328
Elmira Road with an easement to accommodate maintenance of the existing sanitary sewer,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works recommends that the Common Council grants a
license to the abutting owner for operation and maintenance of the existing sign within the right
of way for a period to be determined as outlined in Chapter 170 of the City Code.
Page 11
9) Resolution: 324 Elmira Road Frontage — "Moe's and Walmart"
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121- 1 -1.1, also
known as 324 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be
conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Wil -Ridge Associates, LLC dated 3/23112, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of
the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a sanitary sewer across a portion of the
aforementioned property, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned sanitary sewer requires a maintenance easement of
approximately ten feet from the proposed right of way line, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not
anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal
next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned
property has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121 -1 -1.1 located in the vicinity of
324 Elmira Road with an easement to the City to accommodate maintenance of the existing
sanitary sewer.
Page 12
10) Resolution: 323 - 325 Elmira Road Frontage — "Friendly's Restaurant"
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 124 -1 -3, also
known as 323 - 325 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to
be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Cutting Holding Corporation dated 3/23/12, and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of
way of Elmira Road, and
WHEREAS, a portion of the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by
the tenant of the abutting property owner, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a
need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires
that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal
next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, and
WHEREAS, a portion of public sidewalk has been constructed on property owned by Cutting
Holding Corporation, LLC, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned City
of Ithaca property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that it would be in the City's
interest to obtain land upon which a public sidewalk has been constructed, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider purchase of property abutting the south right of way line of Elmira Road for the
purpose of public sidewalk, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of property abutting the north side of parcel 1241 -3 located in the vicinity of 323
- 325 Elmira Road.
Page 13
11) Resolution: 1105 Giles Street— "Old Giles Street $ Division Street'
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property located between the 1000 block of Giles Street
and the 1200 block of East State / Martin Luther King Jr. Street, as shown on a drawing
prepared by the Office of City Engineer entitled "1105 Giles Street, Old Giles Street and
Division Street", and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned properties were obtained by the City by tax sale and as a
portion of the rights of way for Giles Street and Division Street, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a water main across a portion of the
aforementioned property, and
WHEREAS, there exists a storm sewer pipe across a portion of the aforementioned property,
and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned water main and storm sewer require a maintenance easement
of approximately ten feet on either side of each pipe, and
WHEREAS, abutting lands identified as tax parcel 111 -9 -3 have been designated as Natural
Area, and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently
used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not
anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and
WHEREAS, continued ownership of portions of the aforementioned property by the City of
Ithaca does not benefit the City of Ithaca, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the portion of the
aforementioned property which has been designated as Natural Area should not be de-
designated as such, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the remainder of the
aforementioned property, comprised of the rights of way of old Giles Street and Division Street,
has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council
consider sale of abandoned right of way with an easement to the City to accommodate
maintenance of the existing storm sewer and water main facilities.
Page 14
�� ��
� ; � ��
� a ��
5 a �� s
!� �� a
=a>
� �39" ffi
i ? °s�
� � ��� ��
� �� �a
��
�, ��
� �� ��
�,�
��
�� *�
�,
o' w pN \5 \O �. �.
S j' � a �.
/ r� W � U
J \ a a
� � z
J�� � �_
v
� N
+ �P � +
� ��
� �0
w
0
��� � �
L
4; `}tt
's o
q'41RGTE0
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850 -6590
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
William 1. Gray, P.E. Superintendent / City Engineer
Telephone: 607 /274-6527 Fax: 607/274-6587
lu 1 lid 0] .Z \►I Dili 0 i
TO: Board of Public Works
FROM: Barbara Frycek, Water Meter Technician
DATE: October 31, 2012
RE: Appeal of Water Bill from NYSDOT
New York State Department of Transportation has appealed the water charges for their
location on Third Street, Ithaca, that was billed in October 2007. Upon review of their account,
it was determined that the water meter for that location was replaced on August 10, 2007. The
reading was misread because the meter that was replaced contained separate dials for ones, tens,
hundreds, etc. This type of meter is difficult to read. An adjustment was made to the "high
flow' side but was not made to the `low flow" side.
After reviewing consumption amounts for the same quarter going back to 2003, my
recommendation is that the water bill be reduced to the minimum charge for a two inch meter,
which would be 112 hcf. In 2007, the water rate was $2.82 per 100 cf, making the total amount
due for a minimum bill $315.84.
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
RECEIVED
OCT 2 2 2012
b Office CI the
STATE OP New YORK Supt. and
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Englneemw
ALBANY, N.Y. 12232
www.dot.ny.gov
JOAN M....w1e
COMMIacION[P
October 15, 2012
City of Ithaca
Board of Public Works
Attn: Bill Gray
108 East Green Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
Dear City of Ithaca Board of Public Works:
A—RKW M. CUOMO
G.V.R..R
I am writing to inform you that we, the NYS Department of Transportation in Cortland,
holders of Account #3912963800, are petitioning the Board of Public Works to remove an
errant charge from our water bill.
Back in August, 2007, we had a faulty water meter that was eventually replaced by the
City of Ithaca on October 2, 2007. Before the meter was replaced, it was not working properly
and recorded a usage that resulted in a charge of $3,020.22 for water that we did not use. I
discussed this at length with Barb Frychex of the Water Department and she advised that we
write to the Board of Public Works to get this charge removed.
Would you please review our account and this charge in particular? We feel that this
charge should be removed from our account because we did not use this amount of water
during that time period as indicated on our bill.
If you have any questions at all regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at
(607) 756 -7072. Thank you.
Sincerely, �i��
Stanley. B chenough, P.E.
