Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2013-08-26 Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board Monday, August 26, 2013 at 4:30 p.m. 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Minutes Present: Herb Engman, Bill Goodman, Pat Leary, Rich DePaolo, Rod Howe and Tee Ann Hunter Absent: Eric Levine Staff: Susan Ritter, Paulette Terwilliger, Bruce Bates, Judy Drake, Mike Solvig, Jim Weber and Dan Tasman Agenda 1—Call to order 4:32 pm Mr. Engman called the meeting to order at 4:32 p.m. and added an agenda item. Mr. Engman reported that Mr. Weber had received a letter from Cornell University regarding the Highway Training School the College had considered ending and the Town had sent a letter encouraging them to reconsider. The letter stated they had reconfigured the departments involved in the training and they will be pursuing grant monies to continue the training school. Agenda 2— Report of Town Officials Agenda 3— Discuss Possible Changes to the Town's Smoking Policy Mr. Engman asked the Board if they would like to pursue the idea of having Town properties, including parks and trails, smoke free. He noted that he and Mr. DePaolo have been working on the topic and wanted to have a sense of the Board on whether to continue and formulate a draft policy. The Board stated they should continue. Agenda 4— Discuss and Consider Authorization for the Town Supervisor to Sign an MOU with Finger Lakes Land Trust Regarding the Baldwin Property Mr. Engman noted this is the first step and defines how the Town will work with the Finger Lakes Land Trust to get to the final steps in protecting the land. TB Resolution No. 2013- 114: Authorization for the Town Supervisor to Sign and MOU with Finger Lakes Land Trust Regarding the Protection of the Baldwin Lands Whereas the Town Board intends to enter into an MOU with the Finger Lakes Land Trust for the cooperative effort of protecting approximately 14 acres of land referred to as the "Baldwin Property" and a draft MOU outlining these intentions has been drafted and reviewed by the Attorney for the Town and the Town Board Now therefore be it 1 Resolved that the Town Board hereby approves and authorizes the Town Supervisor to sign the proposed MOU on the Town's behalf. Moved: Rod Howe Seconded: Rich DePaolo Vote: Ayes– Howe, DePaolo, Leary, Goodman and Engman Absent: Hunter and Levine Agenda 5–Authorize Surplus Equipment– Highway (Added Item) Mr. Weber explained this was added because the auction is being held Labor Day weekend which is prior to the next Board meeting. TB Resolution No. 2013-115: Sale of Surplus Items Whereas, a municipal auction is held every year at the Lansing Town Barns which will be held in September of this year; and Whereas the Public Works Department wishes to put the following surplus equipment in the auction in September: • 1996 Ford Aeromax Truck • 1997 Ford F450 1 Ton Truck • 2001 Jeep Cherokee • 2003 Ford F-150 Pickup • 2003 John Deere Front Mower • 2001 ODB Leaf Vacuum • 2007 Salsco Chipper • 2003 Mid Atlantic Trailer Now therefore be it; Resolved, that the equipment listed above be placed in the auction with the money from the sale going into the Cash Reserve — Highway Equipment account (DB230). Moved: Rich DePaolo Seconded: Bill Goodman Vote: Ayes– DePaolo, Goodman, Leary, Howe, and Engman Absent: Hunter and Levine Agenda 6–Continue review of Draft Comprehensive Plan Comments Review of the compiled comments was resumed at the top of page 3, Brittain comments. 2 EC1—Suggesting changes to snow plowing policy to reduce energy. The Board felt this was not the place for this type of policy change in that much detail. Mr. DePaolo asked if we have a policy and Mr. Weber noted that there are different protocols for different de-icing products. As for plowing, we do not call our crews in until it is about 1.5-2 inches but with that being said, all four hills have different weather; you can literally have 2"plus inches on West Hill and nothing downtown. We call in crews for where we need them. There is an expectation of service to our current standards. Mr. Engman noted that at some point a "bare roads" policy was adopted throughout the area and that could be rethought but not as part of the Comprehensive Plan. It was noted that the Plan encourages review of all policies for energy savings and green initiatives without being specific. EC-1 C—Suggesting other water efficiencies. The Board agreed to add part of the suggested change as another bullet point: "Explore other changes to the water supply system in order to improve overall efficiency." EC 1 D—Suggesting the word "investigate" as opposed to "require" because there may be better alternatives and the word "require" binds the Board to using something that may not be the best. Board agreed. EC 1 E—Suggesting encouraging light colored roofs. The Board discussed this but did not want to require them because that could eliminate roof-top gardens or solar panels. The Board also thought this was being too detailed for the Plan. Light colored roofs may not work with the protecting the Town's Viewsheds either. This is something very specific and the overall concept is already in the section saying things like this will be investigated or considered. EC 1 H —Suggesting adding the word "preferentially" to allow options. Board agreed. EC 7 E—Already addressed. RE 1 C—Talking about access to Cayuga Lake and saying we already have a lot but the points listed are not in the Town and we have no access to the lake besides the small East Shore Drive Park and nowhere with swimming. RE 2 D—Questioning why recreation is "aggressively" and others are "explore". The Board did not see a major difference and did not move the change. Transportation Commenter felt it sounded as if we are trying to balance growth vs. development and they suggested adding the word "understanding". The Board didn't feel the change clarified the paragraph any more. No change. TR 2—Commenter did not think the Plan addresses traffic "volume." Lengthy discussion followed. Different members noted other sections where these concerns are addressed and the goals of reducing traffic impacts and volumes to the extent possible are throughout the 3 Plan. That being said, there is a difference between waiting to get out for a commute and not being able to check your mailbox. The Board suggested making the note somewhere in the Plan that we realize we can't fix everything but we are looking at everything we can reasonably control; that way we are saying we will do what we can but we aren't promising anything that we can't commit to delivering. Suggested statement "Consider the effects of traffic volume on the quality of life in new and existing neighborhoods." TR 2 E –Suggested changing the placement of the word appropriate. Approved. TR 3 A– Looking at sight distances. Discussion followed focusing on ways that highways can be designed and neighborhood roads shouldn't be turned into highways to mitigate sight distance issues. There are ways other than removing bushes and hedgerows and the Plan is clear that roads will be thought out for a number of factors. TR 4–Specific additional comments requested that the Board felt some we do and they are also too specific for the Plan. TR 4 B–Suggested wording regarding right-of-ways which is already addressed TR 5–Suggested wording about Town and County roads coordination. Discussion followed on this and although this is addressed in other sections and statements, Mr. DePaolo did want to emphasize that we would like to make a concerted effort to make sure we can get the roads that are appropriately sized for our neighborhoods without forgoing state and federal money using Context Sensitive Streets. Mr. Tasman will come up with some wording for the next meeting. TR 6 C–Comments about retrofitting sidewalks. Discussion focused on off-road sidewalks or paths. Although this is stated in the recreation section, Ms. Hunter wanted "Explore the establishment of new multi-use pathways independent of the roadway network that would allow pedestrian and bicycle mobility away from motor vehicle traffic." Board agreed. TR 7–Suggested additional recommendations. The Board agreed with adding "assess the need for wildlife crossings." and felt the others were already addressed with the exception of"no net increase in asphalt." which the board did not agree with. Municipal Services and Infrastructure MS 1—Additional recommendation suggested regarding downgrading some services and maintenance. The Board felt this is a policy question and does not belong in the Plan and some of the comments are already addressed in the concept of reviewing our policies and procedures for toward greener planning etc. MS 4–Suggestions on limiting impervious area etc. for stormwater maintenance. The Board felt this is in the Plan already. "Limiting" would mean no construction and that is not the plan. 4 MS 4 B— Erosion of ditches. Mr. DePaolo stated this is not a problem on Town maintained roads but the State and County is another story and we have no control over them. Community Services CS1 Suggestion to move the section. Board disagreed. CS 4—Suggested "guarding against landfills." The Board felt this was very NIMBY and started a discussion on where trash goes. Economic Development ED 1 C—Suggested changing "streamlining" to "clarify" and the Board discussed the meanings and interpretations of the two words. Board decided to change the sentence to "clarify and simplify regulations where appropriate" ED 1 1 —This change has already been made. ED 2 A—Suggested that this is confusing. Mr. Howe will work on rewording this. Chapter 3 Suggestions regarding the CU golf course. The Board has discussed this at length at other meetings and an "Open Space" category is too limiting and the Institutional Zone will allow for restrictions through the zoning process. End of Brittains' comments. B. Hilker—Opposed to changing the agriculture zone density. The Board has this topic scheduled for more discussion already. S. Bensel —Suggested changing streetlights and we are being too specific. The Board agreed and has already changed this statement to address similar concerns. L. Fabbroni —Objected to specific development plans being mentioned by name in the Plan. Ms. Ritter noted that he is referring to an appendix where a focus group is quoted and the reference is appropriate. He also requested that all the minutes and documents regarding Mr. Lucente's projects become part of the Plan. The Board felt that was unreasonable and all information is available as public documents. He also stated that the proposed Land Use Map is too vague and seems to make a large portion of Mr. Lucente's land Conservation to prohibit development. The Board felt the boundaries are supposed to be nebulous and will be detailed in zoning changes. C Forrest—Against development near West King Rd. The Board knows her position but development is going to happen and could happen now under current zoning. 