Resident Engineer, Cortland/Tompkins Residency
Water Bill Analysis
NYSDOT Acct. #: 93912963800
Third St. Meter Size: 2 inch
Min. Consumption*: 112
Meter Reading Date
Consumption*
Billing Date
I Water Bill
Total Bill
Notes
1/26/2005
68
3/1/2005
$ 300.16
$ 300.16
4/28/2005
83
5/26/2005
300.16
300.16
7/27/2005
63
9/1/2005
300.16
300.16
10/26/2005
33
1211/2005
300.16
300.16
1/31/2006
39
3/1/2006
309.12
309.12
4/2612006
89
6/1/2006
309.12
309.12
7/27/2006
80
9/112006
309.12
309.12
Meter over read credit
10/24/2006
15
12/112006
309.12
309.12
212/2007
208
3/1/2007
600.66
600.66
4/30/2007
108
6/1/2007
352.50
352.50
8/10/2007
954
8/27/2007
5,504.64
5,504.64
adjustment to high flow
10/212007
53
1211/2007
315.84
315.84
1129/2008
94
3/1/2008
325.92
325.92
413012008
74
6/1/2008
325.92
325.92
7/29/2008
40
9/1/2008
325.92
325.92
912912008
38
1211/2008
325.92
325.92
400
'Consumption is in 100 cubic feet
(i.e. 57 = 5,700 cubic feet of water consumed)
J:\BIII Gmy\BIII's Correspondence \Complaint Responses \Water protests - bill analysesNYSDOT Third St
10/3112012
Water Consumption for NYSDOT Third St.
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Vf
YI
upl
vpl
vl
Vpf
l0
10
10
b
tp0
pb
N
O
n
O
nn
1p�
ph
N W
S
W
M
O
W
O
WO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
ry
r
O
OI
\
Y1
n
O1
e1
1,'1
YI
h
01
T
VI
n
Of
e1
N
1�
�
IVI
�
�
J:\BIII Gmy\BIII's Correspondence \Complaint Responses \Water protests - bill analysesNYSDOT Third St
10/3112012
of tT+ta CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Suite 202 Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690
OFFICE OF THE MY ENGINEER
Telephone: 607274 -6530 Fax: 6072746587
To: Board of Public Works
From: Tim Logue, City Transportation Engineer L/
Date: November 1, 2012
Re: Policy for reserved parking for people with disabilities
It has come to my attention that at a recent Board meeting, there was sentiment
from the Board that you would like to delegate the authority to approve or to
deny requests for on- street reserved parking for people with disabilities. There
was perhaps even a sense that the Board had already done so. I do not have any
problem with staff decisions to approve or deny requests, but I would like to
have the formal policy changed to clarify the authority to do so. Currently, we
are operating under the policy adopted by the Board of Public Works on March
3, 2010, which is attached. The authority to create on- street parking spaces
reserved for people with disabilities is currently delegated to the Board of Public
Works in accordance with Section 346, Vehicles and Traffic, of the City Code.
The current policy has staff processing the applications, and either denying the
application or bringing it to the BPW for approval. This system seems to work
fine and if the BPW has no concerns, the request can be approved very easily
with a short resolution. If the BPW would prefer to not see resolutions to
approve these on-street spaces, assuming that it is legal to further delegate this
authority, the policy should be amended to clarify that the decisions shall be
made by a specific person (e.g., the Superintendent or the Transportation
Engineer), and that the BPW would only act as an appeal board if applications
are denied or if neighborhood conceros /complaints arise.
Until the policy has been changed, we are also including a resolution for the
most recent request for the 500 block of Dryden Road. If you have any questions,
feel free to contact me at 274 -6535 or timloa@cityofithaca.or¢.
An Equal Opp =nit, Emplu,r with a mn m anent to w Morce dhv iflrauon." � J
9.3 Request for Parking for Persons with Disabilities for 653 Chestnut Street -
Discussion
Board of Public Works
Adopted March 3, 2010
By Commissioner Brack: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works adopted a Handicap Parking Policy on January 12,
2000 to act as a guideline for requests received for on- street handicap parking, and
WHEREAS, the current Handicap Parking Policy has become outdated, and staff has met
with the Disability Advisory Council to review and update the current parking policy, now
therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works has reviewed and hereby adopts the Parking
Policy for Persons with Disabilities dated March 3, 2010, as department policy for such
parking in order for staff to continue to respond to requests.
Carried Unanimously
City of Ithaca Parking Policy for Persons with Disabilities
Purpose: The City of Ithaca strives to provide convenient parking options for persons with
disabilities while balancing the exclusive use of such parking spaces with the needs of the
general public. To guide the provision of such parking options, the following policy has been
developed and adopted by the Board of Public Works.
Leal Requirements: The federal rules and regulations enacted for the implementation of Title III
of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the New York State Building Code contain
accessibility requirements for places of public accommodation and commercial facilities,
including accessible parking spaces in parking lots and parking garages. For parking areas of 1
to 25 spaces, at least one (1) accessible space is required. The required number of accessible
spaces increases as the size of the parking area increases, representing approximately two
percent of the spaces. There are no requirements to provide accessible spaces where no other
parking spaces are provided or required. There is no requirement to provide accessible spaces
"on street-"
City of Ithaca Provision for Off-Street Accessible Parkins: The City's parking lots and parking
garages shall meet at least the minimum standards set bylaw in all cases. Whether accessible
spaces beyond the minimum required are provided shall be based on reasonable
accommodation, considering demand, cost, physical constraints, and utilisation rates and other,
relevant factors. Accessible spaces may be relocated, added or reduced, based on these factors
and applicable laws and regulations.
Page 11
Cily of Ithaca Provision for On -Street Reserved Parking for Persons with Disabilities (RPPD):
The use of on- street, reserved parking for persons with disabilities is considered a partial
accommodation, because the spaces generally do not meet the requirements foraccessible spaces
(e.g., they do not have access aisles or they may not be proximate to a curb ramp). The Central
Business District (and to a lesser extent other business districts, such as Collegetown and the
West End) contains a concentration of commercial and public facilities which are not required to
provide off street parking, or, consequently, accessible parking. Municipal parking garagesand
lots do provide accessible parking spaces and are reasonably distributed. However, the use of
on- street reserved parking spaces for persons with disabilities within the areas of high parking
demand in business districts can provide a greater level of accommodation and convenience for
some persons with disabilities who do not require fully accessible parking spaces.
For the purposes of this polity, any area in a business district with metered parking shall be
assumed to be a high parking demand area. Since there is no requirement for on- street,
accessible parking spaces in these areas, no minimum required number of such spares has been
established. The City is committed to reserving a reasonable number of on street spaces, in
business districts, for persons with disabilities. The designation and actual number of such
spaces shall be based on staff study, public requests, reasonable accommodation and factors
considered for off - street accessible spaces. Spaces may be
relocated, added or reduced based on these factors. Consideration will be given to issues of
safety and practicality associated with the particular location, especially if the reserved spaces
will not be fully accessible.
Requests for On- Street. Reserved Parking for Persons with Disabilities (RPPD) Spaces in
Residential Areas: The City of Ithaca provides on- street RPPD in residential areas on a very
limited basis. Such spaces are intended to serve a dual purpose, namely, providing at least
partial accommodation to one of more nearby residents with disabilities, as well as utility to
other persons with disabilities who may need such parking in that vicinity. The following
criteria must be met to consider an on- street parking space for RPPD designation:
1. The request must be accompanied by valid proof of permanent disability status for
parking purposes (as recognized by New York State in accordance with Sec. 1203 (a-d) of
NYS Vehicle and Traffic law) of one or more persons residing (through rental or
ownership) within 250 feet of the requested, reserved space.
2. if the place of residence of the person(s) on whose behalf the reserved space is requested
is capable of having off - street parking under zoning codes, the request most include a
statement concerning the duration of the request and why a curb cut for off - street parking
is not being requested instead. If the residence currently has off -street parking available,
the request must include a statement concerning why the applicant's accessibility needs
cannot be met through use or modification of the existing parking area.
The Superintendent of Public Works shall create an application form for requests for on -street
reserved parking for people with disabilities. Upon application, staff shall evaluate the request
If the request meets the above criteria and if it poses no traffic safety problem in the opinion of
Page 12
the City Transportation Engineer, then the Gty Transportation Engineer shall forward the
request to the Board of Public Works for consideration and may include a recommendation. If
the request does nut meet the above criteria or if it poses a traffic safety problem in the opinion
of the City Transportation Engineer, then the City Transportation Engineer shall deny the
request. The applicant shall have the right to appeal this decision, in writing, to the Board of
Public Works.
If the request is granted by the Board, a sign designating the RPPD space shall be installed and
maintained for five (5) years (except as provided for below). Prior to the end of said five -year
period, the City shall notify the initial applicant that the sign will be removed unless the request
is renewed. If the City finds that the applicant no longer resides within 750 feetof thedesignated
space, the City may remove the sign.
Itshould be noted thatan on-street, RPPD parking space is not reserved for the applicantorany
specific person, but is available to any person with a valid parking permit for a person with
disabilities.
Page 13
aoc.tra°
�R
ooD �Qp°
TO:
1TOMA
2A
CITY OF ITHACA
108 Fast Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690
OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
Telephone: 6072746530 F= 6072746587
November I, 2012
Board of Public Works
Kent Johnson, Junior Transportation Engineer
Application for a Reserved Parking for Persons with Disabilities (RPPD)
parking space at 522 Dryden Rd.
The attached application, submitted by a resident at 310 Ithaca Rd., is hereby
submitted to the BPW for approval or denial.
As mentioned in the application, the resident desires a nearby on- street parking
space reserved for people with disabilities so that when disabled friends visit, the
homeowner can move one of their cars (that have handicap hangtags) to the on- street
space; thus, allowing the friend to park in their driveway.
No particular recommendation is being provided by staff because it is unclear
whether such a change is necessary when other on- street parking spaces are available, or
if this is the best way to satisfy the applicants' parking needs. With that said, the request
seems reasonable and I do not foresee that granting this request would create any
particular problems.
If this request is granted, a new RPPD parking space should be created in front of
522 Dryden Rd. rather than at 524 Dryden Rd. because the latter is too close to the
intersection. A new space at 522 would be adjacent to the existing Residential Parking
Permit System (RPPS), so it would not reduce the number of available RPPS parking
spaces.
BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
November 1, 2012
To Amend Vehicle and Traffic Schedules XXV. Reserved for Parkin for
Persons with Disabilities at 522 Dryden Rd
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 Board of Public Works approves the Reserved Parking for
Persons with Disabilities (RPPD) application from residents at 310 Ithaca Rd.
requesting an RPPD parking space on Dryden Rd., 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
Dryden Road North In front of 522 Dryden Rd.
Office use only
Date ofsi insWlation
/ /
Fiv4year period end date
/ /
Sign request application — Reserved Parking for Persons with Disabilities (RPPD)
1. Applicant name: if/Jf/,fq fi/ �/ . !— C0 k 00 tf
2. Applicant address: J/0 - -htafc egad'
3. Preferred location of reserved space if different from the address above: ce
�o1y _Zryden /load
4. Applicant phone number and/or email:
5. Proof of permanent disability status for parking purposes such as: proof on file in City
Clerk's office, hangtag, license plate, medical certification, etc. Describe:
6. Is off - street parking feasible? dt Yes o No
If yes, explain why off - street parking cannot meet the applicant's needs. If no,
explain why it is not feasible?