5 D Crittenden—Comments regarding West Hill — make WH Semi-Rural not New Neighborhood and add West Hill as a unique character along with the Colleges and CIVIC that are listed. The Board noted that the reference is listing institutions not hills and the other is too broad of a suggestion and the area of West Hill has a few levels of new zoning planned. There are ways to protect Williams Glen through zoning such as our stream setback laws and conservation zones among others. East Shore Residents—is there a commitment to what is shown right now on the land use map to establish the Conservation zone and the Medium Density. The Board does think some areas merit consideration which and perhaps the backside would be Conservation. The group wants to hear that the Board intends to look at Conservation Zoning in the upper portion of the area and not multiple residences on the lower. The Board agreed. This is the end of the compiled specific suggestions submitted to the Town. Ms. Ritter noted there are other comments about the Plan that were sent out that are more general in nature but should be reviewed and discussed. She also noted that Ms. Brock had sent comments as legal counsel to the Town. The Board asked Ms. Ritter to send Ms. Brock's comments out again and both would be reviewed for the next meeting. There is also the Minority Report. Parking lot list As the Board has gone through the review of the Plan, some items were put in a "parking lot" for further discussion. NR 6 F— Had to do with a statement saying "ensure large amounts of water are not taken from Cayuga Lake". Discussion followed. The issue is the statement is broad; we take large amounts for our drinking water and Cornell takes it for cooling etc. The intent is to prohibit fracking water being taken but do we even have the authority to do this. Options were discussed and discarded. We have no regulatory means to enforce this type of statement. The Board decided to strike NR 6 F. New Verbiage from Staff — Page 14, last paragraph of the intro, last sentence for Housing and Neighborhoods Ms. Ritter read the new end of the sentence: ...while the supply of housing geared to low income residents has increased in recent years, housing affordable to residents in the median income range continues to be in short supply. Board approved. Energy and Climate Protection section — Mr. Goldsmith wanted to add a goal of"set short and long-term goals of community wide greenhouse gas emission reduction. Develop and implement a community EAP to meet reduction goals and update plan on a regular basis. And, an additional goal of"Maintain a standing committee to advise on the implementation and update of the community EAP and other sustainability related issues. Ms. Ritter noted there is 6 nothing in the section about how to continue the efforts. Discussion followed. The Board approved adding the language. Ms. Ritter noted there had been some discussion about what "ICLEI" stood for and she found out it does not stand for anything as an acronym anymore, it is now just the name of the group. ED 2 There was a discussion about PILOT s and where they should be discussed. The problem is the IDA is appointed by the County and they make the decisions and have the authority to grant PILOTS. In the past the Town has granted PILOTS with no percentage change. There is verbiage in the Plan already about discouraging PILOTS but the other issue is getting tax- exempt entities, such as the two major educational institutions, to contribute more. Mr. DePaolo will work on some language for the next meeting. Next Meeting - Susan Brock's comments. Future Land Use Map, Minority Report and the density requirements for Agricultural Zone. The next step would be the implementation and then the GEIS. Ms. Hunter had a general comment to the Board regarding a discussion with a gentleman who tax credits and whether mixed-use developments can qualify. We have been told they do not and he seemed to think that was incorrect and we could. Ms. Hunter has contacted Ms. Lifton's office for clarification and if it is a State mandate, to start appealing to the State to change that. Agenda 7 Consider Approval of Town of Ithaca Abstract TB Resolution No. 2013 -116: Town of Ithaca Abstract Whereas the following numbered vouchers have been presented to the Ithaca Town Board for approval of payment; and Whereas the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board; now therefore be it Resolved that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers in total for the amounts indicated. VOUCHER NOS.4153 - 4237 General Fund Town wide 37,335.52 General Fund Part Town 2,462.34 Highway Fund Part Town 75,396.45 Water Fund 17,742.88 Sewer Fund 4,682.28 Salt Storage Building Replacement 92,476.44 Town Hall Parking Lot Improvement 5399.91 Fire Protection Fund 264,792.00 Risk Retention Fund Forest Home Lighting District 177.44 Glenside Lighting District 55.24 Renwick Heights Lighting District 77.68 Eastwood Commons Lighting District 169.53 Clover Lane Lighting District 20.05 Winner's Circle Lighting District 61.72 Burleigh Drive Lighting District 68.42 West Haven Road Lighting District 216.70 Coddington Road Lighting District 128.62 Trust and Agency 1,854.00 Debt Service 1,800.00 TOTAL 504,917.22 Moved: Tee Ann Hunter Seconded: Rod Howe Vote: Ayes - Hunter, Howe, DePaolo, Leary, Goodman and Engman Absent: Levine Agenda 8 Report of Town Committees Mr. DePaolo asked about the Town's contribution to TCAT and whether that discussion is going to take place at the budget meeting or a whole board meeting. He was concerned about how our pulling our funding dovetails with what we say we want in the Comp Plan. Mr. Engman responded that town residents pay through the County tax rate and they have not delivered on the points in our MOD with them. He felt that every time we go to TCAT with a request or comment they essentially shut the door in our face and say we have no say unless we are a full partner. When the Town's contribution started, other municipalities were supposed to do the same and only the Town does. Discussion followed and Mr. Howe suggested TCAT should be invited to come in and talk to the Board about their rational and levels of service and what they want to see in order to extend their service. Agenda 9 Intermunicipal Organizations Agenda 10 Review of Correspondence Consider Adjournment Meeting was adjourned upon motion and a second at 7:13 p.m. Submittecmy Paulette Terwilliger ,Town Clerk 8