Residential Areas: The City of Ithaca provides on- street, RPPD in residential areas on a
very limited basis. Such spaces are intended to serve a dual purpose, namely, providing at
least partial accommodation to one of more nearby residents with disabilities, as well as
utility to other persons with disabilities who may need such parking in that vicinity. The
following criteria must be met to consider an on- street parking space for RPPD
designation:
1. The request most be accompanied by valid proof of permanent disability status for
parking purposes (as recognized by New York State in accordance with Sec. 1203
(a -d) of NYS Vehicle and Traffic Law) of one or more persons residing (through
rental or ownership) within 250 feet of the requested, reserved space.
See answer 5 above.
2. If the place of residence of the person(s) on whose behalf the reserved space is
requested is capable of having off - street parking under zoning codes, the request
must include a statement concerning the duration of the request and why a curb
cut for off-street parking is not being requested instead. If the residence currently
has off - street parking available, the request must include a statement concerning
why the applicant's accessibility needs cannot be met through use or modification
of the existing parking area.
See answer 6 above.
Upon application, staff shall evaluate the request. If the request meets the above criteria
and if it poses no traffic safety problem in the opinion of the City Transportation
Engineer, then the City Transportation Engineer shall forward the request to the Board of
Public Works for consideration and may include a recommendation. If the request does
not meet the above criteria or if it poses a traffic safety problem in the opinion of the City
Transportation Engineer, then the City Transportation Engineer shall deny the request.
The applicant shall have the right to appeal this decision, in writing, to the Board of
Public Works.
If the request is granted by the Board, a sign designating the RPPD space shall be
installed and maintained for five (5) years (except as provided for below). Prior to the
end of said five -year period, the City shall notify the initial applicant that the sign will be
removed until the request is renewed. If the City finds that the applicant no longer resides
within 250 feet of the designated space, the City may remove the sign.
It should be noted that an on- street, RPPD parking space is not reserved for the applicant
or any specific person, but is available to my person with a valid parking permit for a
person with disabilities.
The City Transportation Engineer �1 approves ❑ denies the above application.
If approved, the City Transportation Engineer will forward the request to the Board of
Public Works for consideration and may include a recommendation.
(9/29/2012) Kathrin Gehring - Re: IMPP and Friends of Stewart Park Event in the park onOctober 13 Page 1
teal q. 3
From: "Diana Riesman" <driesman @earthlink.net>
To: "Svante Myrick" <mayormyrick @cityofithaca.org>
CC: "joann cornish" <joannc @cityofithaca.org >, "Kathrin Gehring"
<kgehring @c...
Date: 9/9/2012 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: IMPP and Friends of Stewart Park Event in the park onOctober 13
Hi Svante and thanks for getting back to me.
I will gladly talk to Kathy Gehring.
Best and warm wishes,
Diana
• [Original Message]
• From: Svante Myrick <mayormyrick @cityofithaca.org>
• To: <driesman @earthlink.net>
• Cc: JoAnn Cornish <JoannC @cityofithaca.org >; Kathrin Gehring
<kgehring @cityofithaca.org >; Ray Benjamin <RAYB @cityofithaca.org >;
<cari ba @lightlink.com>
• Date: 9/9/2012 3:18:58 PM
• Subject: Re: IMPP and Friends of Stewart Park Event in the park onOctober
13
> Hi Diana,
> While we are collaborating because it is not a strictly city event we
cannot summarily waive the rental. You could though ask the Board of
Public Works to vote to waive the fee.
> I've copied Kathy Gehring here. Kathy is the support staff for the Board
- she should be able to give you more information about the waiver
application process.
> Thanks!
• Svante Myrick
• Mayor, City of Ithaca
> 108 E. Green Street
> Ithaca, NY 14850
> 607 - 274 -6501
(912612012) Kathrin Gehring - Re: IMPP and Friends of Stewart Park Event in the park onOctober 13 Page 2
• >>> "Diana Riesman" 09/09/12 6:34 AM >>>
• Good Morning Mr. Mayor,
> Again, thanks to you, JoAnn, Ray and others for your quick responses to
our email about Ithaca Motion Picture Project and Friends of Stewart Park's
upcoming event on Saturday, October 13th, celebrating the park during
Silent Movie Month in Ithaca. Scott and I are working through all the
details.
> I am wondering if it would be possible for the $150 fee for the rental of
the Large Pavilion through Ithaca Youth Bureau to be waived, given that we
are putting on the event in collaboration with the City. This would be a
terrific help to us. I have already rented the Large Pavilion and paid the
fee, but was hoping a refund might be viable.
> IMPP and Friends of Stewart Park will cover the cost of the Special Event
Permit, as well as the cost to have the park Caretaker or other park
employee there on Saturday, October 13th to open the buildings etc. which I
am in contact with Ray about.
> Many thanks for your time and consideration and I look forward to
hearing from you.
• Warm wishes and hope all is well!
• Best,
• Diana
> diana desman /founder /ithaca motion picture project
> 607.266.9470
> call 607.592.3017
> making noise about silent film!
,0'%h ByraOG Ithaca Youth Bureau
1
James L. Gibbs Drive
�^ Ithaca, New York
{iJ
` Phone: (607) 273 -8364 8364
Fax: (607) 273 -2817 aoYea
"Building a foundation for a lifetime."
To: Mayor Svante Myrick
Common Council
Bill Gray, Superintendent of Public Works
JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development
Steve Thayer, Contmller
Ithaca Youth Bureau Advisory Board
From: Allen Green, Director
Re: Pavilion Fees, Zamboni / Request to amend the Mayor's proposed 2013 IYB budget
Date: October 15, 2012
1) Pavilion Fees: During the course of developing our budget, Steve asked us to take a look at pavilion fees
at Cass and Stewart Parks. (The IYB handles the pavilion reservations for both parks.)
It has been quite a while since we raised these fees and we are currently investing a good deal of money on
the rebuilding of the small pavilion (AKA Tea Pavilion) in Stewart Park and would like to recoup some of
that investment.
We checked with seven area parks and found that our current pavilion fees are in line with other area fees,
but since some parks also charge a parking/entrance fee and the city does not; a strong case can be built for
increasing these fees at this time. We also surveyed all staff that handle pavilion reservations, to get their
input with regard to fees and the system in general.
We are proposing a 20% increase in the fees. This proposed change should be reviewed by the Parks
Commission and would need to be approved by the Board of Public Works. We would appreciate assistance
from both JOAnn and Bill in sharing this material with the Parks Commission and the Board of Public Works
and with seeking the approval of both bodies.
We also took a look at the possibility of switching to an hourly rental fee and to potential changes in the
group size system, but we are not recommending either of these changes at this time. There seem to be a
relatively small number of communities in NY State that utilize an hourly fee structure for pavilions and with
current park staffing levels this sort of system would be difficult to administer and police, particularly on
weekends when the parks and pavilions are utilized heavily, but staffing levels are bare bones.
Based on the recommended adjustments, we are proposing a change to the Mayor's proposed 2013 IYB
budget as follows:
Increase projected revenues: Account # A 7310 - 2410 -1400 $4000.00
We are hopeful that the small (Tea) pavilion will be finished soon, so that we can accept reservations for this
facility in 2013 and meet the above increased revenue projections. It does appear that DPW personnel are on
the home stretch with this work, but it would be helpful if DPW could confirm that the pavilion will be
available for the full upcoming season and that we have a "green light" to go ahead with accepting 2013
reservations beginning 1/2/2013. We have included the link for the relevant pavilion reservation fomis as
background information: pavilion rental
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification,"
Since we begin to take 2013 reservations on January 2, 2013 it would be most helpful if a decision could be
made soon, so that we can revise the reservation firms and offer consistent pricing to all groups during the
entire 2013 season.
2) Zamboni: We had hoped to replace our 1990 Zamboni ice resurfacer as the primary unit at the Cass Park
Ice Rink. Currently we have a 1972 Zamboni as a backup which would be sent to auction (hopefully
defraying some of the cost), the 1990 unit would become the backup and the new resurfacer would be the
primary unit. The 1972 Zamboni was officially eligible fir Vintage License Plates in 1997, 15 years ago!
Unfortunately this item did not make it onto the 2013 approved capital projects list. The estimated cost is
$98,000.
The 1990 Zamboni was scheduled to be replaced in 2010. Brian Carman, who oversees city vehicles and
equipment, asked us to request replacement of the 1990 Zamboni as the primary resurfacer due to the
condition of the unit, the difficulty in finding replacement parts and the high frequency and cost of required
maintenance. The 2012 -13 ice season was particularly bad for the 1990 unit as it suffered electrical,
hydraulic and oil leaking issues. The 1972 unit had to be used several times and this unit currently is in need
of approximately $2000 worth of work due to seized engine parts. We are reluctant to spend more money on
a 40 year old piece of equipment but we also cannot operate without a backup unit, given the lack of
reliability of the primary unit.
An ice rink cannot operate without a reliable resurfaces At Cass Park the resurfacer is used an average of
ten times daily, it is used to install the ice sheet at the beginning of the season and for the removal of the ice
at the end of the season. With the extensive efforts of Brian Carman, the DPW garage staff and the Cass
Park Maintenance staff we have been able to avoid shutdown of the ice rink during the many mechanical
breakdown episodes that we experience annually. We appreciate your consideration of replacing this vital
piece of equipment. If we can't do so this year, we at least wanted to highlight the need for next year.
Thank you.
Cc: Ray Benjamin, Jeanne Grace, Megan Wilson, Kathy Gehring
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
Our current fees
Proposed new fees
Cass Park
Up to 24 people
$30.00
$36.00
25 — 74 people
$60.00
$72.00
75 + people or Exclusive Use
$75.00
$90.00
Stewart Park Small Pavilion
Up to 24 people
$30.00
$36.00
25 — 74 people
$60.00
$72.00
75 + people or Exclusive Use
$100.00
$120.00
Stewart Park Large Pavilion
Up to 24 people
$30.00
$36.00
25 — 74 people
$60.00
$72.00
75 — 99 people
$100.00
$120.00
100 -149 people
$125.00
$150.00
150+ people or Exclusive Use
$150.00
$180.00
Since we begin to take 2013 reservations on January 2, 2013 it would be most helpful if a decision could be
made soon, so that we can revise the reservation firms and offer consistent pricing to all groups during the
entire 2013 season.
2) Zamboni: We had hoped to replace our 1990 Zamboni ice resurfacer as the primary unit at the Cass Park
Ice Rink. Currently we have a 1972 Zamboni as a backup which would be sent to auction (hopefully
defraying some of the cost), the 1990 unit would become the backup and the new resurfacer would be the
primary unit. The 1972 Zamboni was officially eligible fir Vintage License Plates in 1997, 15 years ago!
Unfortunately this item did not make it onto the 2013 approved capital projects list. The estimated cost is
$98,000.
The 1990 Zamboni was scheduled to be replaced in 2010. Brian Carman, who oversees city vehicles and
equipment, asked us to request replacement of the 1990 Zamboni as the primary resurfacer due to the
condition of the unit, the difficulty in finding replacement parts and the high frequency and cost of required
maintenance. The 2012 -13 ice season was particularly bad for the 1990 unit as it suffered electrical,
hydraulic and oil leaking issues. The 1972 unit had to be used several times and this unit currently is in need
of approximately $2000 worth of work due to seized engine parts. We are reluctant to spend more money on
a 40 year old piece of equipment but we also cannot operate without a backup unit, given the lack of
reliability of the primary unit.
An ice rink cannot operate without a reliable resurfaces At Cass Park the resurfacer is used an average of
ten times daily, it is used to install the ice sheet at the beginning of the season and for the removal of the ice
at the end of the season. With the extensive efforts of Brian Carman, the DPW garage staff and the Cass
Park Maintenance staff we have been able to avoid shutdown of the ice rink during the many mechanical
breakdown episodes that we experience annually. We appreciate your consideration of replacing this vital
piece of equipment. If we can't do so this year, we at least wanted to highlight the need for next year.
Thank you.
Cc: Ray Benjamin, Jeanne Grace, Megan Wilson, Kathy Gehring
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
Page 1 of 2
Kathrin Gehring - Stewart park rentals
From:
Jeanne Grace
To:
Gehring, Kathdn
Date:
11/1/2012 2:00 PM
Subject:
stewart park rentals
Kathy,
I cleaned it up a bit. Please use this for the board agenda. Thanks for giving me the chance to edit.
Jeanne
The sliding sole for payment based on the number of rental attendees is not practical. Tam's point is exactly
right. Whether there are 10 or 110 people there for a weekend rental, we still need to send someone in to open
the facilities, turn on the lights, clean the restrooms etc. Maybe a difference between exclusive rental and
shared rental of large pavilion would make sense but breaking it down into the 5 categories does not seem
practical.
In terms of the pricing, I see where Tom is going with it but I think $1000 is a bit steep. I totally understand
and agree with the logic and I think the pavilion may be worth that much but the fee is so much higher than
any other similar state or county pavilion rental that I think we couldn't realistically charge that much. I think
something in the neighborhood of $300 for an exclusive rental would be totally reasonable.
As Tam suggested we are looking to do weekend coverage of Stewart Park with seasonal help this year rather
than permanent staff. I think is sounds like an easy solution but it is not as easy as it may seem to find reliable
people willing to spend weekends in the summer cleaning bathrooms and picking up trash in the park for $10 /hr
without the supervision of permanentstaK. When poor performance behavior arises in seasonal help that
we are relying on to open and dose the park on weekends, especially at the end of the season when it is too
late in the season to replace the worker there are only a limited number of options we have to curb the
behavior. I know we have to pay the permanent staff more to the same job, but they do a very thorough job
and are invested in the quality of their work. We don't have to worry that they are cutting corners or wasting
time at the park just to collect a pay check.
I do worry about how the quality of Stewart Park maintenance (which in my opinion is quite high right now) will
be impacted next year with the proposed changes to staffing. For the weekends we are looking to have
restroom doors that will automatically open in the mornings and then just have someone come in to work the
afternoon and evenings to dean and lock up the park. I hope that a rate increase for pavilion rentals will not
coincide with a decrease in quality of service. That would be a big public relations dilemma.
I also agree with Tom's comment on lwldng at this service on a program cost basis. We should think
about assessing a cost for the Youth Bureau day camp. The day camp uses a great deal of supplies (bathroom
paper, soap etc), garbage generation and staff time for clean up. These are costs that are currently consumed
by the Stewart Park operating budget but maybe should be reflected in the day camp's operating budget. We
need to start charging the real price that city services cost, not hide the cost in regular operating budgets. This
way when budget cuts are requested we can take a real look at services that should be eliminated to achieve
the requested budget constraints.
In addition, when we look at the cost of operating the park we need to balance that against the revenue the
pavilion rentals bring in. It currently shows as revenue to the Youth Bureau because they manage the rental
fileWC Documents and Settings\kgeluing\Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\50928061coi... 11/1/2012
Page 2 of 2
reservations but we should be looking at that revenue number when we look at costs of permanent staff,
overtime and seasonal staff. That's the investment it takes to generate that rental revenue. Maybe if it's looked
at that way we could argue for less harsh cuts to Stewart Park staffing.
Jeanne Grace
Forestry Technician
Parks and Forestry Division
Department of Public Works
City of Ithaca
245 Pier Rd., Ithaca, NY 14850
Office Hours: M -F 7 -3:30
OFFICE (607)- 272 -1718
FAX (607)-272-4374
iarace(adtvo0tham.ora
file: / /C: \Documents and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\50928061coi... 11/1/2012
Pagel of 2
Bill Gray - Re: Stewart Park Pavilion Fees
From: Allen Green
To: Bill Gray; Tom West
Date: 10/15/2012 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: Stewart Park Pavilion Fees
CC: Svante Myrick; Jeanne Grace; Ray Benjamin; Jim Daltedo; Liz Vance; Nancy Bower
Hi folks
In the interest of avoiding the multiple steering wheels phenomenon I thought I would check
in about process.
I always appreciate Tom's perspective, welcome his suggestions and I would be happy to
discuss his ideas further.
That being said, if folks don't mind, I would ask that Bill "speak" on behalf of DPW staff with
regard to this matter, or designate another individual to do so, in the hopes that we can
answer any questions or discuss any ideas or concerns as efficiently as possible and so that
we will be clear on whether the comments represent "official" recommendations of the
department.
Thanks, Allen
>>> Tom West 10/15/2012 10:46 AM >>>
Bill,
I read Allen's memo suggesting changes to the rental fees for the pavilions at the parks. In light of the difficult
budget situation in which the City finds itself we really need to be more realistic about conducting business.
First of all, the variable fees based upon number of attendees should be abandoned. Regardless of how many
people use the facility Parks' staff still needs to dean up and pick up garbage, open and clean the rest rooms.
I'm sure that the renter does not reduce the number of lights they use based upon attendance. So our
operating costs are fixed regardless of number of attendees.
Secondly, the fees should be competitive with tent rental costs. A 30 X 40 tent (roughly the size of the small
pavilion, costs $400, including set up and break down. The large pavilion has approximately 3000 square feet
of interior Floor space, a 30 X 80 tent has only 2400 sf. Yet the 30 X 80 tent rents for $9001 Tents do not
have lighting or restmoms or a spectacular view of Cayuga take.
I recommend that the rates be set at $1000 for the large pavilion and $400 for the small pavilion. City residents
could be given a 25% discount.
Operationally I understand that the weekend dean up is done by Parks staff on over time at a cost of about
$10,000 per year. These costs could be reduced by hiring a seasonal laborer (both DPW and IYB have vast
experience hiring seasonals) which reduces the hourly rate and dramatically reduces the overhead (benefit)
costs.
We should be looking at this service on a program cost basis, not as separate lines in several different parts of
the budget. This is one of those occasions where government can team from the private sector without giving
up its core value of service to City residents.
file: / /C: \Documents and Settings\kgeluing \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\507BF866coi... 11/1/2012
Page 2 of 2
regards,
Tom
Tom West
Assistant City Engineer
Department of Public Works
108 East Green Street
City of Ithaca
607 327 0710
file: / /C: \Documents and Settings\kgehring \Local Settings \TempIXPgrpwise\507BF866coi... 11/1/2012
Page 1 of I
�Emq.5
Kathrin Gehring - request for change of water supply
From: "Dave Ruff' <druff @fromiemet.net>
To: "Kathy Gehring" <kgehring @cityofithaca.org>
Date: 10/31/2012 4:12 PM
Subject: request for change of water supply
CC: "amigo hall" <amigo.hall @davisulmenus >, "peter middaugh"
<pmiddaugh @boltonpoint.org >, "Scott Gibson" <scottg @cityofithaca.org >, "Tom
Parsons" <parsons @cityofithacaorg >, "Jeff Frey" <jeff @pspunlimited.com >, "Brent
Cross" <bcross @cayuga- heights.ny.us>
Attachments: Hyd Flow Test 118 Triphammer 04_25 12 04.pdf, Hyd Flow Test 100
Ridgewood_ 06_ 29_12.pdf,, D00O26.pdf
Dear Mr. Gray
I am the maintenance contractor for the fraternity, Beta Theta Pi, located at 100 Ridgewood Road
here in Ithaca. All fraternities and sororities at Cornell have been ordered by the University to
complete installation of a full sprinkler system by the end of 2013. If the installation is not
completed by the end of this year, December 31, 2012 the university further requires the fraternity
or sorority to have a contractor in place and a sprinkler system design completed and approved by
the building department and the fire department by that time.
We have been working with Davis -Ulmer Sprinkler Company from Syracuse since last year, 2011,
toward this end. The water supply for Beta Theta Pi now comes from the City of Ithaca municipal
water system. While this system is adequate for the domestic water for the house, there is not
enough water from the existing city water main to provide the increased flow required for a full
sprinkler system. Our contractor, Davis -Ulmer cannot even design the system based on the water
available. The City of Ithaca Water Department has investigated the water availability and
conducted flow tests which confirm the poor water supply from the old water main which now
supplies the house.
Fortunately, Beta Theta Pi owns the strip of property running along Ridgewood Road which has a
large water main from the Bolton Point Water System near the house which could supply the water
we need.
We have received permission from Bolton Point and the Village of Cayuga Heights to change over to
their water supply. This change will allow us to proceed with design and installation of the required
sprinkler system.
We are asking permission from the Ithaca Board of Public Works to proceed with this change.
Thank you,
David Ruff
Agent to City of Ithaca for Beta Theta Pi
file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\kgehring\Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\50914DE8coi... 11/1/2012
Hydrant Flow Test Log
Project
118 Triphammer— Fourth Test
Project No.
Jessup Rd. and Triphammer Rd.
Location:
Wait and Triphammer Road
Conducted By:
Scott Gibson, Matt Sledjeski
Date:
April 25, 2012
Time:
10:15AM
Sketch
to
r 0ffi•
mB .�pNl s1h
102 _
f
t
116 195
Sal �tsi 1'+s1
\\
in _ I-
2
a7.
120 131
131
117
09 \ d18
11e 11s
slaseam—
03dB OM !f�n1 1110
102
208 Eta 23a
301 1918 zz]_..- z28_- 1a
( F.8
903
Pressure Gauged Hydrant
Number.
&100
Location:
Jessup Rd. and Triphammer Rd.
Static, Pa.
61 psi
Residual, PTn,
53 psi
Flowed Hydrant
Number.
E -077
Location:
Triphammer Rd and Wait Ave.
Flow, QT
650 gpm
Calculated
Flow @
1,571 gpm
20psi, Q26:
Calc's. & Comments:
Ps — Pa ose 61, - 20 a,sa
a = r za = 650T
Q Q Ps —PTR Q 6I7 -53TR
QR — Flow at Test Residual Pressure TR- Spun
Q20 — Flow calculated @ 20 -psi residual — gpm
QT— Flow Test Result @ test residual — gpm
PRROr — Calculated Residual Pressure R(20) -psi
PTR — Test Residual Pressure TR -psi
Ps — P Tlow leg Static Pressure psi
Hydrant Flow Test Log
Project
Ridgewood Road — Second Test
Project No.
The Knoll and Thurston Ave.
Location:
100 Ridgewood
Conducted By:
Scott Gibson, Matt Sledjedd
Date:
June 29, 2012
Time:
10:00
Sketch
120 -125 �- Oc 105
100
6
�u
„5
55 g
Ja _
$ �Im
151 -
1 ♦� 80�
R
h4gp 11a
r YW [_ 100
121
9Q ]1I
G73
`1l �
1 I
Pressure Gauged Hydrant
Number:
E -072
Location:
The Knoll and Thurston Ave.
Static, Ps
Ill psi
Residual, P7a,
86 psi
Flowed Hydrant
Number
E -086
Location:
100 Ridgewood Rd
Flow, QT
<190 gpm (Flow registered below
last accurate measurement on cause)
Calculated
Flow @
NA gpm
20pa1, Q20:
Cale's. &rComments:
Q Q L Ps — PR 1osnQ — 700, 73s —20 loss
R— r PS — PAR zo' r 735. -52rR
QR — Flow at Test Residual Pressure TR- gpm
Q20 — Flow calculated @ 20 -psi residual — gum
QT— Flow Test Result @ test residual — gpm
PR(20) — Calculated Residual Pressure R(20)-psi
Pm — Test Residual Pressure TR -psi
PS — Pre -Row test Static Pressure -psi
0
O
U
i
a
�r
o
F �
L, i
00
mm
rn
00
ci u
m
""
Y
I i
B d
n
T�)
i
E
O
2
r
Al
iI
s
Y
r
e
f � r
S �
U �
J `
G O
Y
9
i
a
Page I of 2
Bill Gray - Re: Fwd: water supply 100 Ridgewood Road
From: Erik Whitney
To: Niechwiadowia, Mike; Parsons, Tom
Date: 10/23/2012 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: water supply 100 Ridgewood Road
CC: Gibson, Scott; Gray, Bill
Attachments: Fwd: RE: water supply 100 Ridgewood Road
More information on 100 Ridgewood Rd water connection to the VoCH.
Tom
Tom Parsons
Fire Chief
Ithaca Fire Department
310 W Green St
Ithaca, New York 14850
work 607 - 272 -1234
fax 607- 272 -2793
cell 607- 227 -3400
>>> On Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 3:58 PM, in message
< IE671B82D974C64E9B0302279D58CC5512735AC3 @SBS08.VCH.local >, Brent Cross <bcross @cayuga-
heights.ny.us> wrote:
Dave,
In response to your request, the Village agrees to allow the connection of 100 Ridgewood Road to the
water main in the Village. I am providing the following information as a summary of the details of this
approval.
The new water service will be located on the fraternity's private property next to Ridgewood Road in the
Village, but not in the Village Right of Way (except at the connection point).
The water service will be billed to the fraternity on a quarterly basis by Bolton Point. Even though the
fraternity is connected to the City sewer system, a sewer bill will be generated at the same time as the
water bill from Bolton Point on behalf of the Village
The sprinkler connection (same connection as water service) will be billed annually by Bolton Point.
The fraternity will be responsible for all construction costs, including the work to connect to the main.
The contractor will need to get a "plumbing permit" from Bolton Point.
The contractor will need to get a "street opening permit' from the Village.
The contractor will need to get a "building permit' from the City.
Please arrange to have a pre - construction meeting at the site with contractor, Bolton Point and me.
fileWCADocuments and Settings \kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\5086C45Cco... 10/23/2012
Page 2 of 2
Sincerely,
Brent Cross
From: Dave Ruff [maito:druff @frontiernet.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:03 AM
To: Brent Cross
Cc: Tom Parsons; Jeff Frey; peter middaugh; amigo hall
Subject: water supply 100 Ridgewood Road
file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \kgehring \Local Settings \Temp\XPgrpwise\5086C45Cco... 10/23/2012
(10/23/2012) Bill Gray - Re: Fwd: water supply 100 Ridgewood Road page 1
From:
Enk Whitney
To:
Niechwiadovia, Mike; Parsons, Tom
CC:
Gibson, scoff; Gray, &II
Date:
10/2312012 4:72 PM
Subject:
Re: Fwd: water supply 100 Ridgewood Road
Attachments:
Fwd: RE: water supply 100 Ridgewood Road
Hello Tom,
I want to check with Bill on this to see if it is a matter which could require BPW approval. I've attached your subsequent
email also for Bill's
information. I'll call him also
enk
»> Tom Parsons 10/23/2012 2:0B PM >>>
MM atl Enk
IW PI�ev,rcJls ¢Jrgb¢IIFNr wa6 fiom tle VOCN for ticelrflR paKNm. YOU xe amamdem wlT MM?
Tom
rthvennl
Tk�mYl. �rcIWm9 mYam[nmme, maY rnun kpkWmrtla sa emPomom inlwmawn.11 rt mlmEef mlYlu' uelmlmum(sl rvwM. ttw+reeMy qke -mal F mw w rvon mane nm nos
numco� mme mm w.m mle�mmm,..�mmma. �4 mrtrtmaii w �ks�nmmo. oeas.wnma.emr. imwmucv n�mivrm+l me m.a ma o-man a� m.Amm.
,,, m Iw}vEOU., lemon, m me.aa < s�ssesrs }vneasseoscwauenssmmnrt >. a.kmr �esneflsamnsn- ,.,om: