No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2001-04-09 ARCHIVE COPY ITHACA TOWN BOARD REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 9, 2001 AT 5 : 30 P . M . AGENDA 1 . Call to Order 2 . Pledge of Allegiance 3 . Report of Tompkins County Board of Representatives 4 . Report of Fire Commissioners 5 . 6 : 00 p. m . PERSONS TO BE HEARD 6 . 6 : 15 p. m . Discussion of Ithaca Fire Dept. Use of Town Hall (Guy Van Benschoten) 7 . 6 : 30 p . m . Linderman Creek Apartments - Phase II - Rezoning Request 8 . Report on Eco Village Submittal of DGEIS Consider Approval to Establish a Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee -- 10 . Consider Authorization to Award Contract for Maple Avenue Reconstruction 11 . Consider Authorization to Advertise and Receive Bids for Hanshaw Road Sewer Project 12 . Consider Approval of Town Road Specifications 13 . Consider Approval of Request for Proposal for Design of Highway Facilities 14 . Consider Approval of Advanced Energy Alliance Agreement 15 , Consider Designation of Polling Places and Approval of Polling District Map for Year 2001 16 . Consider Appointment of Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review 17 , Consider Approval of Transitional Duty Program 18 , Consider Approval of Point Factor Job Evaluation Criteria and Point Scale 19 . Consider Amendment of Safety Glasses Program i L4 1 20 . Consider Appointment of Town Planning Board Member I i 21 . Consent Agenda Items a . Approval of Town Board Minutes - 3/ 12/2001 b . Town ofi Ithaca Warrants C , Bolton Point Warrants d . Promotional Appointments e . Budget Modifications 22 . Report of Town Committees 23 , Monthly Report of Town Officials a . Town Clerk b . Highway Superintendent C , Director of Engineering d . Director of Planning e . Director of Building/Zoning f . Human Resource Specialist g . Budget Officer h . Network/Records Specialist i . Receiver of Taxes j . Attorney, for the Town of Ithaca 24 . Review of Correspondence a . Sierra Club re Cayuga Lake Water Quality b . Town ofl Dryden ' s response to Sierra Club C , Flier re Alan Cohen Benefit Roast d . NYS DOT letters re Speed Reduction Requests e . Thank You from George M . Bantuvanis re Hanshaw Road Project f . City Fire Department re Record Storage g . David AlIlee , Cornell Local Government Program , re NYS DOS project 25 . Consider Adjournment I i ARCHIVE COPS' REGULAR MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD MONDAY, APRIL 9 , 2001 AT 5 : 30 P . M . ITHACA TOWN HALL, 215 NORTH TIOGA ST, ITHACA, NY At a regular meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County, New York , held at the Town Hall , 215 North Tioga Street , Ithaca , NY there were present : PRESENT : Catherine Valentino , Supervisor; Carolyn Grigorov , Councilwoman ; David Klein , Councilman ; Ed Conley , Councilman ; Bill Lesser, Councilman ; Tom , Councilman . EXCUSED : Mary Russell , Councilwoman PRESENT: Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk ; Bill Troy , Attorney for the Town ; Dan Walker, Town Engineer; Fred Noteboom , Highway Superintendent ; Susan Ritter, Interim Director of Planning ; Al Carvill , Budget Officer; Judy Drake ; Human Resource Specialist . EXCUSED : Andy Frost , Director Building/Zoning OTHERS : Carl Valentino , 118 Cambridge Place ; Mr. Romanowski , Ithaca Fire Department ; Tom Joseph , Tompkins County Board of Representative ; Lauren Bishop , Ithaca Journal ; Guy Van Benschoten , Ithaca Fire Department ; John Fenessey , Conifer Realty Call to Order : The Supervisor called the meeting to order at 5 : 30 p . m . , and led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance . Agenda Item No. 3 — Report of Tompkins County Board of Representatives Tim Joseph , Tompkins County Board of Representatives — We finally closed out the books for the year 2000 . We are 3 million dollars short of what we need to support our budget . Our fund balance is not as healthy as it was last year. We used the fund balance to hold down taxes . The County Administrator is working with department heads to come up with $800 , 000 worth of reductions in spending this year. The departments might not see an increase next year. The County Board decided to locate the 911 consolidated dispatch center at the South Hill Fire Station . We appreciate the Town of Ithaca' s cooperation in making the site available . We are still working on the details of an agreement . The County does appreciate the effort that has been made so far and the willingness to allow the County to use Town land . The tower system has been the source of a lot of conflict between the County and various Towns . The location of the Fire Station has no effect on the location of the towers . Tower construction will not occur within the Town of Ithaca . The existing tower will be used as part of the system . The arguments over the tower siting and the development of the trunking radio system are premature . They are premature for two reasons . We have developed ideas for the project and located potential sites . We have not decided on the exact sites at this time . The issues should not be raised until the project happens . I am hoping that the State is going to build the system . The County is moving ahead with the initial stages of an environmental impact statement . ra011U;IVkBQF ® 6NUTES PAGE 2 APRIL 9 , 2001 Appel oved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Hopefully , we will win State support to extend their system in this area . The State is still early i their process . The County would like the State to build more or less the same system we hav been planning . The fact that we have our system planned will encourage the State to come here early . The arguments will then be with the State rather than with the County . The State would be doing the environmental impact statement . Hopefully , everybody will just sit tight and wait for development . Supervisor Valentino — We will not be able to do so because of the way the County bid the environmental impact statement ( EIS ) . It forced us to assert ourselves as involved agencies . Mr. Joseph — Agencies that become involved at a later stage can still be involved agencies . We will still discuss if the Town is an involved agency . At this point , the Town could still be an involved agency c�,tt a later stage . Supervisor Valentino — It is not the understanding we have . It would be true if the County were completing a generic environmental impact statement at this point . Mr. Joseph — The County is trying to use the environmental impact statement as a planning tool , which is the way i,t was intended to be used . The County is trying to deal with the scoping , which asks what we arel looking at and use the answers to develop the project . It is not as easy as it sounds . It makes sense that the environmental impact statement should be considered before developing the project instead of afterwards . We are having trouble fitting into the SEQR pro' rocess . Supervisor Valentino — Is the County doing the scoping for the project now? Mr. Joseph — Yes ! Supervisor Valentino — Three million dollars is a huge shortfall for the budget . What has caused the shortfall ? j Mr. Joseph - We have had significant windfalls for five years in a row . We covered our budget with the windfalls I we received . Eventually the time comes when the windfalls are no longer coming in . The County can no longer use the windfall money to cover budget spending . Supervisor Valentino - Are the windfalls Federal or State aid ? Mr. Joseph — The first year or two there were rebates on health insurance . The hospital paid off its bonds . The County received State aid for the new Human Service Building . We were in discussions with the State regarding a formula for which they would reimburse us their potion of the cost . It was finally settled last year and the County received a large payment for several years . There is not a large item windfall this year. Councilman Lesser — What portion of the budget does this represent ? i 2 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 3 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Mr. Joseph - It is about a 52 million dollar budget . Councilman Lesser - Has the County thought about what might happen if the sales tax revenues decline ? Mr. Joseph - The County is thinking about it . We have included in our budget projections that there will be a decline in sales tax from the loss of tax on clothing and shoes . An increase in revenues has been anticipated . We do wonder if we will actually see an increase in revenues . Agenda Item No. 4 - Report of Fire Commissioners Mr. Romanowski , Ithaca Fire Department - The flow chart depicting basic distribution process is now in draft form . I have given copies to Mr. Carvill and Supervisor Valentino so the Town knows exactly what happens with the two percent money . The decision has been made to locate the 911 centralized communications center at Fire Station #5 on South Hill in the Town of Ithaca . Former volunteer companies' rooms are now being utilized as Department offices . Other spaces will be changed to increase the operation and efficiency of the Department . Assistant Chief Van Benschoten will speak on Fire Department ' s use of Town Hall . Bunker recruitment goals have been establish . Station 9 appears to have a full bunker staff for the next year. Station 5 has many vacancies . Present recruiting efforts are focusing on filling in the vacancies at Station 5 . Station 6 is recruiting from a different target population besides students . Recruiting for Station 6 will occur after the program recruitment of Station 6 is complete . State Senator Kohl had an article in the paper regarding volunteer services with the Fire Department . The article stated the decline in volunteer fire fighting over the last three to five years and what it means . The State is seriously thinking about recruitment efforts and retention efforts . Review is underway for training and duty hours compliance . There are members of the volunteer fire companies that have not met their training and duty hour requirements . The volunteer fire fighters will be notified and required to meet minimum criteria standards or placed on inactive status . The requirements for training and participation are strict and demanding on time . Many people have trouble meeting the responsibilities . There was a CPR gift of $2 , 000 received from Heartmates to purchase mannequins and supplies for the Ithaca Fire Department . Ithaca Service League donated $750 . 00 to enable firefighter McGary to attend the 9th International Conference of Fire Service Women in Georgia . She had a very good and very productive time . I have been re-appointed for a two -year term as a delegate to the Cayuga Medical Center Board of Directors for their annual meeting . 3 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 4 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved The County is going to find out that they are going to run out of money . Supervisor Valentino — Many people mentioned the potential problem to the County . Mr. Romanowski There is bound to be a problem when you rely on extra money . It is not going to be there all the time . The County burned up 17 million dollars of tobacco money and a lot of their surplus . They will need to raise taxes , or cut services and personnel to make up for the shortfall . The County also hired over 30 new employees last year. Councilwoman Grigorov — They expanded the staff by 30 ? 1 Mr. Romanowski - The County expanded their staff by over 30 employees . The Town has been showing good fiscal responsibility with your decisions . Supervisor Valentino - We gave the City a defined list of items they needed to complete at the last fire contract inegotiations meeting . We will see at the next meeting if the City has come through with our ri quests . Mr. Romanowski My main concern is protecting the Town of Ithaca ' s interest in the money that the Town is paying to the City for fire protection . Supervisor Valentino — We will be working with John Barney regarding the fire contract . We ar waiting for the City to respond to our requests . There are some specific items the City needs t come back to us with and clean up . I Agenda Item 6 Ithaca Fire Department Use of the Town Hall - Attachment # 1 . Guy Van Benschoten , Assistant Chief of Ithaca Fire Department — The Power Point presentation will give additional information about the table top simulator and what we hope to accomplish with the simulator. Following the presentation: �I Supervisor Valentino — What area of the basement would the Fire Department be using ? Dan Walker — Thb Fire Department will be using the old locker room in the basement . I talked with Mr. Frost regarding the use of the space . There are some questions regarding access . The area was accessible before and there is one emergency exit . Mr. Frost thought the space would be acceptable to 1 se if it is limited to small groups . The table top simulator would be set up most of the time in this 'space . There is enough room there to work around the simulator. The old spy ways used by Postal Service can be used by the controllers of the projects/training . The controllers could keep an eye on what is happening on the table . They do not want the participants to know what they are scheming to create . The controllers create the incidents and then give direction . i I 4 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 5 APRIL 9, 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Supervisor Valentino — How many people would be using the room at one time ? Mr. Van Benschoten — The class size is limited to 30 . Only one half of the class would be in the room at one time . The other half would be doing another exercise . We want to maximize the opportunity for each person to get involved with the simulation . Mr. Walker — There were eight to twelve persons doing the exercise in Corning . There were five different disciplines represented . There was the fire department , police , public works , EMS , and government . There were six active people . The others were actually pushing the cars around and creating the problems . Supervisor Valentino — How does it work? Do other members of the class work in a different room ? Mr. Walker — The class would break into two different groups . One group was in the simulation room the other group was being trained in other areas . Supervisor Valentino — How often do you do this? Mr. Van Benschoten — The course that Mr. Noteboom , Mr. Walker, and myself attended was the Public Safety/Critical Incident Management sponsored by the State . We might hold a session once or twice a year until we have most of the County trained . There would be opportunities for the Town to integrate in case there was a significant incident in the Town . Supervisor Valentino — This is a part of the building that we can allow people to access pretty easily without jeopardizing the security of the rest of the building . Mr. — Where do they keep the model now? Mr. Van Benschoten — It is currently stored at the South Hill Station . It is currently not being used . We have put a lot of time and effort into it . Supervisor Valentino — Mr. Walker, would it be your recommendation that we could accommodate this ? Mr. Walker — Yes . It is not going to be a constant situation . The training in Corning was held on a Saturday . It was most convenient for the people that were working . Mr. Van Benschoten — The Town would know the schedule in advance . There is one course for the elected and administrative heads of government . It is an opportunity to see how incidents happen and know what the priorities are for each of the services : EMS , police , fire , public works and how we all need to come together. I would encourage members of the council to attended the Integrated Emergency Management Class at Emittsburg , which the Town Engineer and Town Highway Superintendent have attended . Travel , lodging , tuition and fees are paid for. The only cost to the individual or to the Town is the mandatory meal ticket . 5 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 6 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved I Supervisor Valentino — I assume we do not have to have an agreement at this point for costs write-offs . It can be open ended as long as they feel the space is adequate and we feel it is working okay . i Councilman Conley — We can always terminate use if it is not working out . Resolution No. 37(a) — Approval of Use of the Town Hall by Ithaca Fire Department WHEREAS, the Ithaca Fire Department has requested use of an area in the basement of the Town Hall to set up a table top simulator and conduct periodic training of emergency management personnel; now, therefore BE RESO i VED, that the governing Town Board does hereby authorize the Ithaca Fire Department to move the table top simulator to the Town Hall and conduct periodic training of emergency management personnel. MOVED: Council m I an Conley, SECONDED: Councilman Klein; A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. I Aqenda Item 5 — Persons to be Heard I There were none. I Supervisor Valentino — Mr. Frost is excused this evening . His mother passed away . Stanley Schier' s operation went very smoothly . He is recovering at an extremely rapid pace . He might be coming home this Tuesday or Wednesday . He is also looking forward to getting cards from all of us . The nurses could not believe that he was up and moving around so well on Saturday . Tompkins County! Communication Project - There was information in the packet regarding the communication towers project ( See attachment #2) . There are nine or ten municipalities that share our concern, about being involved agencies on the towers project . The City is not sure of their position at this point . We received a, letter from Barbara Mink that waffles around the issue . Councilwoman Russell sent a response to Ms . Mink' s letter . We want a direct responsel, as to whether or not the local government would be considered an involved agency . Tonight is the first time I have heard anything about New York State taking over the project . It certainly was not mentioned in Ms . Mink' s letter. I Councilwoman G igorov — Did you see Ms . Mink on channel 7 the other night ? They asked her about the project and she was rather diplomatic about it . i 6 I TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 7 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved. Supervisor Valentino — It is disappointing not to have a direct answer at this level of government . This would be expected in Washington , DC or in the Assembly. We should all know exactly where we stand and we do not know exactly where we stand . Mr. Joseph ' s comments tonight are certainly the first: time any of us have heard that put forward . It is going to take quite a bit of sorting through . Councilwoman Russell and John Barney have been doing an outstanding job of researching the issue . They have looked up a lot of case law . It seems to me this is not something to waffle around about . It is a very important issue to the municipalities . It really needs to be clearly resolved . It is important for us to go forward with the meeting that we have planned . We have an upcoming meeting with the municipal officers on April 17 , 2000 at Town Hall for the Supervisors . We have invited the City and the Mayor to come . After that meeting we will have our regular municipal officers meeting at the Lehigh Valley House . Councilman — Supervisor Valentino , in the second paragraph of Councilwoman Russell ' s letter, it states that the Town ' s position is that the initial decision should be made locally . Is that a formal position that we have taken ? I am not sure I agree with that in this particular instance . It should go to court so that case law can be established . I still believe that . It is an official position if there has been a vote . Supervisor Valentino — There is a time limit on being an involved agency . We cannot really withdraw our decision at this point . The second meeting of the month would be for the board to make that final determination . At this point it is a preliminary decision . We lose our designation or attempted designation if we back off. Councilman Lesser — Are we trying to establish our position vis-a-vis the County? Is this a broader issue ? Supervisor Valentino — It is a much broader issue than the communication towers . It is a very important issue for our rights on our land use , zoning laws , regulations , and the County' s needs to comply with them . There has certainly been some case law that indicated that they should be required to do so . Attorney Barney and Councilwoman Russell 's research has strengthen our position . Councilman — It is -far from being clear in my opinion . Supervisor Valentino — We can go over the actual case law and background with Councilwoman Russell . Attorney Barney is a very conservative attorney . He feels strongly that we ' re on the right side of this issue . Attorney Troy — The problem comes from the Court of Appeals discarding an old rule . They created a new rule with nine factors . They did not determine who should apply the nine factors in which instance . Councilman — It was probably done deliberately . 7 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 8 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved i Attorney Troy — Courts will often do that . They will only decide the precise issue that is befor them and then there are years of uncertainty . It is cases like this that end up resolving others . Supervisor Valentino — This could be a very important case for all of New York . This is the first time it has probably been directly addressed . On the other hand , when you look at the County and they talk about intermunicipal cooperation and doing what is best for the community . We are talking about towers , which is a safety issue . Think about this , part of the things that are addressed by thel municipalities is to ensure that the property that they purchase is large enough to contain the tower should it collapse . We already know from talking to some other people that the land the County is talking about buying is not large enough to contain the tower if it should collapse . The tower needs to be certified by an engineer, the Town Engineer and the County Engineer, to make sure that the tower is built safely . This is not frivolous stuff . It is a very important case for zoning , but it is also an important case for ensuring that those steps for safety are applied . Councilman - It is a very contentious issue . The County is not going to suddenly agree with the Town . I do not think that is the case , but they might . We do not even know where the towers are going to be yet , as far as I know . Councilwoman G igorov - That is not exactly the point . Councilman — It' s the principle . Councilwoman Ungorov — Once they say they' ll be here and here and here and it turns into neighborhood figklt over not putting it there , it' s a completely different issue . Councilman Klein— All of our Zoning Board recognized that you can 't really deny a tower. At best you can create ceirtain standards . Supervisor Valentino — You look at every municipality here , the Town of Ithaca and the City are a little different because we have paid fire fighters . Well , part of our town is covered by volunteers , but all of our communities have these various fire departments and every single municipality recognizes the importance of this 911 communication and its need to be there . Every single municipality has said they have no intention of standing in the way of this project moving forward . They just want to make sure safety regulations are adhered to , that the provisions in our ordinances which , we did to protect our residents are maintained . And they say they' re going to do that . If they say they' re going to do that why don 't they just go ahead and name us as an involved agency . Councilwoman Grigorov — Because they want to maintain the principal that they have the right to do what they want . I Councilman Conley — Are we talking abut this so that we become an involved agency? I 8 I TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 9 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Supervisor Valentino — We' ve already sent in our letter stating that we are an involved agency. The County has contested our right to be involved agencies . We clearly believe that we are involved agencies . Councilman Conley — You mean the County can come into the Town and do something because they have the power to do that ? Supervisor Valentino — That ' s what they' re saying . Councilman Conley — The State says the same thing . That they have a right to do whatever they want . Attorney Troy — There' s an opinion letter in here from a State agency saying that they generally agree with us . Again they couch it in somewhat tentative language . Councilman — A perfect opportunity for us to establish case law for the next community who is going to be facing a County that is dictatorial . Supervisor Valentino — Some of the smaller municipalities here feel pretty strongly . You take Danby , the Village of Lansing , they' re saying as a group together we can financially take on this case . Each little municipality wouldn 't be able to financially take it on to do the test case . This helps the really Small , poorer municipalities establish their rights . It' s an example of intermunicipal cooperation among the towns and the villages to try to get it resolved . Councilman Lesser — Should this become a State project , what rights do we have then ? Supervisor Valentino — I don 't know . This is another problem . The County does not directly communicate with us . We get bits and pieces from here and there . Attorney Troy — This came out of left field . I 've been hearing all along that there is State bidding going on for these types of systems . This was transformed tonight to the State may build this . I ' m not an authority , but I 've never heard of the State building and turning over a communications system to municipalities . Supervisor Valentino — That' s not how the State generally operates that I ' m aware of . Susan Ritter — I have heard this . I went to the meeting where the consultants talked about this with the County and there is some indication that perhaps the State would actually implement this instead of the County . It would be statewide . Councilman Conley — So they would just put it in where they felt it ought to go ? Attorney Troy — These consultants are the people that are doing the work for the State . I think , if I understand correctly , they County' s using them so that they can sort of dove tail their efforts . That ' s a far cry from the State saying we ' re going to provide radio service for Lansing Fire Department . 9 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 10 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved i i Supervisor Valentino — So this was the consultants? I Susan Ritter — No , the consultants are working for the County . But I believe the State has their own consultants also or these consultants are sort of in cooperation . But there is this issue that the State is trying to implement something as well . It might be slightly different technology . I Supervisor Valentino — My concern is we ' re hearing bits and pieces . We don 't have any real leader from the County saying this is where we are with this , this is what is being proposed . We've not had di iect , clear communication . We' re trying to put pieces of a puzzle together on our own that we shouldn 't have to do . Any other questiolns ? We ' ll be back to this in two weeks . i Agenda Item No 7 - Linderman Creek Apartments — Phase 11 — Rezoning Request — Attachment # 3 1 i Councilman Klein — Supervisor Valentino , as you know , I have a conflict of interest with this particular project . I I would recuse myself from any discussion , and in order to allow the Board to be comfortable wi Ith an open discussion , I would prefer just leaving the room . Councilman Klein leaves room. l John Fenessey -i I ' m Vice President of Conifer Realty LLC . I am here tonight to present o proposed development of a second phase for the Linderman Creek Apartments up on Mecklenberg Rd . We had originally intended to replicate the first phase with another 56 units . But as we got into the housing market study , we found substantially more demand than what we had anticipated . As a consequence we thought , since there is such a demand , and I believe you have a letter in your file from the entity that carried out the market study , that there are some 2 , 930 income eligible households and we need to capture but 2 . 5 % of those households in order to fill these 72 units . On that basis , we decided let' s take a look at doing a larger project on the site . And also , a factor that came into consideration , was we felt we could afford more facilities for the tenants than we could under a smaller project . You ' ll see that we now have a larger community building , we also have a picnic shelter, and we think we can have more recreational facilities for the tenants . Both children as well as adults . Mr. Fenessey presented the proposed site plan to the Board. i John Fenessey — 1Within the requested zone change you ' ll notice these units here represent the proposed 72 we' re discussing here this evening . You ' ll see that this little strip of land left between the end of this property line and the western property line . We have proposed , subject to need/demand , 3 additional building , 36 or 24 units in the future for that part of the site . Councilman Conley — Those are the only things that are different? Those three on that end ? i 10 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 11 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved John Fenessey - These three here , right . For the requested zone change we could request just a strip like that , but we thought it might be prudent to see how that plays out and ask for a zoning change that would include where those three buildings would go . If, in fact , they ever go there . Councilman Conley — The last time you presented it , you were talking about the other part of it , correct? All the buildings were on the first presentation other than those three . John Fenessey — This has 72 . We' ve just increased the size of the project . Supervisor Valentino — That would be 16 more units ? John Fenessey — Yes . Councilman Lesser — Aren 't you effectively asking for approval for 96 units? John Fenessey — That's correct . As I previously mentioned , the rents here will be little bit higher than what they are currently at the first phase . We ' re going for tax credits on this to make it possible . Those rents are $ 544 for the one , $629 for the two , and $660 for the three- bedroom . Supervisor Valentino — Does that include the utilities ? John Fenessey — That includes the utilities . The landlord will pay for the heat and the water. They will pay for the electric . Supervisor Valentino — Will those ranges of rent still qualify Section 8 people ? John Fenessey — Section 8 is really 50% of median . The fist phase was at 60% of median . We ' re a little higher here than we were at the first phase . Councilwoman Grigorov — Back when you did the first phase your future plan went back farther instead of going up the road ? John Fenessey — When we made the application several years ago , we had just merged with Home Properties . When we went to do this phase , Home Properties and Conifer Reality separated on the 1St of January . They manage all our properties for us , but they don 't develop local housing . My point is , this land back here is not owned by Conifer, it' s owned by Home Properties . If we were successful in creating this project we would own this parcel and that parcel . Councilwoman Grigorov — What happens to the futures road ? John Fenessey — The futures road , this road was designed as a public road to come in here, its supposed to eventually connect up across the way . 11 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 12 APRIL 9 , 2001 App ' pp�oved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Supervisor Valentino — That road would come right out to 79 ? John Fenessey — IThis road is the existing road . It ' s called Conifer Drive . Councilwoman Grigorov — Its supposed to extend further up . John Fenessey — , The main thoroughfare would be a dedicated road . Supervisor Valentino — Both of these developments would still have just the one access road on 79 ? 1 John Fenessey -Correct . Councilman Conley — I don 't know what the traffic situation is now with one project . Ms . Ritter — Certainly the second phase would require a traffic analysis . When we wanted , to do the first phase we wanted to be down here . It turned out to be less than desirable as far as DOT was concerned , they want as few points of impact as possible on the highway . Councilman Conley — Both sites would use that one road ? John Fenessey — IRight ' . Councilman — Atlthis point do you have any idea what either Conifer or Home Properties will be doing with the rest of the site at sometime in the future ? John Fenessey — iYes . This land here , we' re in the residential business so it will be residential . I tend to see market rated stuff that maybe we wouldn 't do , maybe some single family homes that did have a program that gave some assistance for home ownership . I would see that type of activity occurring lback in here . I think there ' s a total of something like 42 acres that will be acquired in this arrangement . This parcel here will be 14 acres . Supervisor Valentino — This would require a rezoning to MR , multiple residence . Ms . Ritter — It ' s R15 now which is considered higher density , so multiple residence would not necessarily be inc i nsistent . Supervisor Valentino — If you look at the resolution tonight what we ' re saying is that unless there is some huge over- riding reason why we shouldn 't , we request the Planning Board to make a recommendation . I Councilman Conley — At some place in time we ' ll have a public hearing . That is after the planning process . i I i 12 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 13 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Supervisor Valentino — Usually this is our procedure . We don 't want to waste the Planning Board ' s time working and reviewing something for rezoning if there is some reason that we are going to say absolutely no . Ms . Ritter — There will be an environmental review of all of the environmental issues . Councilwoman Grigorov — And they would hold a public hearing ? Ms . Ritter — The Town Board would hold the public hearing on the rezoning . The Planning Board will hold a public hearing on the site review . Resolution No. 37(b) - REFERRAL OF REZONING REQUEST TO PLANNING BOARD FOR LINDERMAN CREEK APARTMENTS PHASE H AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRORPOSAL BE IT RESOLVED, the governing Town Board hereby requests that the Planning Board make a recommendation to the Town Board concerning the rezoning request from Conifer Realty for the Linderman Creek Apartments Phase 11 Proposal for low and moderate income families, Mecklenburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 27 - 1 - 13. 12, 14 . 2+1- acres; and be it further RESOLVED, the governing Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Planning Board to act as Lead Agency for SEQR for this project. MOVED: Councilman ; SECOND: Councilman Lesser; A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Councilman Lesser — I would like to ask that when the Planning Board considers this that they consider some safety factors . How appropriate it is to have this number of dwellings with a single outlet road at this point , and perhaps they could look at the remaining acreage and get some idea as to what kinds of development might be appropriate there , given land use and traffic issues , so that we don 't end up doing this on a completely piece meal basis . We might have some view of what the overall development might look like at some point in the future . Councilwoman Grigorov — We might need some of the land on the west side for another access road . Mr. Walker — From a transportation/planning aspect of this , that road has been on the master plan map since the 70s .. I would classify that as a collector road . We expect to see a fair amount of traffic on it . A hundred units like proposed here would be a normal loading for that type of road for that amount of area . As we went further back in we want to see that constructed through to Bundy Road for a second outlet . A second access onto Route 79 would probably form a problem . We looked at a road to square off with West Haven Road , actually the sight distance up there is worse than it is where this road does come out and I think the State would rather have two offset intersections with a distance between . 13 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 14 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Councilman Lesser — My concern was if there should be an accident on that road th conceivably there would be a number of people in there who would be difficult to access . I Mr. Walker — Rig'ht now it' s a private road still and there ' s twenty some feet of pavement plus wide shoulders on it . Access is possible . Actually the sidewalk which was built in to the lower Linderman Creek is actually wide enough , if a fire truck had to get in there they could make it through . There is; a second access there . Councilman Kleinl, returns. Agenda Item No .1 8 — Report on Eco Village Submittal of DGEIS Supervisor Valentiino — I didn 't want to spend much time on this one tonight because we have put it on our agenda for April 19 . Councilwoman G igorov — The Planning Board is meeting again before our next discussion of it . Ms . Ritter — That' s right . They' re going to have a presentation by Eco Village as well . Then two days later you ' ll have a presentation . Then we are hoping the first week in May that the Planning Board would give !their final comments to Eco Village comments on the adequacy of the docment to go for public review . I am hoping to have your comments if you could read through the document . We don 't necessarily have to have the whole Board give one comment . Each of you individually can give comments in you are interested in particular sections . Councilwoman Grgorov — The only thing that occurred to me was that I would hope that this wa not going to be built on the ridge . If it is behind the other it might be built too high . Ms . Ritter — Your concerned about some of the view shed issues? i Councilwoman Grigorov — Yes . I don 't think that was addressed very accurately . I wasn 't convinced that it wouldn 't be sticking up further than the top of the hill . Ms . Ritter — Perhaps we could talk a little bit more about that or also at that meeting any comments that you have . I Councilwoman Grigorov — I thought that at the Planning Board probably somebody will bring it up . Supervisor Valentino - We should be getting feedback from the Planning Board by April 19 , Agenda Item No. . 9 — Consider Approval to Establish a Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee - Attachment # 4 1 Supervisor Valentino — You 've got information and a history of the original committee . Does anyone have any 'questions? i 14 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 15 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Councilman — The only thing I noticed in this first paragraph is that Fred 's name was conspicuously absent and George Conneman , as well . They were both at these preliminary meetings we 've been having . There may have been a reason for not putting them in . Supervisor Valentino — Basically what we have is a resolution . Towards the bottom of the resolution it does talk about the Town of Ithaca Highway Superintendent . Resolution No. 38 - APPROVAL TO ESTABLISH A TOWN OF ITHACA TRANSPORTION COMMITTEE AND TO DISBAND THE TOWN OF ITHACA/CORNELL UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Town Board finds it would be desirable for the Town to establish a Transportation Committee that would address a broad range of intermodal transportation issues specific to the Town of Ithaca, and to study and make recommendations to the appropriate bodies on Town - wide transportation issues with coordination from neighboring entities such as Cornell University and the City of Ithaca, and to lay the groundwork for developing a Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan, AND WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca/Cornell University Transportation Committee, established in 199:5 to address issues related to Precinct 7 and surrounding areas, has been inactive for the last two years, and its replacement with the Transportation Committee could better serve the Town of Ithaca by addressing a range of Town- wide intermodal transportation issues; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the establishment of the Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby disband the Town of Ithaca/Cornell University Transportation Committee; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the membership of the above-referenced Transportation Committee shall consist of a total of three (3) members from the Town of Ithaca Town Board; one ( 1) member from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board; and two (2) ad hoc members from Cornell University; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that from time to time, as appropriate, when dealing with issues impacting other areas not represented by members listed above, the Committee may expand its membership, especially to involve community representatives, for consideration of particular issues or projects; and BE I T FURTHER RESOLVED, that assistance and participation may be provided to the Committee by the Town of Ithaca Director of Planning or designee, the Town of Ithaca Highway Superintendent, staff of Cornell University, Executive Director of the Ithaca - Tompkins County Transportation Council or designee, and/or others may be determined to be appropriate by the Committee. 15 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 16 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov; SECONDED: Councilman Lesser. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman IlConley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye . Motion carried unanimously. Supervisor Valentino — I 've already talked with Bill to see if he would be interested in chairing the committee for us !and he has graciously accepted . I think that will help us get this committee off to a really good start . Aqenda Item No 10 — Consider Authorization to Award the Contract for Maple Avenue Reconstruction Attachment #5 Mr. Noteboom — The bids came in April 5 . 1 had a chance to look over them . Supervisor Valentino — We still haven 't gotten written confirmation from the State for the funding . We have verbal , land telling us not to worry , that it' s coming . It kind of leaves us in a strange position . I Councilman Kleinl — We can hold the bids for what , 30 days? Mr. Noteboom — I have made a lot of phone calls about this . Marty Luster' s office says we will get the letter in 6 weeks . It' s been tied to the budget somehow , but he ' s talked to Ways and Means Committee and the money is there . It is just a matter of the State budget passing , but that could be forever. Councilman Lesser — It should be part of last year' s budget . Supervisor Valentino — Wasn 't this supposed to be in the Bond Act? I Mr . Noteboom — They moved the monies from the Thruway Authority Bonding , now they've put it to the dedicated I fund which involves the Comptroller' s office and they haven 't got all the paperwork . In my communications with Marty Luster' s office they are quite upset that nobody bothered to tell anybody all this was going on . Susan said that Marty Luster was quite involved with this at this point in time , and if we have any problems he will be right on top of it . Whatever that' s worth . Councilman Kleine —This could seriously impact our town budget if we enter into an agreement for $285 , 000 and somehow that $204 , 000 doesn 't come our way . Councilwoman Grigorov — And it is conceivable in my opinion . Councilman Klein i— It gets me nervous to authorize approval . i Supervisor Valentino — Fred , what happens if we hold off on approval of the bid ? Mr. Noteboom — It would be difficult to do it during the school year. i I i 16 i I TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 17 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Mr. Walker — It is not a major traffic road for Cornell . Mr. Noteboom — There ' s a lot of traffic on it , but the apartments are all on the City end of that . Councilman Klein — What' s the timeframe for the project . Mr. Walker — The contract was supposed to start June 1 . Mr. Noteboom — And done by the middle of August , when Cornell reopens . Councilman Klein — How much advanced notice do they have to have ? Do we have 30 days to hold the bids , or 45 Mr. Walker — 45 total , but they've been open for a week or so . We have basically a month and a half . Councilman Klein — I ' d feel more comfortable waiting until our next Board meeting . The State ' s not reliable . Mr. Walker — We still have plenty of time in the construction season to get the job done . We were assuming a 60 day construction period , but it ' s possible they can do it in 30 days . Councilman Klein — In the absence of the grant , we would still probably be doing the project . By getting the grant we are freeing up some capital to put towards our highway facility . Supervisor Valentino — Is it my understanding that we will put this on next month 's agenda? Councilman Klein — Do you agree with me Fred ? Mr. Noteboom — I 'vek been nervous about it all winter because you ' re talking of a lot of projects in balance here . Until we sort it out , I ' m not sure what to commit to . Councilman Lesser — The range of bids is much larger than I would typically expect? Is this common ? Is it an indication of the times ? Mr. Noteboom — I ' m not sure I totally understand . But Davis Wallbridge , obviously they had plenty of work and are probably already contracted quite a bit , but if we wanted to give them the bid they would rear) a lot of profit . They were saying we don 't really want the bid , but we ' ll just give you one . Mr . Noteboom — The one I was surprised at was the Economy Paving because there was a fair amount of contact and they had the project at Cornell Campus B Lot . It would seem like working right there they would be able to save some money . Supervisor Valentino — Do we know anything about the low bidder here ? 17 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 18 APRIL 9 , 2001 App loved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Mr. Noteboom — We also know that some of the contract prices these other contractors had tf use for blacktop , everything else , Suit Kote has an advantage there . They were quoting usin their grinders and blacktop of other companies . Councilman Klein — Some of the unit prices vary tremendously . Supervisor Valentino — You ' re recommending the low bidder? Mr. Noteboom — Suit Kote ? We use them constantly . We don 't use their construction side . This is a different side of their business that' s doing this . They have a construction side of the business that did ithe airport . Councilman Kleine — We' re still within the 45 days if we put it off to May? Mr. Walker — Yesl. Councilman Klein — Is it conceivable they may hold the price even beyond that? Mr. Walker — They' re not obligated to , but they might . Councilman Klein — What was the estimate ? Mr. Noteboom — The construction estimate was $300 , 000 . When you threw in engineering fee and everything else it was , I think , $358 , 000 was the total estimate . Councilman Klein' — The construction contract is actually under what we anticipated ? Supervisor Valentino — That part is good . If we could just get confirmation from the State . Maybe I should give Marty Luster a call . Attorney Troy — Not to speak too much out of school , but you ' d asked about Suit- Kote , I can just tell what little bit I 've learned representing another municipality . The Village of Lansing has some work done on a town road and the work was substandard . United Asphalt is claiming they have lab results showing there' s some problem with asphalt they purchased Suit Kote . How true that is don 't know . I ' veli heard a rumor/word -of- mouth/hear-say that the County has had some problems with asphalt purchased from Suit Kote . There may be very little to it , but I feel in good conscience I have to tell you about it . i Supervisor Valentino — Fred , whose the company we were having trouble with the coating you put on ? Mr. Noteboom — That happened to be Suit Kote Councilman Klein — Does this have to be tabled or do we just postpone it? Supervisor Valentino — I would just postpone consideration of this . 18 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 19 APRIL 9; 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Agenda Item No. 11 = Consider Authorization to Advertise and Receive Bids for the Hanshaw Road Sewer Protect. Mr . Walker - I think you ' re all familiar with this particular project . The plans and the specs are on the table . Our engineer' s estimate is $300 , 000 . That includes about $25 , 000 of estimated costs that we' ll put in as our own forces for restoration , the tree plantings , and things like that . Susan may correct me , but I believe this is a type II action and requires no additional review by SEOR . Mr. Walker - We have a meeting with the Beyenbachs on April 19 with their attorney Dan Hoffman . Our attorney will be representing us there too . In talking to Dan Hoffman , he said they just want to make sure that it is spelled out clearly what we are planning to do as far as restoration . We have also prepared new easement maps for all the properties . John Barney has drafted a letter that will go out under my signature stating that we have existing easements but we ' d like to clarify it . Supervisor Valentino - People raised legitimate questions about that . I thought we ought to show people our good faith and get letters out to them immediately saying that we ' re willing to redo these easements so that they are more up to date and appropriate . Councilman Klein - Dan ' s staff did an excellent presentation . Resolution No. 39 = CONSIDER APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE BIDDING FOR HANSHAW ROAD SEWER REHABILITATION WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that rehabilitation of the Hanshaw Road Sanitary Sewer is an appropriate sewer maintenance project, and; WHEREAS, the Town Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation, and; WHEREAS, the project is a type ll action under SEOR and requires no additional review, and WHEREAS, the estimated cost of the improvement is $300, 000. , now, be it; RESOLVED, the Town Board hereby approves the plans and specifications and authorizes the advertisement for bid and receipt of bids for the Hanshaw Road Sewer Rehabilitation, MOVED: Councilman Lesser; SECONDED: Councilman Conley. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. 19 t i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 20 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Supervisor Valentino — Cornell has said they' ll help pay for this project . They said let us know as soon as we are ready . Agenda Item No i 12 — Consider Approval of Town Road Specifications — Attachment # 6 Councilman Klein — We are restating a number of issues to do with road construction and culverts . Mr. Noteboom —T i hings we 've changed to over the last several years from the old specs . We wanted to get them down on paper. What this doesn 't address is hopefully what the Transportation Committee will start talking about so some day we may get to looking at street- scapes , classifying our roads . Sue has looked through this and has a couple minor changes she ' d like to put in which address the issues of how the Planning Board is involved in this . Ms . Ritter — Page 2 , under Right- of-Way Widths , where it talks about a larger right-of way width may be required . We also wanted to add in pedestrian or bicycle facilities . Then on Page 6 , probably a bigger issue , which we thought maybe we ' d put under waivers , that we wanted to allow for any developer who came in who might have some kind of innovative design . We did not want to stifle that ! We were thinking perhaps an addition thing under waiver might say specific road design plan modifications may be granted with approval from the Town Highway Superintendent and Planning Board . " Attorney Troy — The problem with that language is you ' re cutting the Town Board out of th decision . Mr. Noteboom — �iCould you make a suggestion . Our intent is not to prevent contractors from doing something that' s good . Attorney Troy — I ' m not sure it is necessary . If someone comes in with an innovative design and the Planning Board picks up on that , they can certainly discuss it and make a recommendation . Ms . Ritter — Doeslit always have to come before the Town Board ? I Mr. Walker — It always comes before the Town Board because it would be a dedicated road to the public . Mr. Noteboom — Somewhat of a side issue , but I feel compelled to bring it up . We are still held to ASHTO when to comes to problems with any of our roadways . That ' s why I feel it' s kind of important to bringl it up again . I hope the Transportation Committee will help us start working toward a better classification of our roads . ,I I re it says "no Ms . Ritter — I had gone more comment . Under general requirements , page 6 , where y trees or shrubs shall be planted in the Town ' s right-of-way" , we ' d like to have that stated as " no I i 20 i i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 21 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved trees or shrubs shall be planted in Town ' s right-of-way without prior approval of the Highway Superintendent" . Attorney Troy — Could we make it written approval ? Mr. Noteboom — Sure . Attorney Troy — What is the standard that the Highway Superintendent would apply to decide whether or not to give approval ? Mr. Noteboom — We don 't really have a standard . Attorney Troy — My concern is that we don 't want somebody coming in with an article 78 saying "you gave permission to two others , why aren 't you giving it to me ? " You don 't really have any objective standards . Mr. Noteboom — The only standards we have at this point are ASHTO standards which talk about clear zones . Councilwoman Grigorov — If you have criteria and somebody meets those criteria he does get to put the tree there . That 's the danger. Councilman Klein — Actually , A and B sort of contradict each other. A says "no trees shall be planted . " B says "these requirements for planting in the right- of-way . . . " Attorney Troy — ThE� only the thing you could say is leave A alone and take out the first sentence of B . Basically you ' re telling people if you do plant it there it becomes the property of the Town . Ms . Ritter — We have 50 to 60 foot right- of-ways and we would not be planting in them at all ? Supervisor Valentino — People go ahead and plant . They don 't bother us . Attorney Troy — I would remove the first sentence of paragraph B and take out the word if exisiting' , any "existing" trees . Then you have discretion . If it ' s not bothering anybody you leave it alone . If the time comes when you have to do something you can . Councilwoman Grigorov — When the Planning Board looks at this are they going to tell the person "you can 't put trees there no matter what" ? Number 1 has added to it "without prior written approval from the Planning Board or Highway Superintendent" . Councilman Lesser — Does the Planning Board have a procedure that they would following to respond to the earlier? 21 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 22 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved I Attorney Troy — the difference is that you have a Board that ' s actually conducting a public hearing . i Resolution No. 140 - ACCEPTANCE OF TOWN OF ITHACA ROAD SPECIFICATIONS AS REVISED WHEREAS , the Highway Department , along with the Public Works Committee , have updated the Town ' s Road Specifications ; now , therefore , be it , RESOLVED , on the recommendation of the Public Works Committee and the Highway Superintendent , the attached road specifications shall be approved and supercede all former road specifications . I MOVED : Council i man Klein , SECONDED : Councilman Lesser. A vote on the motion resulted as follows : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Klein , aye ; Councilman Conley , aye ; Councilman Neiderkorn , aye . Motion carried unanimously . I Agenda Item No ' 13 — Approval for Design of the Highway Facility — Attachment # 7 Mr. Noteboom — I think we might want to refer this back to Public Works Committee to discuss David ' s items . I Councilman Klein , — I would like to ask Bill Troy , the schematic plans that were provided by MRB Group in 1998 , which were accepted by the Public Works Committee , all those drawings are copy- righted and our contract with MRB Group was not terribly elaborate . I just want to make sure we have the right to reuse those . We can 't build the project from them , but it' s fairly standard for professionals to put the all rights reserved on their drawings and we are planning on sending this out . Attorney Troy — I ' d like to look at the agreement , but it seems to me that if they drew plans for construction they can 't very well complain if your using them to construct . i Supervisor Valentino — Let' s pull out the agreement . I know we approved this in Public Works , but I ' m not sure w ever approved it at the Town Board . Mr. Noteboom — It appeared so . The thing that wasn 't in with the Town Board minutes was a copy of the complete report . I had to get it from MRB . Supervisor Valenti no — Double check the approval . Agenda Item No 14 — Consider Approval of Advanced Energy Alliance Agreement — Attachment # 8 I Supervisor Valent ino — John Barney looked at the agreement . I, I I 22 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 23 APRIL 9, 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Councilman Lesser -- I wanted to ask Al if he also had a chance to look at it . John said he looked at it , but he said nothing about the terms . Is it a legal questions or a financial question ? Supervisor Valentino — We have looked at the financial part of it pretty intensively at Bolton Point . I think Paul was meeting with one of representatives today to see how it was going to work out because Bolton Points is a big user. It appears that the Alliance would be slightly expensive . Mr. Carvill — The only information that I have received is notification from NYSEG solutions that all of our billing goes; back to NYSEG and then NYSEG will turn it over to Advanced Energy . Supervisor Valentino — I think that an important aspect of this is that there are four counties that have worked on this . We 've spent a great deal of time and a lot of hard work to try and break away from the monopoly . If the analysis comes out close , I would prefer that we go with Alliance because of all the work we 've already done . For big users like Bolton Point we were saving something like $26 , 000 per year with Solutions . Councilwoman Grigorov — What percentage is that? Supervisor Valentino — It' s significant , but our electric bills are huge at Bolton Point . Probably around 5% as a wild guess . Still it's a savings . In my mind it is also moving in the right direction . What I would like is authorization to sign this . Councilman — Is Bolton Point going with this agreement? Supervisor Valentino — He has a meeting with some people . He and Ken Butler have been doing a lot of research on it . He was having another meeting today with somebody from NYSEG . He felt that by the end of today he would feel comfortable . He was looking for some guarantees on some rates going up . I said it was my understanding that NYSEG can 't do that . We should know tomorrow . Unless Paul finds some huge thing that we have overlooked , I ' d just as soon sign it and go with it . Resolution No. 41 - AUTHORIZING THE TOWN TO ENTER INTO AN ELECTRICITY AGREEMENT WITH ADVANTAGE ENERGY, INC. WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca has been a participant in the Municipal Electric and Gas Alliance and has been receiving electricity from NYSEG Solutions; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Electric and Gas Alliance has put electrical service out to bid on behalf of the various municipalities and has received a bid that is more advantageous to the consumer than the ,bid submitted by NYSEG Solutions; and WHEREAS, Advantage Energy, Inc. of Hamburg, New York, submitted a more advantageous bid; and 23 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 24 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved WHEREAS, such Agreement appears to be in the best interest of the Town of Ithaca a appears to provide electricity at the most advantageous pricing for the Town; NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that the Town Board approves the Electricity Agreement between Advantage Energy, Inc. and the Town and hereby authorizes and requests the Town Supervisor to execute said Agreement on behalf of the Town unless the Town Supervisor determines within the next two days that it his not in the best interests of the Town of Ithaca to enter into the Electricity Agreement. MOVED: Councilman Conley, SECONDED: Councilman . A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No . 15 — Consider Designation of Polling Places and Approval of Polling District Map for 2001 — Attachment # 9 Ms . Hunter — The re I s been one change in polling places , that is in District #7 . Instead of using Cayuga School , we are going to be using Cayuga Heights Fire Department . Supervisor Valentino — People had some complaints about parking and handicapped accessibilit at the school . Resolution No. 42 - DESIGNATION OF ELECTION DISTRICT POLLING PLACES & APPROVAL OF CORRESPONDING ELECTION DISTRICT MAP WHEREAS, in conformity with Election Law it is necessary that the governing Town Board designate the names and addresses of Election District Polling Places for voting within the Town of Ithaca; and WHEREAS, in conformity with Election Law it is necessary that the governing Town Board approve a corresponding "official map " which outlines and describes the said Election District Polling Places within the Town of Ithaca; and WHEREAS, the governing Town Board wishes to be in compliance with the Election Law with regards to the same; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby designates the following listing 0 1f election district polling places, as the official " Town of Ithaca Election District Polling Places for the Year 2001 " ; and be it further RESOLVED, the said Election District Polling Places for the Year 2001 " are all in compliance with the Election Law and are accessible to the handicap; and be it further 24 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 25 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved RESOLVED, the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby adopts the attached corresponding "Election District Map " as the official map which outlines and indicates the location of the said polling places for voting within the Town of Ithaca; and be it further RESOLVED, the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution, and a certified copy of the corresponding "Election District Map " to the Tompkins County Board of Elections. ELECTION DISTRICT POLLING PLACES FOR THE YEAR 2001 District # 1 - West Hill Fire Station, 1242 Trumansburg Road District #2 - Veteran Volunteer Fireman 's Association, Inc. , 638 Elmira Road District #3 - South Hill Fire Station, 965 Danby Road District #4 - Reis Tennis Center @ Cornell University, 230 Pine Tree Road District #5 - Hasbrouck Apartments Community Center, 121 Pleasant Grove Road District #6 - B. O. C. E. S. , 555 Warren Road District #7 - Cayuga Heights Fire Department, 194 Pleasant Grove Road District #8 - Boynton Middle School, 1601 North Cayuga Street District #9 - B. O. C. E. S. , 555 Warren Road District # 10 - South Hill Fire Station, 965 Danby Road District # 11 - Reis Tennis Center @ Cornell University, 230 Pine Tree Road MOVED: Supervisor Valentino, SECONDED: Councilman Conley. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No. 16 — Consider Appointment of Local Advisory Board for Assessment Review Resolution No. 4;3 - APPOINTMENTS TO LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review will hold their review proceedings on Thursday, May 10, 2001 from 3:00 p. m. to 6: 00 p. m. , at the Ithaca Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York; and WHEREAS, it is necessary that the Town Supervisor appoint two members of the Town Board to attend the said proceedings as Town of Ithaca representatives; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the Town Supervisor hereby appoints Carolyn Grigorov and Councilman Bill Lesser as the Town of Ithaca representatives on the Tompkins County Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review scheduled for Thursday, May 10, 2001 ; and, be it further 25 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 26 APRIL 9, 2001 Appioved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved RESOLVED, the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward a certified co of this resolution to the Tompkins County Assessment Department. MOVED: Councilman , SECONDED: Councilman Conley. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conll y, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Aqenda Item No! 17 - Consider Approval of Transitional Duty Program Supervisor Valentino — We are going to hold this until next month . P I g g Agenda Item No'. 18 — Consider Approval of the Point Factor Job Evaluation Criteria and Point Scale — Attachment # 10 i Supervisor Valentino — We have been working on developing a better method of wages for our employees . One of the things we did was to informally adopt the County' s point factor job evaluation system . One of the reasons that we did that was that the County had gone through a time when they might be subject to a lawsuit because of the way they paid their employees based on gender. They needed to come up with a system that would be blind to those kind of factors . They worked withla consultant to work out this point system and it went through many tests to make sure it was a fair and adequate kind of evaluation . As we worked with it through the years , because the County is so much bigger and has so many different kinds of jobs , their total point evaluation system didn 't really fit the needs of the Town . Over the last yeari we 've met with the department heads and people from Bolton Point and , as a group , we 've worked through the factor system and looked at the good things from the County and things we wanted to improve . This point factor that you have in front of you as a draft is the classification system we came up with after quite a bit of work . Ms . Drake — Basically what we are looking for is the Board ' s approval that we use this system to evaluate current and any new positions that get created . Supervisor Valentino — We 've run tests on it . We have taken every job classification and applied the points to see where the job comes out . Ms . Drake — On the back of the resolution is a sheet that says previous points . Those are the points establishedi by the County for the different classifications . The new points are ones that we are proposing as bui point evaluation . i Supervisor Valentino — We tried to compress our classifications because we just don 't have that many employees or jobs . We assigned higher points to our " S" classifications because I have a long standing arg l ment with Anita at the County . She thinks all of the jobs at the Town should be classified quite a bit lower than their comparable jobs . I feel just the opposite . They think because we have people that have to do many different tasks it makes their job classification j 26 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 27 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved lower. I say , " no it doesn 't" because we demand more of our workers . Everybody has to know other components of other people ' s jobs . When we looked at our jobs we tried to take into consideration that wn. ask for a lot of varied skills and have a lot of demands on our people . Ms . Drake — You also received for review an envelope that we will be discussing at the next Town Board Meeting . It is the next step to the evaluation , re - establishing the job classification listing . In the next two weeks if you could review the material , and let me know if you have any questions so that we can address them . Supervisor Valentino — Judy has done a lot of work at looking at other comparable places and what their wages are . It is certainly not our intent to zip ahead of everybody else in the County , especially the County itself . But we definitely feel that we need to stay in the ballpark and be competitive if we want to maintain the high caliber staff that we have and attract high caliber people to come work for us . We 've slipped behind in the last three years . We are looking at just the things that Judy and I have proposed so far on what the wage adjustment would be that we are talking about in June to bring people up . It comes out to about a 5 . 7% increase overall . The important number is , it comes out around $88 , 000 a year. Al and I went through an exercise on that today . If everything else in our budget for the Town stays exactly the same as it is this year and we just added that extra amount , and say we didn 't get increased revenues , the impact on our Town tax rate would be about 1 . 5 cents . And that ' s not taking into consideration that some parts of some of the jobs come out of Water and Sewer. That's a pretty minimal impact . My own philosophy is that if people are paid well and have good benefits it has a very positive on the economy of our community . It means people can go out and buy cars , homes , it adds to value of our community . I know from my past history with the union work when we organized and raised people ' s wages it had that kind of an impact . More of the workers at Cornell could live in the Town of Ithaca or inside the County . Beyond that it began to have impact on what it was costing us for social services . We had a large percentage of employees that were working full time jobs and were getting substantial civil services because the employers were not paying them the wages that they should have . It is healthy for our whole community when people are paid well . I think 1 . 5 to 2 cents on our tax rate is pretty minimal . Resolution No. 441 - APPROVAL OF POINT FACTOR JOB EVALUATION CRITERIA AND POINT SCALE WHEREAS, the Town had been using Tompkins County's criteria sheet and point scale for determining job classification; and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor and management team evaluate the County's system and deemed it to be inadequate for the Town 's use, and, therefore, drafted criteria and a point scale that would better suit the Town of Ithaca 's needs and size; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approved the attached Point Factor Job Evaluation Criteria d Point Scale; and be it further 27 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 28 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved RESOLVED, the approved criteria shall be used to determine job classifications of ne and existing positions. MOVED : Councilman Klein , SECONDED : Councilwoman Grigorov . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Klein , aye ; Councilman Conley , aye ; Councilman Neiderkorn , aye . Motion carried unanimously . Aqenda Item Nol 19 — Amendment of the Safety Glass Committee i Councilman Klein —Do we have any agreement with Cayuga Optical guaranteeing prices ? Ms . Drake — They have sent me a price sheet and I can tell you from 1992 they've held the prices since then . I think we 've had a pretty good working relationship with them . One of the advantages to this is that under Univera , our health insurance , they are one of the providers . Councilman Klein' — I guess if they decide to raise their prices , this resolution is no longer valid . Ms . Drake — It will be valid because it states that the Town is going to pay the $40 and the $50 . Anything above and beyond that is the employee ' s responsibility . I put on the resolve that this would be evaluated every 5 years . Resolution No. 45 - APPROVAL OF PRESCRIPTION SAFETY GLASS PROGRAM WHEREAS, June 8, 1992 the Town Board approved resolution number 150, which authorized the provision of one pair of photo-gray safety glasses through Ithaca - Cayuga Optical at a cost not to exceed $55. 00 for bifocals and $37. 00 for single vision lenses; and WHEREAS, the cost of such prescription safety glasses has increased since the said 1992 resolution; and WHEREAS, the Personnel Committee and Safety Committee have reviewed the 1992 resolution and recent price list from Ithaca - Cayuga Optical for safety glasses and recommend the following: • Town pays for Safety Frames up to $40 • Town pays fo t Safety Prescription Lenses up to $50 • Town pays the Full cost for side shields • Town pays the full cost for any dispensing or administration fees • Employee shall take a voucher to appointment for Ithaca - Cayuga Optical • New lenses and frames will be authorized once every two years • Employee shall pay for any eye examination now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby rescind resolution # 150 from 1992 and approves the above recommendations by the Personnel and Safety Committees as the Prescription Safety Glass Program; and be it further 28 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 29 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved RESOLVED, the Town will continue to use Ithaca -Cayuga Optical as the provider for prescription safety glasses, with the limits evaluated every five years. MOVED: Councilman Lesser, SECONDED: Supervisor Valentino. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No. 20 — Consider Appointment of Town Planning Board Member Councilman Klein — 'Ale interviewed two candidates . Councilman — Mr. Talty has been here about three years . He ' s a paper products representative . Councilman Klein — He works out of his house . Councilman — He has not done this before . We asked him if his being out of town would interfere . He said it would not . We asked him , since he does make contact with local firms , whether he would have any difficulty with that . He said no he wouldn 't because he would ask to recuse himself, but he did not feel this would be an issue very often . Councilwoman Grigorov — Did we ever do anything to require that new members go to training classes ? Councilman — We asked him if he would be willing to do that and he said 'Yes" . Councilwoman Grigorov — I think that it is really important . Supervisor Valentino — What was the thing about him that really seemed appealing ? Councilman — The thing that appeal to me was he seemed to have an open mind about things . He doesn 't have a lot of terribly strong preconceived ideas . I think that impressed me . Also I was impressed by Tracy and Rod ' s reaction to him which seemed to be quite positive . I think that he is somebody who would work well with the group . Councilman Klein — His business does take him throughout Central and Northern New York. He has had an opportunity to see other places and towns . Supervisor Valentino — Did you ask him how he knew about the position ? Councilman Klein — He saw the ad in the paper. He is interested in being involved in the community . Councilman Lesser — Is this a fresh term . Ms . Ritter — It is a fresh term and would be for 7 years . 29 TOWN BOARD MI1'� UTES PAGE 30 APRIL 9, 2001 Approved - Approved — Approved — May 7, 2001 - Approved — Approved — Approved Councilman — It I Id him a little bit about some of the issues the Planning Board had to deal with in the past . Told im some of them were really quite controversial and heated . He said that he was not afraid of controversy and didn 't shy away from it . He would do what he thought ought to be done . Resolution No. 46 - APPOINTMENT TO PLANNING BOARD WHEREAS, there is a vacancy on the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the term 0110112001 to 12/31/2007, now therefore; BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby appoints Kevin Talty, 15 Lexington Drive, Ithaca, New York 14850 to fill the vacancy on the Planning Board beginning immediately upon adoption of this resolution. MOVED: Councilman , SECONDED: Councilman Klein . A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item Noo 21 (a) , (b) , (c ), (e) — Consent Agenda Ms . Drake — Item "d" was pulled . Resolution No. 47(a) - TOWN BOARD MINUTES WHEREAS, the Town Clerk has presented the minutes held on March 12, 2001 , to the governing Town Board for their review and approval of filing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the governing Town Board does hereby approve for filing the minutes for the meeting held on March 12, 2001 as presented at the April 9, 2001 board meeting. MOVED: Councilman Lesser, SECONDED: Councilwoman Grigorov. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 47(b) - TOWN OF ITHACA WARRANTS 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 30 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 31 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers in total for the amounts indicated. 1 VOUCHER NO. 3283 through 3415 General Fund Townwide $ 89, 107. 36 General Fund Part Town 31748. 29 Highway Fund Part Town 29, 829. 31 Water Fund 10, 523. 14 Sewer Fund 109, 890. 60 lacovelli Neighborhood Park 356. 95 Risk Retention Fund 209. 50 Fire Protection Fund 19, 68 1 . 00 Lighting Districts 1 , 071 . 35 Debt Service Fund 743. 89 Total $265, 161 . 39 MOVED: Councilman Lesser, SECONDED: Councilwoman Grigorov. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously Resolution No. 47c - BOLTON POINT WARRANTS WHEREAS, the following numbered vouchers for the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission have been presented to the governing 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. VOUCHERS NO. - 127 through 179 Operating Fund $ 116, 039. 34 SCADA Capital Project 311 . 47 Chemical Bulk Storage Pro 107. 57 Total $ 116, 458. 38 MOVED: Councilman Lesser, SECONDED: Councilwoman Grigorov. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously 31 i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 32 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Resolution No. 4 (el - BUDGET 2001 AMENDMENT & MODIFICA TIONTO WN YOUTH PROGRAMS I WHEREAS, the adopted 2001 budget has appropriated $ 101 , 973 for 2001 youth programs. These program expenditures were adopted before all of the program agreements were signed; andl WHEREAS, all 2001 town youth programs will cost $ 112, 817 with offsetting revenue resources totaling $63, 129. This supporting resource reflects an additional $2, 529 to the $60, 600 already budgeted for in 2001 ; and WHEREAS, a summary of expenses and revenues by program is attached to this resolution; and WHEREAS, both the Town Supervisor and Town Budget Officer have reviewed these budget changes and present them to this governing board for review, discussion, and approval; now, therefore be, it RESOLVED, that this governing board approves the changes in expenses and revenue for year 2001 Town Youth Programs; and be it further RESOLVED, that this governing board directs and authorizes that all necessary and appropriate budget changes be recorded to the accounting and budgeting records for the yea . 2001 . MOVED: Councilman Lesser, SECONDED: Councilwoman Grigorov. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously Agenda Item No J 22 — Reports of Town Committees Councilman Lesser — I put a copy of a memo in the packet regarding the traffic study (Attachment # 11): Right now the consultants have very tentatively identified some truck routes and that will be one of the issues that will be discussed at the public meeting . Perhaps the Transportation Committee can think about possible truck routes in the Town and what consequences they have . From what I ' ve been able to learn about truck routes , they don 't mean a great deal . All you do is specify them unless you have an ordinance of somewhat uncertain validity somehow ' limiting trucks to those routes . It' s really more of a designation than it is any kind of mandate . That' s where it stands . It' s not entirely clear to me what is going to come out of it . It did clarify that almost all the trucks traveling in the County are here because they have business in the County and are not through trucks . Supervisor Valentino — That was important to find out . Councilman Lesser — The second one is Coddington Road . I put this in the form of a memo to see whether you think it is appropriate to proceed like this . I spoke to John Lampman who took 32 I TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 33 APRIL 9, 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved over for Ward . A couple of matters . One is a little bit like the Towers . What right do we as a community have to be involved in a planning process . You talk on one hand that our input is welcome and on the other hand all these steps continue on without us being contacted . One thing I suggest doing here is asking Stew Stein who is the head of the County Transportation Council if there could be a clarification of what rights communities have in being involved in the planning and design for roadway repair. Secondly , since the County went ahead and interviewed the four listed highway consultants without notifying us , even though we had requested it , John suggested that we could send some written requests that would ask for written responses from these four possible consultants . I 've suggested some kinds of questions that we might ask them . My view is to understand how the consultants view community input and at the minimum emphasis before they' re hired the importance of the project to the community and our intent to have some involverrient in it . I put some suggested kinds of questions . The remainder lays out the steps and the schedule for the completion of the plan which is sometime late in 1995 , early 1996 . The Board asked Councilman Lesser to send the memo Councilwoman Grigorov — Cayuga Lake Watershed Intermunicipal Organization — There is a letter in here that the Sierra Club sent the Town asking asking for support to be the umbrella organization for studying the lake . However, the Intermunicipal Organization has already spent three years studying the lake and published its report which they may not be aware of . Deb Grantham wrote a letter to the Sierra Club . If you want we could write something along those lines . Here is a copy of the letter she wrote . I would write something along those lines . Supervisor Valentino — We've got the bylaws for the Recreational Partnership ready to go for approval at the meeting tomorrow . It looks like the financial parts are falling into place pretty nicely . It' s been an :interesting process working with the City . They' ve been very good about trying to learn different and new ways to account for their money and do it in a way that's not as complicated . The Sewer Agreement — I think we ' re going to get that done this year. Cayuga Heights has made some real steps in moving forward to become a full partner. We' re very close to getting the final agreement put together for them . The Water Agreement - We had a meeting with the City . We made it clear to the city that they' re the ones that are holding us up at this point . They' ve got some work that they need to do . They promised that they would do that . We 've got some meetings coming up with Cornell so that we can finalize their contract . I think we ' re at a point now where everybody wants to keep moving . Mary and I have been putting a lot of time in on this Towers Project . Mary has been compiling information and looking at some case law . We will have more information for you on April 19 . Mr. Walker — 911 —The whole committee was at the South Hill Station . I think the site is a little constrained but with the proximity of the tower on top of the existing radio tower that they want to rebuild on top of South Hill really makes the best central location for the 911 call center. I ' m not sure exactly what's going to happen with the State . I think , really , what it' s going to come down to 33 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 34 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved is that the State ' s radio system is based around the State Police communications system . It would be nice if everybody could be consistent on their radio system , but I doubt that the State i going to pay for it all . My impression is that the 911 decision makers want to be a little bit more open than they used to be . Right now there is no contract signed to have the 911 center in the central station . The County runs the call station , but there ' s no lease agreement . I think that needs to be firmed up . Agenda Item No 23 — Report of Town Officials Town Clerk — Attachment # 12 Highway Department — Attachment # 13 Mr. Noteboom — I want to bring up about traffic counts , if you have any priorities please let me know . Councilman Lesser — Are there other existing counts for Forest Homes , so that once the north campus is finished we have some reference point , an objective standard ? Mr. Noteboom —April 23 we ' re doing a count of Forest Home . We ' re going to put out 8 to 9 counters to try and get Warren Road , Pleasant Grove , all those connecting roads . Councilman Lesser — I believe we heard at the Transportation Committee that the Cornell Entrance Committee is going to be making some proposals at some point . Perhaps we should look again at having some base line data if , indeed , the plan goes into place and relocates as much traffic as proposed . Mr. Noteboom — If I recall right , the T model is showing that it is not going to help significantly with a lot of traffic , but it will help in some certain areas . Hopefully by the next Board Meeting they will be coming here with a presentation . Enqineerinq Department — Attachment #14 Planning Department — Attachment # 15 Councilwoman Grigorov - I thought it was interesting to read who did get grants . Do you have any idea why we didn 't? Any particular inadequacy . ? Ms . Ritter — We did make a phone call to the State and one of the big issues is the development pressure . The other is , in the future , we need to nominate several parcels that are contiguous . They had over 60 million dollars in requests from New York State . We 've gotten some tips from the State on how to put together a better package . Building and Zoning Department — Attachment #16 34 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 35 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved Human Resource Specialist — Attachment # 17 Budget Officer Mr. Carvill — My assumption is that the Town Hall project is finished and we need to close the project . Councilman — I think we said we wanted to look at the acoustics in several of the rooms around here and see whether or not something can be done about . Supervisor Valentino — The money for the project can 't really be released for the acoustics . Mr. Walker — I think what we need to do is get an estimate and then look for funds . Supervisor Valentino — Let' s try to get an estimate for acoustics for the next Board meeting . Dan and Al and I should try to work on a resolution to close that project . Network Specialist: — Attachment # 18 Additional Agend2i Item No. 1 — Consider Authorizinq Submittal of Legislation to the New York State Legislature Allowing Cornell University to Become a Member of the Integrated Water System — Attachment # 19 Supervisor Valentino — This is something that we really want to talk to Marty Luster and Seward about getting in the works . It is something we can stop at any point . By getting this legislation to start moving through we are not saying that we officially agree to it . We want to just get it in the works because it takes forever. Councilwoman Grigorov — Did John write that or did Cornell ? Supervisor Valentino — Cornell did not write it . Councilman — It sounds similar to what they did for TCAT . Supervisor Valentino — It is . Our legislation is quite a bit longer than the TCAT one was and its basically because John Barney and Cheryl Egan were aware of some of the problems with TCAT and tried to overcome them . Councilman Lesser — What level of commitment is Cornell planning on ? Supervisor Valentino — Cornell is planning on coming in as a partner like they are in TCAT . Mary Russell , Paul Tunison , and myself are the three people that are negotiating with Cornell to put together this draft license agreement so that Bolton Point can take over their water facility and it will become part of the Bolton Point system . Their facility is very important because of the gravity flow that they can provide to reduce the cost of getting water around to the rest of the community. Cornell was very worried at first , and we were very worried about taking them in . But I think that 35 A��n� i TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 36 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved John and Shirley have been working through those problems . Cornell actually runs a pretty nice little plant . Mr. Walker — Cornell has kept the maintenance up on their plant . The biggest problem with their facility is it is a run of the river type plant . They don 't have any storage in a reservoir and it does bring a lot of sedii�nent down from Dryden . Resolution No. 48 - AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEGISLATION TO THE NEW YORK STATE LEGISLATURE THAT WOULD ALLOW CORNELL UNIVERSITY TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION AND PARTY TO THE AGREEMENT OF MUNICIPAL COOPERATION WHEREAS, the Commission, on behalf of the Town of Ithaca and the other four municipal members of the Commission, desires to formulate an Integrated Water System with the City of Ithaca and Cornell University, and WHEREAS, the Commission, in conjunction with representatives of the City of Ithaca and Cornell University, is developing agreements to govern the operations of the Integrated Water System, and WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca and Cornell University desire to have Cornell University become a member of the Commission and party to the Agreement of Municipal Cooperation, and I WHEREAS, the Commission was formed when the Town of Ithaca and the other fo member municipalities entered in to the Agreement of Municipal Cooperation pursuant to th authority contained in Article 5- G of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York, and WHEREAS, Article 5- G prohibits a municipality from entering into a joint venture with a private entity, WHEREAS, Cornell University's water system is owned and operated by its privately endowed college, and WHEREAS, Cornell University 's privately endowed college is a private entity, and WHEREAS, New York State General Municipal Law must be amended by legislation to allow the Town of Ithaca and the four other member municipalities to partner with Cornell University, and WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Board has reviewed a draft of proposed legislation to thereby amend New York State General Municipal Law, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Board authorizes the submittal of legislation, in the spirit of the draft proposed legislation, to the New York State Legislature to amend New York State General Municipal Law. 36 TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 37 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved MOVED: Supervisor Valentino, SECONDED: Councilwoman Grigorov A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously Additional Agenda Item No . 2 - EXECUTIVE SESSION On motion by Supervisor Valentino, seconded by Councilwoman Grigorov, the Board moved into executive session at 8:45 p. m. to discuss personnel issues. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously On motion by Councilman Klein, seconded by Councilman Conley, the Board moved out of executive session at 9: 08 p. m. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Neiderkorn, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No. 25 — ADJOURNMENT As there was no further business to come before the Board , the meeting was adjourned at 9 : 08 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Tee-Ann Hunter Town Clerk SPECIAL MEETING — April 19 , 2001 NEXT REGULAR MEETING — May 7 , 2001 Minutes transcribed by Tee-Ann Hunter 37 I TOWN BOARD MINUTES PAGE 38 APRIL 9 , 2001 Approved - Approved - Approved - May 7, 2001 - Approved - Approved - Approved I I, I I I . I I I 38 I TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN BOARD SIGWIN SHEET DATE : April 9 , 2001 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINTADDRESS / AFFILIATION V 1 T2 ' 31/c K V _ ( I 41 e" f cu 0 e 1 C 1 1 ' I i 1-1 I. i l i I I l IF F�Rrl rLe Lo 33 ILI 1 Ig s ei x j s fi i I 1, ty}yrytt p ' r a$�.'lt3`s' +ins vt 1 ' d j 14 Ik £ , n r x `' ILI ml ILI 1- zLl 2 "' ti � v: l s t5 .+,x s s y� vra 4 g8 .e° .?r ar+ i i - 4. - 1 i u" �I LIN Y 'c g + , yam, ° i� 1 14 If 11 ILL LlIll G x v "Cff3 I_ j� u '�I 14 Q o o �I �d It )J � I � mot/ �j� UV {I IL�u�u(�1�II1' V U o ip ILI °4 Q 1 !I I n I 1 IG it IF IF al i F 4 �a sf h itil - "' U x. 1 1 � G eH frj4ia r .^`'ea' f rF €i . n t it . � " it f , � ILL it _ our illy,- i - UQD IF "`. aA'$i ` t4 k£`v� .4 ' X� °�4J V` 0 iLit = it If pp �_ 1 V N 4 1 . 0 o ° � Q r ll ,F it I IF It �; I i . 1 � � 6 � , I I •r� 6 I I �j � i. I � - I I I - tj 70, cc 10 jj jl #1004 c"u I ' jl PIP6l ' I - I jjI ii IIj II Aj f I z I sc If 1 h X1it i x . - +, � T } - } � � ' . lilt h 11 � 1 rl fi 1 I A I & L t f i k Ck I { � '3e Rif k:Vz a M It it { by S MW 1 r Fg III ' z it Rl It It ( log ill 4 l ( i 1 r ° 1 1 L c� !I ,1 A I � I a I w d I i1 If .t 4 u I II IJ I All V 'A6 44 LLL 5 iJ b w '� i4 i s x ' I I � � M1 OL 7 If 1L lr k {� ?m ��'?,� o+Ji'„ a�h'` "t & -C` Jc ya.�• x cl LLLL- C L IL � F L . -01 � v V l I Q 00 1 1 1: ° u a if RJS o , II I� ;I 3 old — k I x a 1 � § ! 444 J ��I §§�i did id- I dor Wit did * A# @ Ha 4 y kl 1 � • p '§"Y 454A'4yst-�+ r ooll- tl do,5,17 of do +p�v a'�k"��-"f^ ' `'y `Yi t ee et' '( �S". .. ' a • .- a �c 1 aslk , aR..q fut� ,a '� �+ n5 l - m 14 ' '' ot old, s '" tit e o di o MODa aso x 0 a p m p[ I it kkk 1 Pp S It ��• I � I r I _ � $ 1 h I lit pin x iyc � a a�sa .,yy •. P,A 'lb� g _ - - + ni J., y - ' A �{ lit x � s rfa .. �� vu,#x 1 s{+• _. 'J+��J7. . c, r �: r'.. z lit, le 4'p ff tl Y V LJ A _. ° I 4 1 ° 4 ti ii o . 11 dII pp Ems' -. 1 ,Ayic. . y 4y $4.,i1 4 ti� Fs 'Ok IS • 4 19 Gb 1 a _ In o 0 0 0 �^ i rto It IT w � 1 It a j III I d. 1 It .l 1 ; ,q I i 1 r � 11 1 r 1 jI II t I `' t • - ` T ar f t 1 iii; .{. - l •i 9. k.� t cu t r Vr� ItItttty 0 3� cnLIL ir-. j F I tf1 rte?' � I - _ ct • � ( ` IN ' I 1 I I1 t a i s f I • s r i. -,� _., tom- ,• .x , , I kp - " �� 4 I E AL I J k,i L-. yy ,fir yF M1 � IN h 1 I li 1 ddd cu, 1 l I i t H I tf2 I I ' � I i r I i 1 Il 4 4 , , ,t • _ I I N all ill 61 G 4- ` I s r i � � P r .r• � q I I � II � i III yl I i e y, j <I { t , IL IN y r , 11 I I I I i I ; , j I I� f r � 1 I 1 1 , 4 1. I' i f ' 1 ' r / ® y 1 I, 1 J 1 I r I 1 cn cu I � { I tit it 4V t IT It �y f I *M Cd eD a) -too) . - cz It I ; I dI � p I I IN T J I ip 41 j ip I i f € S b. �{ tl �.L f e 111 i i �. d IT T,' '. TR r 1 ' � . � � c l' A 4" 4 x_ r no nr ' a 09 0 TO I . . � 5 , w h Y � 1 * rye ' :° 1 k is '. yT t a it" I rfa s ,r � a9 j�} fid Ij G# y_}��.L. _ ��-�p.n� � d Y i - r I �o r 7- � „ —a wrm >4r -�m�^�• . ama �e��,., asrsr-� �.r pr =�: T' f Al it , it s y _ � jw la k ism me n _` � � fad” �_ 9 ' ■ �a r � +fie -Al It 'S r It ot i pr II �a e D t Ci. + Ir 1, 4 t 14 it t L a a o � � oa ATTACHMENT # 2 MEMORANDUM To : Town Board Members From : Mary Russell Date : April 3 , 2001 Re: County Communication Towers The attached materials are to inform you as to the current status of our communications with the County regarding the towers issue. I will not be present at the April 6th Board meeting and neither will John Barney, but there may be an update from Cathy. We will concentrate on this issue at our special Town Board meeting on April 19th, so please retain this information for that meeting . There: are currently nine municipalities that have sent letters to the County indicating that they consider themselves to be involved agencies in the SEQR process . We have asked for a response: from the County by April 6th and Barbara Mink has indicated that a response will be forthcoming by that date. f . e BOARD ' r SN ATIVES Co i � se ` T . J 50 Telephone : kO . * v: 07) 274-5430 � w.ta� I 0sMIco�org March 2 , 2001 Hon . Mary Russell 955 Coddington Road Ithaca; New York 14850 Dear Mary, Thank you very much for your participation in last week' s meeting about the county ' s proposed public safety communication project. I found the perspectives shared important, and have spent some time seeking the legal documentation requested as well as full board opinion as to how we should proceed. First, let me stress how important we all know this project is to Tompkins County. For the last three years we have responded to the need first articulated by the public safety community to improve communication before frequencies are taken over or the hardware becomes obsolete, both of which are likely to occur in the near future. We have worked with two different consulting firms to establish the best approach to meet our needs, and an 800 megahertz tunked tower system comes out on top. Last year the Communications Capital Project Committee I established to conduct this initiative made a point of visiting every to present plans as they then existed. In response to the questions raised at those meetings and in the local media, the committee took a step back and asked for another peer review of the options, to make sure we hadn ' t overlooked anything. At that time it became known that the State was also looking at a communications network, and we acted on that knowledge by hiring the firm that was working with the State to work with us . What their report showed was that we were indeed on the right track, and that whatever system we came up with would be compatible with what the State was working on, and the possibility exists to have some of our costs paid by the State. As the project moves forward, we have committed to keeping the entire up to speed on these plans, and we have already published a significant number of editorial piece, communiques, and publicity of SEQR schedules and requests for information . Where we have found ourselves in disagreement has to do with the formal role towns might play in determining the future of this project, and your request to have the county be subject to town cell tower ordinances . You cite specifically the City of Rochester vs. Monroe County case, where the court ruled the county was not subject to the city ' s ordinances. You point out that even though the City lost the case, the analysis of nine factors which must be considered if one municipality is exempted from another' s zoning laws has relevance for our case. These nine factors include the nature and scope of the municipality, the kind of function involved, and the extent of the public interest to be served by the improvements. We also think this nine-point test is important; but we don ' t agree with your conclusion that the towns should apply the factors, rather the county. We believe that the County should apply the test, for the reasons explained in the attached memo . %JS Recycled paper What you are basing your claim of town rights on is an article from the Department of State that suggests the host municipality perform the balancing test. However, that article is an opinion, not a legal rule and is not supported by any legal authority. So, based on our legal (►dvice, case law, and the practicalities involved in making this project succeed, we feel that the County should make the determination as to the applicability of the nine factors. That test should not be applied until all available information is collected, including the proposed location of any towers, and the towns and the public have full opportunity for input. The Comcap Committee has already asked you to let us know whether the Town Board or Planning Board is the right point of contact for future discussions, and our Planning Department is collecting information on existing; cell tower ordinances and other criteria to make sure we avoid major conflicts . Once that is done, the committee wants to sit down together with town representatives to resolve any issues that may come up. We are absolutely committed to involving municipalities in as public a way as desired, and to the fullest extent possible . I have attached our attorney' s memo to this letter so you can read in further detail the basis of their decision. I look forward to continuing to move forward together, to successfully put together the best possible public safety communication system for our constituents. Sincerely, Barbara Mink, Chair Intermunicipal Planning; Committee i i Tompkins County Attorney 125 E Court St,. Ithaca, NY 14850 Henry W. Theisen, County Attorney Telephone: (607) 274-5546 Jonathan Wood, Deputy County Attorney L�[t , Fax No. (607) 274-5547 Bruce D. Wilson, Assistant County Attorney Susan E. Cool:, Paralegal ED MAR 01 2001 OF REps. MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara Mink, Chair, Board of Representatives FROM: Henry W. Theisen, County Attorn ey #WrIA m DATE: March 1, 2001 SUBJECT: Application of Town Ordinances to County Tower Siting I have reviewed the applicable cases regarding the need for the County to comply with town tower ordinances in siting the radio communications towers. Prior to 1998, the test was whether the project was primarily for a public purpose rather than a private purpose. In 1998 this test was eliminated in favor of a 'balancing test" established by the New York Court of Appeals in City of Rochester vs. County of Monroe 72 NY2d 338 (1998) . There are 9 factors which must be considered to determine whether the County is exempt from Town zoning. Those factors are as follows: 1 . The nature and scope of the instrumentality seeking immunity; 2 . The encroaching government's legislative grant of authority; 3 . The kind of function or land use involved; agency , . "properly concluded that the benefits inherent in the development of a project" . outweighs the interest of the Town." It, therefore, concluded that the County Agency had properly considered the test established by the. Court of Appeals in the QU— of Rochester case. The case is very significant because the Court clearly accepted the determination of the County Agency as to the applicability of the Town's ordinance without requiring a submission to the town. Interestingly, the Court also held that the Town was not an "involved agency" for SEQRA purposes. Another case in the Third Department which is illustrative is Town of Queensbury vs. Cit;r of Glens Falls, 217 AD 2d 789 (1995) . In that case the City of Glens Falls decided to construct two large water storage tanks in the Town of Queensbury. It did not apply to the Town for permits. The Town brought an action against the City claiming, among other things, that the Town's zoning ordinance should have been applied. The Appellate Division upheld the lower court's finding that the interests of the City outweighed the interest of the Town. Accordingly, it held. that the City can place its water storage tanks in the Town without applying for approval from the Town. There is one other Third Department case that deals with this general subject. That is the case of the City of Ithaca vs . Tompkins County Board of Representatives, et al 164 AD 2d 726 (3rd Dept., 1991 ) . That case concerned the Solid Waste Facility on Commercial Avenue. As you no doubt recall, the City brought an action against the County opposing the placement of the Solid Waste Facility in the City. The City argued that it was an " involved agency" under SEQRA because the Facility would require a city permit to discharge to the sewer system. The Court rejected the City's argument. It held that the record did not orally by the Town's representatives. Those concerns that can be satisfied by the County without frustrating the towers effectiveness and economic feasibility should be accommodated. Barbara Blanchard's memo to the Town Supervisors, dated February 20, 2001, expresses well the open attitude that the County should have, without conceding its legal rights. Please call me if any clarification is needed concerning this memo . OF I r _ TOWN OF ITHACA 4 ` 215 N . Tioga Street, ITHACA, N . Y . 14850 TOWN CLERK 273-1721 HIGHWAY (Roads, Parks, Trails, Water&Sewer) 273 - 1656 PARKS 273-8035 ENGINEERING 273-1747 PLANNING 273- 1747 ZONING 273- 1783 FAX (607) 273-1704 March 20, 2001 Honorable Barbara Mink Chair Tompkins County Board of Representatives Tompkins County Court House Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Barbara: Thank you for your letter of March 2 , 2001 and the attached memorandum from Mr. Theisen, all related to the relative responsibilities of the County and Towns in reviewing the County ' s Communications Project. We have discussed the materials in your letter and Mr. Theisen ' s memorandum with our attorney and have reviewed the cases that were cited in his memorandum. In a nutshell, we disagree with the conclusions that he and, in reliance upon his memorandum, you appeared to have reached. Basically, it is our belief that the initial decision as to whether or not the County ' s tower proposal is subject to local regulations must be made by the appropriate body at the local level . In our case that would be our Board of Zoning Appeals insofar as it relates to whether the County ' s proposal is subject to the Town' s Zoning Ordinance provisions relating to telecommunications towers . Further, whether or not the County is subject to our telecommunications provisions, it appears that the Town may be required to fund the costs of some (as yet unknown) number of transceivers . Accordingly, it appears that at a minimum the Town Board would be an involved agency for SEQRA purposes (since it may be required to fund an action), the Planning Board of the Town may be an involved agency because it would be the agency that would review the site plan, and the Board of Zoning Appeals would be an involved agency because it is the Board that grants the special approval for telecommunications towers. More detailed comments on the Draft Scope are contained in our letter to Stephen Whicher dated March 20, 2001 . Accordingly, we would like the County to acknowledge, in writing, that the Town Board, the Town Planning Board (at least until the Town ' s Board of Zoning Appeals finds, if requested to do so by w the County, that the Ton' s telecommunications regulations do not pertain to the County ' s project), and the Town of Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals are involved agencies for SEQRA purposes . We would appreciate receiving this response by no later than April 6, 2001 . It is my belief, that once these bodies have been acknowledged as involved agencies, they will consent to the County being lead agency for SEQRA purposes, at which time the County may properly assume that role and the time frame to begin comments on the scope of an EIS could begin. We look forward to receiving the requested response by the date indicated above . Thank you for your cooperation in connection with this matter. Sincerely, ly�-4 At��w Mary Russell , Deputy Supervisor sls xc : Honorable Don Barber, Town Supervisor, Town of Caroline Honorable Mark Varvayanis, Town Supervisor, Town of Dryden Honorable Edward Inman, Town Supervisor, Town of Danby Honorable Jean Owens, Town Supervisor, Town of Enfield Honorable Glenn Morey, Town Supervisor, Town of Groton Honorable Stephen Farkas, Town Supervisor, Town of Lansing Honorable Donald Hartil, Mayor, Village of Lansing Honorable Doug Austic, Town of Ulysses E w f BARNEY , GROSSMAN , DUBOW & MARCUS ATTORNEYS AT LAW HN C. BARNEY SENECA BUILDING WEST 12TER G . GROBBMAN SUITE 400 FAC8I MILE DAVID q, pueow 119 EAST SENECA STREET ( 007) 272 -88OG RANDALL B . MARCUS ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 (NOT FOR SERVICE OF PAPERS) WILLIAM J . TROY I II JONATHAN A. ORKIN ( 607 ) 2736841 MEMORANDUM TO : Honorable Mary Russell Deputy Town Supervisor Town of Ithaca FROM: John C. Barney, Esq. DATE : March 20, 2001 RE : Tompkins County Communications Tower Process Mary I have had a few minutes to review some of the County' s materials including a memorandum from Henry Theisen regarding the appropriate process to be followed when one governmental entity seeks to exercise its authority in another governmental entity' s jurisdiction. More particularly, the question has arisen as to whether the County may proceed with its communication tower project without, at a minimum, seeking a determination from the appropriate Town of Ithaca Board as to whether it is subject to the Town of Ithaca site plan and special permit requirements. I believe that the more rational position compels the County to obtain that determination from the Town of Ithaca' s Board of Zoning Appeals. As you know the law ;in this area is governed by the Court of Appeals decision in the Cog= of Monroe v. Ci1y of Rochester case, 72 NY2d 338 ( 1988) . In that case the court moved away from the historical consideration of whether the proposed action of a governmental entity was a "governmental" as opposed to a "proprietary" function, and instead established a "balancing of public interests approach" . The Court articulated nine areas that needed to be considered when attempting to resolve the conflicting jurisdictions . Judge Bellacosa in writing for an unanimous court cited with approval the Model Land Development Code provisions stating: "This balancing; approach subjects the encroaching governmental unit in the first instance, in the absence of an expression of contrary legislative intent, to the zoning requirements of the host governmental unit where the extra territorial land use would be employed. " (72 NY2d 343 ) . Honorable Mary Russell March 20, 2001 Page 2 Thus, it appears that the initial application for determination of whether the host governments processes should be followed, should be made to the appropriate host government body. In the case of the Town of Ithaca, the appropriate body would be the Board of Zoning Appeals pursuant to a request for an interpretation. The only New York case which appears to address this very issue directly, is a Supreme Court decision in Rockland County, Nanuet Fire Engine Co . No I . Inc v Arnold Amster, as Chairman of Zonings Board of Appeals ( 177 Misc. 2d 296, Sup ct. , Rockland County ( 1998)). In that case a fire company received a building permit from the code enforcement officer for construction of a fire substation. The code enforcement officer claimed to have used the County of Monroe balancing test and granted the permit even though the proposed substation was on a sub-sized lot and no site plan was filed as required by the municipality' s land use regulations. The matter was appealed to the municipality' s Zoning Board of Appeals which vacated and annulled the building permit. The court affirmed the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals except that it remanded the matter to the Zoning Board of Appeals to determine, using the nine point balancing of interests test, whether the fire company was subject to the jurisdiction of the municipality. Mr. Theisen in his memorandum dated March 1 , 2001 , concludes that the County, rather than the Town, is the appropriate governmental agency to apply the nine point test and make the determi- nation as to whether the County is subject to the Town' s legislation. In rendering this conclusion, he relies upon three cases: King v. County of Saratoga Industrial Development Agency, 208 A.13. 2d 194 (3rd Dept, 1995), Queensbury v. City of Glens Falls, 217 A.D. 2d 789 (3rd Dep 't, 1995), and City of Ithaca v. Tompkins County Board of Representatives et al 164 A.D42d 726 (3=d Dep 't, 1991). ' Each of these cases involved factual patterns which were unique and it does not appear that the issue of which governmental entity is the appropriate one to initially determine the jurisdiction of 'the host government ' s rules and regulations was specifically addressed. For example, in the King case, the Saratoga County Industrial Development Agency entertained an application in September of 1991 for construction of a paper sludge landfill. In January, 1992 the Town in which the landfill was to be located filed a petition with the Commissioner of Environ- mental Conservation claiming that the Town should be considered an "involved agency" under SEQRA. After the Commissioner ruled the Town was not an involved agency the Town enacted a local law which prescribed numerous technical standards for landfills, many of which were more stringent than those required by DEC, and also provided that the municipality was to be desig- nated the lead agency whenever a landfill was proposed for development within its borders , Significantly, this local law was adopted some five months after the application had been filed with the Industrial Development Agency. The Commissioner of Environmental Conservation rejected the municipality' s claim that it was an involved agency finding that the municipality had no discretionary approval authority over the project. Significantly, the Industrial Development Agency had named itself lead agency for the project in November of 1991 , two months prior to the adoption of the local law under which the Town asserted its right to regulate the landfill. In 1993 , the municipality brought a suit claiming that the naming of the Industrial Development Agency as lead agency was inappropriate and that the ultimate granting of approval by the IDA was in error. The Appellate Division affirmed the determination of the lower court upholding the Honorable Mary Russell March 20, 2001 Page 3 actions of the IDA and also upholding the IDA' s application of the nine point test under the County of Monroe case. It should be noted, however, that at the time a lead agency determin& tion was being made, and whether there were other involved agencies, the Town had no regula- tory power. Thus in this circumstance the court found that once the IDA had assumed responsi- bility for review, that it was appropriate for the IDA to make the determination as to whether there needed to be compliance with any other rules and laws. It is not clear that. that would have been the same result had the Town' s local law been in place prior to the filing of the application with the IDA or even prior to the IDA' s lead agency determination. In the Town of Queensbury case, the City of Glens Falls was under an order of the New York State Department of Health to clean up its surface water drinking sources. The court specifically held that "A consent order in an enforcement proceeding which imposes an obligation upon a local agency to correct a violation is an act of prosecutorial discretion and as such, is exempt under SEQRA ' (217 A.D. 2d 790). The Court further reasoned, in applying the "balancing of interests" tests, that the compliance with the order also exempted the City from the Town' s regulations. The Court did not expressly address which municipality should normally have made the determination of applicability of the host municipality' s regulations. Finally, in the Ci1y of :Ithaca case, which involved the City' s regulatory authority over the siting of a waste processing facility, the court specifically stated "The record, however, fails to substantiate the City' s claim that the facility will require a permit as a "significant industrial discharger" under the City code. " ( 164 A.D .2d 730. ) Thus, it appears the City had no regulatory authority over the construction of the facility and accordingly there was no reason to go to the City for a determina- tion as to whether the facility was subject to the City' s inapplicable regulations. In sum, while the Third Department has certainly reviewed cases where entities other than the host municipalities have initially applied the County of Monroe case criteria, it does not appear that the Third Department has specifically addressed the issue of whether in the normal situation the host municipality should be the entity making the determination. JCB S � ki` > l ... +�. t � �y,.y r F� ,iF'�'Z <5 a inF F � z a rx x r x�. ✓ i .. x 5;� s , t ' a' 'd ,. s �� ? ' ,S'K?'.�� p rx+i C' .5r5 z �,c"r ¢�� � r� �� .xJA1VIES �A SOON<LOCAL GO�ERNMENT�TECHNICALµSERIE5� � s�ry <� ` t � ��$' � � �`r Yi� r nr3 'ti SNP 2 '� ✓� r r3"x by r 3'u� .+,�,x =+' £ 'rMZ' z Fr r rid y - v ,y;-p x s n .fn�dK } Governmental Immunity from Zoning Governments often undertake development activities within their own or other communities. For example, a municipality may be undertaking the construction of a new town garage, park, or community building. Likewise, local governments may find their community to be the site of a development action by another nearby municipality or another level of government, such as the county or the state. When this happens, questions are often asked about how zoning regulations affect these development activities. This paper is a guide for local government officials faced with these questions. Certain acts of government may be exempt, or "immune," from zoning. Historically, New York courts have recognized that certain entities are entitled to absolute immunity from zoning regulations, including the federal government; state government; state urban development corporations ; and public schools . These entities are not required to comply with local land use regulations . Other governmental entities, such as towns, villages, cities, counties and fire districts, are accorded only a limited immunity, and may be subject to local land use regulations . In making a determination as to whether the actions of governmental units with limited immunity are "exempt"from local zoning regulations, the New York Court of Appeals in the 1988 case of Matter of County of Monroe v City of Rochester 72 N.Y.2d 338, 533 N.Y. S .2d. 702 , established a new method for resolving inter-governmental land use disputes using the "balancing of public interests" analytic approach. Unless a statute exempts it, the encroaching governmental unit is presumed to be subject to the zoning regulations of the host community where the land is located. Working from that premise, a host community then considers several factors to determine whether or not it is in the public interest to continue to subject the encroaching government to its land use regulations. The host community is to weigh the following nine factors: 1 . the nature and scope of the instrumentality seeking immunity; 2 . the encroaching government' s legislative grant of authority; 39 the kind of function or land use involved; 4. the effect local land use regulation would have upon the enterprise concerned; 5 . alternative locations for the facility in less restrictive zoning areas ; 6. the impact upon legitimate local interests; 7 . alternative methods of providing the proposed improvement; 8 . the extent of the public interest to be served by the improvements; and 9 . intergovernmental participation in the project development process and an opportunity to be heard. A subsequent case indicated that a public hearing should be held to elicit public input on the nine factors. Neither the New York Court of Appeals nor the New York State statutes specify which board in the host municipality makes the determination of governmental immunity. This raises two questions — when in the development approval process is this determination made, and who makes it? The following are some alternative scenarios which may lead to a determination of governmental immunity. ��Ta � i ��.n�'r �f�9rxr '�F't�e` <,� kv'° rrG v: is z S%%' � si - •� v� ms's .'�,.;' �Y.`c'. �_.,:,: c e, r � r y y -:- � � � � vu� ?s Fy .� � ,�. � _;.. ,t x., -> x K;µ ? �� �� �H � ��J`AMES A��COONfLOCAI:;GOVERNME�IT�ATECHNiCAij' SERIEES� `��> ���` ��y a SF.�.�+.:�� 2 t � z K?Ti' Z C r Fs� ?��� r "�?�y � �� � � '1S ya Tr t '� tS, � a " en3'r � Fr xr� s � x^Jr-'!�• �X ! ,.x� Second, it is not clear which board in the host municipality weighs the nine factors and determines whether the governmental unit undertaking the development activity is immune from local land use regulations or not. Also ambiguous is when in the development process that decision is made. Finally, where a governmental unit is absolutely immune from zoning or other land use regulations, it is unclear what deference that unit of government should give to the host government' s regulations . The courts have not answered the question, "Should the immune governmental unit nevertheless try to comply with the host municipality' s regulations?" If you would like more information relating to local government powers and responsibilities, please contact either the Tug Hill Commission at (315)785-2380, or the Department of State' s Division of Local Government at (518)473 -3355 . August 1999 NYS . Department of State Tug Hill Commission 41 State Street :• '* Dulles State Office Building Albany, New York 12231 , .. 317 Washington Street (518)473 -3355 J Watertown, NY 13601 -3782 315-785-2380/2570 (800)367-8488 www.dos. state.ny.us i OFIT� ° TOWN OF ITHACA 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET , ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 TOWN CLERK 273-1721 HIGHWAY 273- 1656 PARKS 273-8035 ENGINEERING 273-1747 PLANNING 273-1747 ZONING 273-1783 FAX (607) 273-1704 March 20, 2001 Mr. Stephen Whicher, County Administrator Tompkins County 125 East Court Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Re : Lead Agency Designation for Tompkins County Public Safety Communications System and Comments regarding Draft Scope Dear Mr. Whicher: Thank you for your letter of February 22, 2001 regarding the above-referenced matter. The Town of Ithaca will, we expect (and subject to the comments below and in my letter to Barbara Mink, dated March 20, 2001 ) ultimately concur that the Tompkins County Board of Representatives should be designated as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review for this project. We definitely believe that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared. We also believe that the Town Board is an Involved Agency since it may be required to fund these costs of an unknown number of transceivers that are part of the proposed system. We further believe that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals are both involved agencies pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617 , if new or modified telecommunication facilities are proposed in the Town of Ithaca, because of the approval authority granted to those boards in Article XIII, Section 70A of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance regarding Telecommunication Facilities. Attached for your use is a copy of Article XIII, Section 70A of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance regarding Telecommunications Facilities . We have received a copy of the draft Scope for the Environmental Impact Statement for this project, along with a Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). We note that Part I of the EAF was not completed. We therefore question how Part II could have been completed by the lead agency. In addition, Article XIII, Section 70A of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance requires the submission of a Visual EAF Addendum for telecommunication facilities proposed to be located in the Town . No Visual Addendum was included with the EAF submitted. It is difficult to comment on the draft Scope at this time without more information regarding potential tower or telecommunication facility locations and types . In fact, it is our opinion that the draft Scope and initiation of the Environmental Impact Statement process is premature, since many of the project details and potential impacts of the project are unknown at this time. For example, at the top of page 3 of the draft Scope, it is indicated that "While some alternatives are known at this time, others may arise during project development . . . " Page 4 of the draft Scope includes Section III.A.2 System Design and Architecture, which indicates "Location of project i Stephen Whicher, County Administrator March 20, 2001 Page 2 infrastructure and sitting. " This is not sufficient information for a scoping document that is intended to be utilized to obtain public comment regarding the project. The Scope should include actual proposed locations and other details concerning the communication system facilities . The same comment is relevant to page 5 of the draft Scope relating to "Alternatives to the Proposed Action". The Scope should include specific alternative tower/facility locations . Each site would have its own set of environmental issues and potential impacts that need to be described in the Scope. A meaningful Scope should include a detailed description of how technical studies in the DEIS will be accomplished;, not just that they will be included. For example, if there are traffic issues, then the Scope should identify specific intersections to be analyzed and what the analysis will include. If a proposed telecommunication tower is proposed to be located in a scenic viewshed, then the Scope should identify the type of visual analysis that will be conducted. These are just examples of why we believe that the draft Scope that has been submitted by Tompkins County for this project is premature and incomplete. We also note that Part II of the EAF indicates that many of the impact categories will result in "small to moderate irr.Lpact." We question how this determination could have been made without any information or details regarding locations, types, sizes, etc . of proposed towers or other facilities. Depending; on specific locations and other details, it is quite possible that some facilities that may be proposed might have "potential large impacts." In conclusion, we believe that the draft Scope and EAF which have been submitted for our review are inadequate; and premature for purposes of public or agency comment, unless the Environmental Impact: Statement proposed at this point is prepared as a Generic EIS . This would enable the County to review the general potential impacts of the overall communications system, but would then have to be supplemented with site specific EIS ' s when specific facilities and locations are proposed. This is not, however, the approach that has been represented by Tompkins County in the materials that we received. We would appreciate clarification regarding this matter and the overall EIS process . Sincerely, Mary Russell, Deputy Supervisor Att. cc: Barbara Blanchard, Chair, Communications Capital Projects Committee James Hanson, Jr. , Commissioner, Tompkins County Planning Department Supervisor Catherine Valentino John Barney, Attorney for the Town of Ithaca Fred Wilcox, Chairman, Town of Ithaca Planning Board Kirk Sigel, Chairman, Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals TOWN OF ULYSSES 10 Elm Street Trumansburg, NY 14886 (607) 387-5767 Fax (607) 387-5843 March 15 , 2001 Tompkins County Board of Representatives Court House Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Board Members : After reviewing the court decisions being presented by both sides of the 911 communications project controversy, it is clear that there is a difference of opinion as to the rights of individual municipalities to control their own zoning destiny. Since there is not a definite plan in place at this time, it would seem that a tower site within their municipality might at some point affect all towns and villages within Tompkins County. If the Town of Ulysses were to be chosen as a tower site, and since we have a tower ordinance in force, we should be considered as an involved agency for the SEQRA determination. At this point in time, with the lack or a definite plan of sites, we feel that, we should be considered an involved agency. If we were granted the involved agency status, we would not oppose the county' s determination oftheir lead agency status. This is the only logical conclusion due to the fact that every municipality within the county is affected by the project. I would appreciate an official notice from your board that the Town of Ulysses will be considered an involved agency for the remainder of the SEQRA process for the 911 communications project. I would, in addition, request that this notification be made to my office on or before April 6, 2001 to avoid any further action on the part of The Town of Ulysses to secure the involved agency status. Sincerely, G i Doug A ic, Ulysses Town Supervisor ToMPKI 1 �COUN Cp�yy T N OF DAN BY - TOMPKI NS COUNTY V 182410 DANBY ROAD (607) 277-4788 - ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850-9419 Fax : (607) 277-0559 Edward Inman Danby Town Hall 1830 Danby Road Ithaca, N. Y. 14850 March 19, 2001 Tompkins County Board of Representatives 320 N Tioga St. Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 Re: Proposed Public Safety Communications System Dear Board of Representatives : May I start this letter with a declaration stating that I, the Danby Town Board, and the Danby Planning Board realize the importance and the need for the 911 -Telecommunication Project planned by the County Board of Representatives, with the help of the Fire Department. As Supervisor for the Town of Danby, I am writing to inform you that the town will accept the county as the "LEAD AGENCY" for the 911 - project, if the county will accept the Town of Danby as an "INVOLVED AGENCY" . The town will incur expenses throughout and upon completion of the project with the legal costs and consulting costs as stated in our telecommunications law. The Radios and equipment costs, upon completion of the project to update to the new system, will be left to the towns. I have stated az)ntinually, that all that I am interested in is the cooperation of the County Board concerning the placement and location of a tower located in the Town of Danby. Looking at the previously proposed tower placement map presented by the Cap Com committee, you will notice that the proposed tower is located only a few feet from state lands or from wooded areas. With a move of only a short distance, keeping the tower on the same ridge and altitude would help to hide the base and make the tower more esthetically pleasing to the surrounding neighbors. With the bids out to new companies we may find that some of the previously proposed sites have been eliminated or moved . I am aware, as a previous volunteer fire fighter, that communications in our area are very broken and the need for a tower in our area will probably be necessary . With this in mind I am asking for your cooperation. You, as elected officials, know that we were elected to serve our electors. The proposed tower placement in the town will affect only a few neighbors next to the tower but will have far reaching ramifications. If I were to sacrifice a few neighbors without making any attempt to help, as you are very aware, I would lose not only their respect, but also the respect of the people of the town, as an effective supervisor. In conclusion, please remember that the town is definitely an involved agency and looks forward to continuing cooperation of the county. Respectfully, / Edward Inman Supervisor Town of Danby TOWN OF CAROLINE -a P O Box 136 Y : F Slaterville Springs, NY 14881 � C Don Barber, Supervisor 19 March 2001 (607) 539-3395 Tompkins County Planning Department 121 East Court Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Re: Draft EIS for Tompkins County Public Safety Communications System The Caroline Town Board believes that it is an involved agency because we have regulatory authority or the authority to determine if we have regulatory authority over a communication tower sited within our borders. If you will acknowledge that we are an involved agency, we will consent to you being the lead agency for this project. Please communicate your response in writing by April 6,2001 , Purs yuly, �u- - Don Barber Supervisor cc: Barbara Mink - Chair County Board of Representatives TOWN OF DRYDEN * OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR 65 EAST MAIN STREET DRYDEN, NEW YORK 13053 =9505 FAX 607-844=9599 E-MAIL drydent@lightlink.com TEL 607-844-8619 March 21 , 2001 Tompkins County Planning Department 121 East Court Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Re: Draft EIS for Tompkins County Public Safety Communications System The Dryden Town Board believes that it is an involved agency because we have regulatory authority or the authority to determine if we have regulatory authority over a communication tower site within our borders. If you will acknowledge that we are an involved agency, we will consent to you being the lead agency for this project. Please communicate your response to me in writing by April 6, 2001 . Sincerely, /�Qit2 i� Mark Varvayanis Supervisor /m cc: Town Board VILLAGE OF LANSING 2405 NORTH TRIPHAMMER ROAD ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE HOURS MON. -WED. -THR. -FRI. 9- 1 TELEPHONE 607-257-0424 March 22, 2001 Ms . Barbara Mink Chair Tompkins County Board of Representatives Courthouse Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Barbara Thank you for your letter of March 2 with the enclosed opinion from Mr. Theisen . I have discussed the matter with the Board of Trustees and with the Village attorney and they have instructed me to communicate to you the results of those conversations . With respect to the SEQRA process for the environmental assessment of the proposed emergency communication system, we feel that the Village of Lansing is an involved agency and we request a formal assurance from you that this is indeed the case . We would like to receive that assurance by the close of business on April 6, 2001 . If we receive this assurance , the Village of Lansing will consent to having Tompkins County act as the lead agency for the process . I hope to hear from you soon . Thank you. Sincerely yours Don Hartill Mayor a, TOWN of LANSING Q `7/om.c. of Industry. Agrieu.lturc and ScBrci(: Reaul� " �9. Faux 186 lil Tantung, NY 141 82 March 22, 2001 Ms. Barbara Mink, Chair Tompkins County Board of Representatives 320 North Tioga Strait Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Barbara: Thank you for your letter of March 2 with the enclosed opinion from Mr. Theisen. The 'Town Hoard at the meeting on March 21 , 2001 discussed this issue. With respect to the SEQRA process for the environmental assessment of the proposed emergency communication system, we feel that the Town of Lansing is an involved agency. If we arc granted this status, the Town of Lansing will consent to having 'Tompkins County act as Lead Agency for the process. We look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Herbert S. Beckwith Deputy Supervisor Katrina Greenly Town Council Mcmbcr Bud Shattuck Town Council Member MAR-21 -2001 15928 P , 02 ri OMae Chmn Atq► Chmn qrp .*4r , tea) STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE 4 1 STATE STREET ALBANY, NY 1 2 23 1 -0001 ALEXANDER F. TReADWELL SECALTAgY OF STATE JAMES P . KING March 219 2001 OCNCRAL COUNS" Hon, Mary Russell Deputy Supervisor Town of Ithaca 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 1 850 Dear Ms. Russell; I write in response to your letter requesting an advisory opinion whether Tompkins County is immune froin the zoning laws or ordinances of municipalities in the county with respect to construction of towers on which emergency communication equipment would be installed. Counsel ' s Office of the Department of State believes that, if, after application of the factors in In re County of Monroe (72 N.Y. 2d 338), a given municipality decides it is in the public interest to do so, the county would be subject to the municipality' s zoning. It is the municipality's choice, not the County's . While there is little guidance in the few cases construing Coun of Monroe, regarding the forum or the mechanics for determining whether the County should be subject to each mu dc' zoning, it would seem reasonable for the board which is authorized to review tower proposals to make the determination, This letter is necessarily brief in order to provide you with a timely response. Please contact me with any further questions regarding this issue. Sincerely, 2Z4 Richard L. Hoffman Associate Attorney c. Mark Varvayanis (Town of Dryden) Glen Bruening (DEC) PHONE; ( 51 8) 474-8740 • FAX: (518) 473-92 1 1 • ' WWW. D03 . 5TATE , NY , U • E-MAIL; INFOQDOS .STATE. NY , US w•r •Kw wytA OF IT �9clTOWN OF ITHACA 1e 2 ' 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET , ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 TOWN CLERK 273- 1721 HIGHWAY 273-1656 PARKS 273-8035 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273-1747 ZONING 273-1783 FAX (607) 273-1704 April 5 , 2001 Honorable Barbara Mink, Chair Tompkins County Board of Representatives Tompkins County Court House Ithaca, New York 14850 Re : Tompkins County Public Safety Communications System Dear Barbara : Thank you for your letter of April 4, 2001 regarding the above-referenced matter. Unfortunately, I do not believe that your letter or the attached County Board of Representatives resolution adequately responds to my request that the County acknowledge, in writing, that the Town Board, the Town Planning Board, and the Town ' s Zoning Board of Appeals are involved agencies for SEQRA purposes in regard to the environmental review of the County ' s proposed public safety communications system . I indicated that once these bodies have been acknowledged by the County as involved agencies, they would likely consent to the County being lead agency for SEQRA purposes . Please grant us the courtesy of a clear and direct response . The Town ' s position still is that the initial decision as to whether or not the County' s tower proposal is subject to local regulations must be made by the appropriate body at the local level . In the case of the Town of Ithaca, that would be our Zoning Board of Appeals insofar as it relates to whether the County' s proposal is subject to the Town ' s Zoning Ordinance provisions relating to telecommunications towers. Sincerely, Mary Russell, Deputy Supervisor cc : Honorable Don Barber, Town Supervisor, Town of Caroline Honorable Mark Varvayanis, Town Supervisor, Town of Dryden Honorable Edward Inman, Town Supervisor, Town of Danby Honorable Jean Owens, Town Supervisor, Town of Enfield Honorable Glenn Morey, Town Supervisor, Town of Groton Honorable Stephan Farkas, Town Supervisor, Town of Lansing Honorable Don Hartil, Mayor, Village of Lansing Honorable Doug Austic, Town Supervisor, Town of Ulysses Barbara Blanchard, Chair, Communications Capital Projects Committee James Hanson, Jr.. , Commissioner, Tompkins County Planning Department Supervisor Catherine Valentino John Barney, Attorney for the Town of Ithaca Fred Wilcox, Chairman, Town of Ithaca Planning Board Kirk Sigel, Chairman, Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Erin M . Crotty, Commissioner, N.Y . S . Department of Environmental Conservation Daniel Palm, Director, Region 7, N .Y . S . Department of Environmental Conservation Ralph Manna, Reg . Permit Administrator, N. Y. S . Department of Environmental Conservation Tompklns; County Q BOARD OF REPRESENTATIVES * h 14850 APR - 5 2001 Coarthouse, Ithaca; N.Y. 0 Telephone : (667)Z 74,`5434` *x:(607) 274-5430 www.tompkms=co.org ATTEST ITHACA TOWN CLERK April 4 , 2001 Ms . Mary Russell , Deputy Supervisor Town of Ithaca 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Mary : Thank you for your letter regarding the proposed public safety communication system . I am enclosing a resolution passed by the County Board last evening that indicates our continued commitment to work closely with all affected municipalities in the County as we move ahead with this project . Sincerely, �) 'J" Barbara Mink , Chair Board of Representatives / mp enclosure �� Recycled paper RESOLUTION NO. 57 - STATING INTENT TO WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH AFFECTED MUNICIPALITIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A COUNTYWIDE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM (PSCS) MOVED by Ms . Blanchard, seconded by Mr. Penniman . WHEREAS , Tompkins County is seeking to replace and/or enhance the communication system currently in use by public safety (fire, EMS , and police) officials and other government agencies countywide , and WHEREAS , the proposed method of accomplishing this objective is the construction and operation of a wireless public safety communication system using 800 Mhz fi-equencies that Tompkins County has been granted by the FCC and digital, trunked radio and, possibly, the proposed New York Statewide Communications Network system, and WHEREAS , project goals are to : ( 1 ) Maximize coverage and balance the level of service to meet the communication needs of the County' s public safety community, (2) Minimize the economic cost to the County though public/private partnerships and the effective use of funding opportunities, and (3 ) Minimize the environmental impact of the project on the County and the infrastructure necessary to the greatest extent possible, and WHEREAS , the development of such a system is expected to require the construction of an unspecified number of communications towers, the locations of which are not currently known, and WHEREAS , the County has an interest in maximizing the effectiveness of each tower in order to minimize both the overall cost 'and the total number of towers that would be required, and WHEREAS , a number of municipalities have indicated concerns about the County's approach to the siting of the towers and development of the tower sites , now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Tompkins County Board of Representatives recognizes these concerns and intends to address them in a collaborative way with any and all municipalities that may eventually see a proposed tower site within their jurisdictions, RESOLVED, further, That a thorough review of environmental issues will be conducted in conjunction with this project, with serious consideration being given to any proposal to mitigate negative impacts, if such proposal is appropriate and feasible from a cost and technical standpoint, RESOLVED , further, That the Tompkins County Board of Representatives confirms that the process to . be followed in advancing the PSCS project has been communicated accurately to municipalities in letters from Barbara Blanchard dated February 20 , 2001 (Attachment A) and from Barbara Mink dated March 2 , 2001 (Attachment B) . SEQR ACTION : TYPE II-20 RESOLUTION NO* 57 - STATING INTENT TO WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH AFFECTED MUNICIPALITIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A COUNTYWIDE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM (PSCS) cc : Administration - via Network Finance Public Works Count), Attorney All Municipalities STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of a resolution adopted by the Tompkins County Board of Representatives on the 3rd day of April, 2001 . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said Board at Ithaca, New York, this 4`h day of April, 2001 . l-e lave 9 Xlerk Tompkins County Board of Representatives 0 II4 1nS : 0� lat BOARD Fr avRtSlN ATIVES Co house; IfaI .I 50 Telephone : T607) se 3x: 07) 274-5430 % . --- .to IPs-dco g March 2, 2001 Dear [Individuals present at 2/23/01 IPC meeting] : Attached are the minutes from last week' s meeting about the county' s proposed public safety communication project. Hound the perspectives shared important, and have spent some time seeking the legal documentation requested as well as full board opinion as to how we should proceed. First, let me stress how important we all know this project is to Tompkins County. For the last three years we have responded to the need first articulated by the public safety community to improve communication before frequencies are taken over or the hardware becomes obsolete, both of which are likely to occur in the near future. We have worked with two different consulting firms to establish the best approach to meet our needs, and an 800 megahertz tunked tower system comes out on top. Last year the Communications Capital Project Committee I established to conduct this initiative made a point of visiting every town to present plans as they then existed. In response to the questions raised at those meetings and in the local media, the committee took a step back and asked for another peer review of.the options, to make sure we hadn't overlooked anything. At that time it became known that the State was also looking at a communications network, and we acted on that knowledge by hiring the firm that was working with the State to work with us. What their report showed was that we were indeed on the right track, and that whatever system we came up with would be compatible with what the State was working on, and the possibility exists to have some of our costs paid by the State. As the project moves forward, we have committed to keeping the entire community up to speed on these plans; and we have already published a significant number of editorial piece, communiques, and publicity of SEQR schedules and requests for information. Where we have found ourselves in disagreement has to do with the formal role towns might play in determining the future of this project, and your request to have the county. be subject to town cell tower ordinances. You cite specifically the City of Rochester vs. Monroe County case, where the court ruled the county was not subject to the city's ordinances . You point out that even though the City lost the case, the analysis of nine factors which must be considered if one municipality is exempted from another's zoning laws has relevance for our case. These nine factors include the nature and scope of the municipality, the kind of function involved, and the extent of the public interest to be served by the improvements. We also think this nine-point test is important; but we don ' t agree with your conclusion that the towns should apply the factors, rather the county. We believe that the County should apply the test, for the reasons explained in the attached memo. 1�(y1t <• "i • ? °a J _3 s 1W lr t i t . 1: ell �, t�} �� 4 +4 y.Y,[Sa.W j 74-� y ; � 1 ✓.� �r +4 �C�, r 1 1 „ rt ,� . '" �}1` 9f+j Yas tasl .�- � iL � yi I�I+ kl [ C.•. ( t 4 4 ay . �y � t��� .tY+r t�,•,Yi.:'='�`". 7 s.,-'-u ,R ` f. `. " n I;Y' . r ( � .+ r4 � < e r1 Syf t` Js 1 1 � 1 i':( f s Ll t: x'11 ����1 �•! kd T � F "tf ra'•1,:' )l� v 111 1 1 1 1 - • 1 11 • ' 1 1 - - • 1 . 1 1 • 1 - 1 • - • 1 • - 1 • J • - 1 1 • It - • • • • - : 1 • • • • / / 1 �+ 1 • • : • 11 11 4111 '11, - • 1 ' • 1 - - • • • • • : • • 1 • • • • • • : • • • • • 1 • • 1 1 • 1 - 1 / • • • loon • • - • • • • • - • • LINDERWNN'lCR \ . . EEK EXISTING STREAM / PROPOSEC ?. I IY�E B — Y'� SEisa L — I I �o�;;i.. .+:y : :, X;::`:m "'y0p-0 .f'..I.,_2h •.<.3''.y'�'+� I P%.a!a ` resale'• ` ;x,' .,,- �'� W CL o_ ICiI \ > 12 WIC :::::a j x-•925.0 / r-9I3A -1 vim95OO / ' DUM UMPSTER 1 —� / I A UO I auc K \ j Fi.=951.0 930.0 o I p \ ga PLAY F5_:,:;:' . r:�;,-! ♦'929.0 Uj 50.0 AREA 935.0 i::`;_�:; -t \+ ti I : :::.� ::: ::: ., ; .. r ♦921 TYPE B J 1 � 1 F1� � \ lnuc i \� DUMP I DUMPSTER Fi.=955.0 p \\ 19.0 0--915.0 / —915.0 I x-929.0 p Q u fi }z I d, 1 iJ:ti�fi \ 920.0 I ,c6ti 5O_FRONT YAR B K IEMERGENCYJACCESS -h I BUS STOP \ t � SRE PLAN l-t i ■ ZONING DATA I SITE AREA 14.21 ACRES (' SITE AREA INCLUDES AREA DENOTED AS FUTURE POlENT1Al 7 PUBLIC ROAD- WHICH MAY BE DEDICATED AS PUBLIC ROAD.) EXISTING ZONING: R- 15 RESIDINML � i PROPOSED ZONING: MR MULTIPLE RESIDENCE ` ` :•� PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3 - EIGHT UNIT ONE-BEDROOM BUILDINGS (TYPE A) - 24 5 - WiT UNIT TWO BEDROOM BUILDINGS (TYPE D) 40 +24 FUTURE I' 1 - WAIT UNIT THREE BEDROOM BUn nRx: frvP .) .8 1 - COMMUNITY BUILDING (2700 SF), TOTAL DWEWNG UNITS 72 +24 FUTURE I., \1� CARL JAHN 8 ARSOCIATES / / ZONING REQUIREMENTS i I' DESCRIPTION REOUIRED PROPOSED FUTURE L L' / DENSITY 2500 S.F. MIN./D.U, 8591 S.F./D.U. 5443 S.F./D.U. - BUILDING COVERAGE 30% MAX 6.4% MAX. 8.5% MAX. / BUILDING HEIGHT 36' MAX. 31 ' 31 ' .' -•t . ! FRONT YARD SETBACK 50' MIN. 50' MIN. 50' MIN. / REAR YARD SETBACK 62' MIN, 70' MIN. 70' MIN. SIDE YARD SETBACK 31' MIN. 225' MIN. 35' MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS 31' MIN. 66' MIN. 66' MIN. PARKING SPACES 96 102 134 DPEgII' UNE y ZONING DATA 3 LOCATION MAP L— I L- 1 1 "= 1200'-0" .•.• , . . ..r . ., . � q, . �. .*ba. . .r .. ._ . W = =e= �,r ',YO q• rr.r q hGg7 `TTVE BUFFER _ �.s 0 1 I � I Y U I PROPO D :3 o DETTION, BASIN arj) 7 r, pi / I I °a 1 \ W eel co cr I I I t \ Qda o eDS.a / Bso.o-- CONFIER CIRCLE 889.50± t I EXIST. ROAD ' A I — a 1 ( \ M n ••, 50 0 TH XL U " I , 1 ► r > > ` c Q so l 01 I 1 1 I � � \ \ \ � . _ ` ` o �iiw•Fi! i:'_'.j.n';- I ` \ l \ 11 l �\ R E v I S I 0 N 5 PROJECT N0. 201015.00 D MARCH 30. 2001 E T I T L E EXIST. SIGN © I SKETCH .� MW SITE ) ' J PLAN NYS ROUTE 79 ) ) - 5 C A L E FWMI NOTED As oufto"off 4 OVERALL SITE PLAN L - 1 1 '=40'-0" L—I 1 0=300'-0" ATTACHMENT # 4 PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO : TOWN BOARD MEMBERS FROM: SUSAN RITTER, ASSISTANT TOWN PLANNERj .� • DATE : APRIL 39 2001 RE : TRA.►NSPORTATION COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS - ATTACHED Attached for your consideration is a Resolution to establish the Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee. The ei:fort to establish this Committee grew out of two recent meetings between Town of Ithaca representatives (Cathy Valentino , Bill Lesser, Tom Niederkorn) , with Cornell University (represented by Bill Wendt and John Gutenberger) , the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council (represented by Fernando de Aragon) and Planning Department staff, to consider the reorganization of the Town of Ithaca/Cornell University Transportation Committee . The outcome of the meeting was to establish a new Transportation Committee that would better address Town-wide intermodal transportation issues . Attached is both the: resolution establishing the new Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee, as well as the Resolution and Agreement creating the Town of Ithaca/Cornell University Transportation Corrunittee in 1995 . �1y OF I P� TOWN OF ITHACA 21 EAST SENECA STREET , ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 � Y 0T0WN CLERK 273-1721 HIGHWAY 273-1656 PARKS 273-8035 ENGINEERING 273-1747 PLANNING 273-1747 ZONING 273-1783 FAX (607) 273- 1704 TOWN BOARD MEETING 10 / 2 / 95 AGENDA ITEM NO . 19 APPROVAL FOR AGREEMENT REGARDING TRANSPORTATION- RELATED ISSUES BETWEEN CORNELL UNIVERSITY AND THE TOWN OF ITHACA Resolution No . 184 WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca Town Board finds that it would be desirable for the Town of Ithaca and Cornell University to establish a joint study group , to be known as the Town of Ithaca / Cornell University Transportation Committee , to study and make recommendations to the appropriate bodies on transportation issues related to Precinct 7 and surrounding areas , as outlined in the attached " Agreement Regarding Transportation - related Issues Between Cornell University and the Town of Ithaca " ( Revised 9 / 12 / 95 ) ; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the establishment of the Town of Ithaca / Cornell University Transportation Committee ; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the membership of the above - referenced Transportation Committee shall consist of a total of eight ( 8 ) members , to include two ( 2 ) members from the Town of Ithaca Town Board ; one ( 1 ) member from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board ( either the Planning Board Chair or designee ) ; three ( 3 ) members from Cornell University representing the Department of Transportation Services ; a representative from the Office - of Community Relations , and a representative from the Department of Facilities Planning ) ; one ( 1 ) member from the Forest Home Improvement Association appointed by the Forest Home Improvement Association ; and one ( 1 ) member being a citizen representative from the East Ithaca area of the Town of Ithaca appointed by the Town Board to serve for a term based on a calendar year ( which includes the Pine Tree Road , Eastern Heights , or Ellis Hollow neighborhoods ) ; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that from time to time as appropriate when dealing with issues impacting other areas not represented by members listed above , the Committee may expand its membership for consideration of particular issues or projects ; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that technical assistance may be provided to the Committee by 'the Town of Ithaca Director of Planning or designee , staff of Cornell University , Executive Director of the Ithaca - Tompkins County Transportation Council or designee , and / or others as may be determined to be appropriate by the Committee . i Agenda No . 19 , 10 / 2 / 95 Res . No . 184 Page 2 . MOVED : Councilwoman Harrison SECONDED : Councilwoman Grigorov Supervisor Whitcomb , aye , Councilwoman Valentino , aye ; Councilman Klein , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilwoman Harrison , aye . Carried unanimously . DATED : October 2 , 1995 .JC 1 J04 Lent Noteboom , Town Clerk sEP 2 6 1995 DRAFT TOWN JF ITHACA PLANNING ZONING, ENGINEERING (REVISED 9/12/95) Agreement Regarding Transportation-related Issues Between Cornell University and the Town of Ithaca - 1995- BACKGROUND At the request of the Town of Ithaca in 1990 , Cornell University prepared a Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement ( GEIS) to analyze the environmental impacts, both positive and negative , of rezoning Cornell's Planning Precinct 7 from R-30 to a Special Land Use District (SLUD ) . Cornell University requested the rezoning in order that it could plan better for a long-term development program in the 271-acre Precinct 7 . The Town of Ithaca Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency, utilized the Draft GEIS to create a Final GEIS on April 19, 1994 , and a Statement of Findings on May 17 , 1994, The Ithaca Town Board began its consideration of the proposed SLUD legislation on June 7 , 1994. The GEIS contains a detailed analysis of transportation for existing conditions , of future conditions without a development program, and of future incremental development and associated impacts . The GEIS found there are a number of existing deficiencies in the circulation system that need to be addressed by community-wide comprehensive planning. Specifically, the GEIS references previous studies related to the issue of traffic in the northeast portion of Tompkins County — in particular the hamlet of Forest Horne — including the 1974 MacNeill Cross Town Road Feasibility Study and the 1981 O'Brien and Taube East Ithaca Circulation Study. In addition, an East Ithaca Transportation Study Committee did a traffic analysis and made recommendations in 1989 . A "North-South" connector has been discussed for many years , but no route is planned nor has one been identified. The impact of such a road would be significant to traffic in the area and to future Cornell development. It is assumed, for example, that such a road would reduce traffic volume in the Forest Home neighborhood. Thus , future Cornell-related traffic; generated by development in Precinct 7 might impact Forest Home less if an alternate route were available . While Cornell has expressed willingness to help plan and set aside land for such a road , there is no local consensus about where it should go . Additionally, the GEIS concluded that impacts to the surrounding road network would occur in the future if no other community-wide improvements are implemented. Cornell has committed itself to work with local communities in the resolution of such problems within a comprehensive planning process . Transportation Agreement Page 2 AGREEMENT WHEREAS , during discussion of the proposed SLUD legislation, a number of broad transportation-related issues — vehicle , pedestrian , bicycle , and recreational — were identified that are outside the specifics of the SLUD legislation, and WHEREAS, during these discussions , it was determined that a joint Town of Ithaca/Cornell transportation committee should be established to study these issues , and WHEREAS , one of the issues identified for further study was the possibility of locating a North-South connector road , including recommendations regarding the methodology for planning, financing and implementing construction of such a road, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council (ITCTC ) has included in its Transportation :Improvement Program a project to conduct a formal corridor/subarea planning study to determine the possible need for additional capacity improvements, congestion management, and Transportation System and Management improvements (TSM/TDM) in the area east of Cornell University, and WHEREAS , Cornell is working on an updated Plantations Plan, and WHEREAS, a Town of Ithaca/Cornell transportation committee should coordinate its work with the Plantations Master Plan, the Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council , and other planning groups as appropriate , NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , to address these concerns , and others that might be identified in the future, Cornell University and the Town of Ithaca hereby agree to the establishment of a joint study group to be known as the Town of Ithaca/Cornell University Transportation Committee (TICUTC ), and be it further RESOLVED , that TICUTC is charged to study and make recommendations on, among other things , topics such as : 1 . Methods to reduce existing and future traffic in the Precinct 7 area, including specifically the hamlet of Forest Home . 2 . Alternatives to Single Occupancy Vehicular travel (SOV travel) , including possible additional park-and-ride lots in the Town of Ithaca and other municipalities , and improved transit. 3 . Traffic-connectivity and pedestrian- safety related issues , in and around Precinct 7 , including connectivity with East Hill Plaza, Forest Home , existing recreatilonways , and the main campus . And be it further RESOLVED , that TICUTC shall report its recommendations to the Ithaca Town Board, Cornell University, and the ITCTC in a timely manner, preferably by , and be it further Transportation Agreement Page 3 RESOLVED , it is agreed by both parties that TICUTC shall address not only the issues above , but may study other transportation issues as deemed appropriate by the parties from time to time . Agreed to this day, [ dateI By. Supervisor [title] Town of Ithaca Cornell University 1 MAPLE AVE RECOI TOWN Suit-Kote Finger Lakes Pa Item Quantity Units Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Tota Mobilization 1 Lump Sum $ 11 , 000 . 00 $ 11 , 000 . 00 $ 11 , 910 . 03 $ Maintenance and Protection of Traffic 1 Lump Sum $ 18 , 000 . 00 $ 18 , 000 . 00 $ 5 ,497 . 00 $ Mill Existing Pavement - 5" Depth 5225 Sq . Yards $ 0 . 90 $ 41702 . 50 $ 2 . 62 $ Granite Curb in Place 1300 Linear Foot $ 20 . 00 $ 26 , 000 . 00 $ 34 . 00 $ On-Site Cut 5100 Cubic Yards $ 6 . 50 $ 33 , 150 .00 $ 3 . 93 $ On-Site Fill 900 Cubic Yards $ 4 . 00 $ 31600 . 00 $ 3 . 65 $ Run of Bank Gravel Base 1234 Cubic Yards $ 23 . 00 $ 289382 . 00 $ 14 . 79 $ Crushed Stone Base 2245 Tons $ 14 . 00 $ 31 , 430 . 00 $ 19 . 29 $ Type 7F Asphalt Top 512 Tons $ 45. 00 $ 239040 . 00 $ 61 . 93 $ Type 3 Asphalt Binder 1475 Tons $ 35. 00 $ 517625 . 00 $ 43 . 84 $ Type 1 Asphalt Base 1620 Tons $ 30 . 00 $ 48 , 600 . 00 $ 37 . 37 $ 1 hole Frame and Covers 5 Each $ 500 . 00 $ 21500 . 00 $ 580 . 80 $ TOTAL $ 282 , 029 . 50 $ 3 f� ATTACHMENT ISTRUCTION BID TABULATION IF ITHACA ng I J . V. Spano Economy Paving Davis Wallbridge , Inc 'rice Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price , 910 . 03 $ 139284 . 00 $ 139284 . 00 $ 321736 . 55 $ 32 , 736 . 55 $ 25 , 000 . 00 $ 25 , 000. 00 1497 . 00 $ 297805 . 00 $ 290805 . 00 $ 28 ,400 . 00 $ 28 ,400600 $ 54 , 000 . 00 $ 54 , 000000 2689 . 50 $ 3 . 00 $ 15 , 675. 00 $ 4 .40 $ 229990 . 00 $ 2 . 50 $ 139062 . 50 , 200 . 00 $ 29 . 00 $ 37 , 700 . 00 $ 21 . 85 $ 289405. 00 $ 26 . 00 $ 339800. 00 9043 . 00 $ 5 . 00 $ 25 , 500 . 00 $ 11 . 20 $ 57 , 120. 00 $ 9 . 00 $ 45 , 900 . 00 1285 . 00 $ 5 . 00 $ 41500 . 00 $ 6 . 00 $ 51400 . 00 $ 7 . 00 $ 61300 . 00 1250 . 86 $ 17 . 00 $ 209978 . 00 $ 24 . 60 $ 30 , 356.40 $ 50 . 00 $ 61 , 700 . 00 , 306 . 05 $ 20 . 00 $ 44 , 900 . 00 $ 17 . 25 $ 387726. 25 $ 20 . 00 $ 44, 900 . 00 , 708 . 16 $ 46 . 00 $ 23 , 552 . 00 $ 44 . 40 $ 22 , 732 . 80 $ 55. 00 $ 28, 160. 00 1664 . 00 $ 43 . 00 $ 631-425 . 00 $ 40. 20 $ 59, 295. 00 $ 46 . 50 $ 689587 . 50 1539 .40 $ . 43 . 00 $ 69 , 660 . 00 $ 35 .40 $ 57 , 348. 00 $ 45 . 00 $ 72 , 900 . 00 1904 . 00 $ 250. 00 $ 11 .250 . 00 $ 390 . 00 $ 1 , 950. 00 $ 300 . 00 $ 11500. 00 1997800 $ 350 ,229.00 $ 385,460.00 $ 455,810. 00 ATTACHMENT # 6 TOWN OF ITHACA Road Construction Specifications RoadFVaN , Requirements A. General Rer7 « ii•enients: 1 . All new streets and roads shall be centered in the right-of- wav , except upon approval of the Highway Superintendent and review by the Town Engineer . Approval will be based upon the topography, construction of xvalkways, bikeways, and parking lanes . 2 . Cross slopes on shoulders shall be a minimum of '/� inch per foot and a maxinnun of =/4 inch per foot, cohere super elevation is required combined slopes shall not exceed 0 . 1. 0 feet/ foot . � . Roadwav cross slopes will be a minimum of 1/4 inch per foot and a maximum of 1/2 inch per foot . 4 . The Highway Superintendent must approve all curbing . Special drainage is required and must meet the drainage specifications of paragraph B4d . 3 . All piped drainage must have a minimum 50-year life span and a minimum grade of 1/2 percent . Please see Driveway and Culvert Pipe Policy (Attachment # 1 ) for specification on putting in piping . 6 . All drainage pipe inverts shall have a maximum depth of 10 feet below the road surface . However, all culverts with inverts deeper than 4 feet will have to have safety features incorporated into the end section or headwall design, and are approved by the Highs-vav Superintendent with review by the Town Engineer . 7 . Water and sewer lines to be located in the Town right-of-wav must be approved by the Town Board before the road is accepted . B . Specific Requirements : 1 . Plans : Roadway plains will include the following details in addition to the general road lavout: a . Detail of road sections and profile where culverts are placed under the road . b . Road cross section and profile to include depth of sub- base, base, distance from edge of pavement to bottom of open ditch, and depth of open ditch from edge of shoulder . If concrete gutters or swales are planned, a typical road cross section ( Attachment # 2) with the swale must be provided . C . Sub-surface drainage structures must have a cross section and profile of the buried pipes and catch basins as well as location on the road plan . Page 2 2 . Street and Road Width : All streets or roads will be at least 2 lanes . The minimum lane width will be 10 feet , with 4 feet shoulders . However, Weider lanes and shoulders may be required to meet traffic demands . 3 . Right-of-way Widths : Sixty (60) foot minimum except for pre-existing reserved fifty ( 30) foot right- of-N•vay . Larger right- of-way widths may be required depending on topography, drainage, satety issues, special maintenance needs, and potential future traffic growth . VVithin the right- of- � vay there shall be no obstructions to a clear line of sight, such as trees, bushes, buildings, fences, etc . 4 . Drainage requirements along roadways and streets : a . Open ditches mist have a minimum grade of 1 percent and a maximum grade of 10 percent within the road right- of-way . Erosion control must be incorporated on all ditches and cut slopes . Grades of 5 percent or more shall require special measures to prevent channel scour and bank erosion. The centerline of all open ditches must be a minimum ten feet from the outside edge of the driving lane . All open ditches must be a minimum two feet deeper than the outside edge of pavement to a maximum of four feet. A concrete swale may be utilized in place of a ditch, however, the Highx-vav Superintendent must approve the design with review by the Town Engineer . If either can not meet the grade requirements, an alternate design shall be submitted to the Highwav Superintendent for consideration and / or approval with review by the Town Engineer . b . The side slopes of an open ditch will not be greater than 3 : 1 on the roadside of the ditch. The slope on the outside cut slope shall not be greater than 3 : 1 . The Highway Superintendent, with the review by Town Engineer, will consider exceptions for cuts in rock, or steep side hill cuts for special approval . C . All pipes under roads and driveways must have a minimum 12 inches of cover material above the pipe . The minimum driveway culvert size will be 15i " in diameter for corrugated metal pipe (CMP) and 12 " in diameter for smooth interior corrugated plastic pipe (CPP) . d . Where subsurface storm drainage, curbed sections or roads with paved swales are utilized, provisions for drainage of the road sub-base are required . The Highway Superintendent must approve the highway drainage design and construction plans with review by the Town Engineer prior to the start of construction. D . Material Requirements : a . The Highway Superintendent, with review by the Town Engineer, must approve all granular materials used in construction of a town road . The developer must provide a sieve analysis (performed in accordance with ASTIVI D42 which includes washing of the fraction passing the #10 sieve) and maximum density / optimum moisture content test (Modified Proctor Test) on the proposed materials prior to start of any construction . Page 3 b . Culverts used in the construction of Town roads will have a minimum life span of 50 years and meet the requirements of sections 706 and 707 of the 1985 NYS Standard Specifications , as amended . C . Copies of all invoices for materials used in the construction of the road. wav and roadway drainage structures must be provided to the g11Nvav Superintendent . 6 . Sub - Grade : a . The sub- grade under all paved areas, including ditch backslope, shall be brought to the true grade as indicated in the cross-section with a 1/4 inch per foot crown for the roadway and with /4 inch of required elevation . b . All topsoil and organic materials shall be removed before preparation of the sub-grade . C . Any areas that are below grade shall be brought to grade with suitable compacted gravel materials and shall be adequately shaped . After Bringing the sub- grade to shape, it shall be rolled ti-vith a smooth steel wheel roller weighing not less than ten tons vibratory roller for gravel, or a sheeps foot or pneumatic roller for clay . After rolling, the surface shall be true grade in cross -section and any depression shall be satisfactorily eliminated . d . Anv soft or unsuitable material shall be removed and replaced as directed by the Town, and again reshaped and re-rolled until there is no movement under the roller and compaction to 90 to 95 percent of the Modified Proctor Test is achieved . e . Verification by an independent testing agency may be required with the cost paid by the developer . The testing agency must have a PE on staff to certify the results . Compaction tests will be at the discretion of the Town inspector and the number of test locations will normally- average approximately one site per 100 feet of roadway . 7. Sub-Base Course : - a . The sub-base course shall consist of a minimum of 12 inches of clean bank- run gravel with no stone over 2 inches in diameter . b . Compaction will meet 95 percent of maximum density and within 2 percent ± optimum moisture content. The developer will pay for verification by an independent testing agency . The testing agency must have a PE on staff to certify the results . Compaction tests will be at the discretion of the Town inspector and the number of test locations will norinal1v average approximatel �l one site per 100 feet of roadway . C . Placement of the material will conform to section 304-3 . 01 of the 1985 NYS Standard Specifications, as amended . d . Sub- base course shall be brought to the true grade as indicated in the cross section X-vith ± 1. 'a inch of required elevation . Page 4 e . Ylaterials used for the sub- base must meet the requirements of section 304- 102 type 2 or t \.rpe 4 of the 1955 NYS Standard Specifications, as amended . f. After sub- base course has been installed, graded , and inspected, an approved stabilization fabric , i . e . : N/lirafi 500x or equal , shall be installed . 8 . Base Course : a . The base course shall consist of a minimum of 6 inches of approved Type 2 material which the sieve analvsis shall be 2 inches or less , consistent with section 304-2 . 01 of the NYS Standard Specifications . b . The base course shall be laid in courses of not more than 6 inches of compacted material at any one time , with proper rolling with a ten - ton vibrator , roller at the completion of each course of gravel . C . All holes or depressions found in rolling shall be filled and the surface shall be re-rolled until it conforms to the lines and grades shown on the cross -section and profile . d. In all cases, the course inust be so thoroughly compacted that it will not heave under the roller and be compacted to within 95 percent maximum density and within 2 percent ± optimum moisture content ( verification of compaction and testing agencv will meet the same requirement as listed above) . e . This course shall not be laid in excess of 500 lineal feet without being rolled and thoroughly compacted so as to render it waterproof. f. In all cases, the materials used for the base course and the construction rriethods shall be carried out in accordance with said section 304-3 . 01 . Sub-grade preparation under the ditch backslope shall be consistent with the sub-grade furnished under the pavement areas . Base course shall be brought to the true grade as indicated in the cross section with ± V4 inch of required elevation. g. Materials used for the base must meet the requirements of section 304-2. 02 type 2 of the 1985 NYS Standard Specifications, as amended . 9 . Surfacing : Prior to surfacing, the base course shall be brought to line and grade conforming to the cross-section and profile as shown on the plans, and thoroughly compacted to requirements of paragraph 8 . Written approval of the base by the HighX,vav Superintendent is required before placement of the Binder . The top will not be placed until all major excavation for the buildings is completed for the phase of the subdivision along the section of road . If a construction road is available then a waiver will be considered for placement of the top without a waiting period . Placement of pavement will not be allowed when the ambient air temperature is below 60 degrees F or above 95 degrees F . Bituminous Concrete Pavement : Two lavers are required : a binder and a top course . Page 3 a . Binder : The binder will be a minimum of 3 inches of item 403 . 13 (Type .l binder) . b . Top : On top of the binder a minimum of 2 inches of item =103 . 16 (Type 7 top ) . C . Placement of the materials will be consistent with the 1983 NYS Standard Specifications, as amended . 10 . Shoulders : The construction of the shoulders shall conform to the same requirement as the construction of the sub- grade, sub- base, and base . The Shoulders N, gilt be constructed at the same time as the roadway , utilizing the same material, placement and lift requirements . The final course will be asphalt- stabilized gravel to cover the base and bring the level of the shoulder to the level of the pavement . 11 . Road Cuts : a . No open cuts in the roadway will be permitted after placing of surface courses except as approved in writing by the Highway Superintendent. I) . Street cross-section shall be consistent with the Plan attached Lidless otherwise approved in writing by the Highway Superintendent, with review by the Town Engineer . C . Repairs of Road Cuts : Asphalt paved and surface treated roads shall be repaired with full depth granular material with a minimum of 12 inches of crushed limestone and capped with a 3 inch lift of item 403 . 13 (Type 3 Binder) , and 2 inches of item 403 . 16 (Type 7 Top ), as per attachment # 3 . 12 . Inspection Requirements : a . The developer is required to coordinate with the Highway Superintendent for inspection after each road construction phase (see attached Inspection of [roadway form) . b . The developer, at the developer' s expense, will correct any deviation from the approved plan and specifications . C . Pei forniance Bond/Letters of Credit. The Town may, at its discretion, require a performance bond, a letter of credit or an escrow account in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney in an amount established by the Highway Superintendent for the purpose of insuring that sufficient funds are available to enable the Town to complete infrastructure improvements required of the development in conjunction with the site plan or other approval . Ten- percent retainage of such credit will be held by the Town until one vear following surfacing or acceptance of the road, whichever is later . Additionally a set of as-built plans certified by a NYS Licensed PE must be provided prior to release of credit . Page 6 D . Wciivers: Waivers from any of these specifications to the extent permitted by J other laws and unless specifically delegated to a Town officer elsewhere in these specifications, shall be grantee( only by the Town Board . E . Effective Date: These specifications shall appty to all highways in subdivisions receiving preliminary approval after Mate of adoption of the specifications . F . Lmidsca p itt . �� LP � � C 1 . General Requirements 06 a . No trees or shrubs shall be planted in the Town ' s right-of=way . b . _ - snln� p tf b Any rees or shrubs in the road right-of-wav become the property of the Town of Ithaca . c . All road right-of-ways out of the pavement must be provide with an established ground cover approved by the Highway Superintendent or his / her agent. 2 . Inspection Requirements : a . The developer is required to coordinate with the Highway Superintendent for inspection before and after applying topsoil, seeding and mulching. b . The developer, at the developer' s expense, will correct any deviation from the approved plan and specifications . C: 63/ 63da M / h ighwav/ specs / roadspecifica tions oj S v TOWN OF ITHACA HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 106 SEVEN MILE DRIVE , ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 PHONE (' 607 ) 273 - 1656 Roads . Parks , Trails . Sewer, and Water FAX (607) 272-6076 INSPECTION OF ROADWAY Project Address : Owner : The Highway Superintendent or his representative must inspect each step of the roadNioav being built as it is completed . The inspection place, time, and person must be so noted and signed on the inspection sheet . The original sheet will be held in the Torun and owner having a cope of each inspection . A minimum of twenty -tour (21) hours notice of inspection must be given. SUB -GRADE : Inspected by Date : Section: Weather (conditions) : Notes : SUB-GRADE COURSE : hlspected by : Date : Section: Weather (conditions ) : Notes : STABILIZATION FABRIC : Inspected by : Date : Section : Weather (conditions) : Notes : BASE-COURSE : Inspected by : Date : Section : Weather (conditions) : Notes : SUFRACE COURSE : Inspected by : Date : Section: Weather (conditions) : Notes : SHOULDERS : Inspected by - Date : Section : Weather (conditions) : Notes : i CULVERT PIPES : Inspecteld bv : Date : Section : Weather (conditions) : Notes : LANDSCAPING : 'COPSOIL, SEED, AND MULCH Lnspected by : Date : J Sectloll: Weather (conditions) : Notes : Attachment # 1 TOWN OF ITHACA Effective Date : 7/ 10/ 2000 DRIVEWAY AND CULVERT PIPE Revision Date : POLICY AND PROCEDURE Review Date : 7/ 10/ 2002 Approvod by : f li ( h � \7avr SUperintenclent and Tolvrn Board Enclosures Purpose Highway Lavv i_ 1)-1 states that responsibility for drivevways lies vwith the property owner . it is in the best interest of the Town that culvert pipes are properly sized and are at the proper grade . Since there is a shared interest, landowners for access and Town for operation, we want to work cooperatively with property owners . Please see the aaached permit for applicable tees and costs . The Town of Ithaca will not be responsible for such materials Lis blacktop , aprons, or headwalls . Procedure isting Culverts Needing Replacement and New Driveway Culvert Installation on an Existing Town oad Landov-vner contacts the Highway Department stating they need a driveway culvert pipe . Town will fill Out appropriate forms and permit application and inform landowner of permit and fee process . 2. After landowner staked out driveT,vav , HighN,vav Department then goes to location, makes a drainage and visibitity inspection e . g. : diameter of culvert pipe, and/ or preferred driyewway location in reference to visibility and contacts landowner with requirements and reconunendations . We mandate that everyone installs a minimum 30-foot length culvert pipe . An estimate of the costs to install the culvert along tvi_ ti1 applicable fees will be discussed at this time . 3 . Landowner then purchases culvert pipe and has it delivered to site . 4 . LandOhwner contacts the Highh-vav Department to inform us of culvert pipe delivery and to schedule approximate installation date . D . Highway Department hwill send landm,vner an invoice for the total cost after installation has been completed . 6 . The same guidelines swill be in effect if a resident wishes to enclose the ditch line in front of their property . OTE: 1_ f the drivewwav is anvthing other than gravel, the homeowner is responsible to buy and install material to replace blacktop or head i-vans, etc . that may have been removed . If Special clrCLI111StaIICe-1S \A"LIrrallt Saine. , till'. I m \,, ri i-figtl \vw Superintendent is authorize(-] to deviate I1'0111 ti ? �: ahO \ ' ,' I'eelllll'elllelltS aS 111m be reaSOnably Ilecessary to accolll111odate such cil"CLllllstances . wner ' s Rights - llf - bV ,ly ( ROW) Responsibilities I HOIIleo \ \_ ner should keep their ditch and culvert clean of trash and debris ( no leaves , brush , garhiw �l ' lraivcl , etc . allo \ved) . 2 . Homeowners Should inform the E lighvvav Departnlellt of culvert maintenance problems (e . g. : darnage to pipe , obStrLlctionS, etc . ) Hrlu ITI 47 11 1ZelII /I. I I II The ^h\wll of Ithaca \will not install lleaei\ \- alls . If the honleo \wrier installs headwalls , thev must be kept below the grade of the he alders of the road so as to prevent damage due to sno\v removal . The Town will not be responsible for J .-image if headv-valls are installed above the grade of the shoulder of the road . Highway Department' s Rights- of-Way ( ROW) Responsibilities 1 . The I: Department wilt make determinations to replace old, damaged, or wrong-sized culverts , at the oz•vner ' s cost after discussing this with them. 2 . The Hi ,_ 1vwav Departrent will maintain roadside shoulders and ditches; thaw- out frozen culverts ; vwash ou jrlcan out blocked serviceable culverts ; remove blocked culverts if necessary to prevent danlae a. � raadvwav ; and place gravel, as needed , in areas of water damage caused by blocked pipes . The Hl( rh\•vav Department will replace culvert pipes, at the Town' s cost, if the Town damages them. Culverts placed by Contractors as Part of Approved Subdivisions (Please see Subt.iivisi011 regulations for information on Drainage issues . ) building Site plan must cletail the folloN-ving . Before a building permit is issued, for any required in the road ROW, certification must be obtained from the Highvvav • ll Perintendent. Size of culvert to be installed . Proper alignment. Elevation or grade of pipe and ditches . Final discharge location and quantity of storm water discharge at peak flo \w . " . Type of head walls or apron to be used . b . i mtrtctoi needs to call the HI (.Yhv-vay Department for inspection on all culvert pipes and r :linage iealures that they are installing . Before a Certificate of Occupancv (CO) is issued, a rivev -av inspection needs to be completed in accordance with approved subdivision plan . ;11 l: Attachment # 2 L 1 1 i i J, 1 i f f ° \ CD r 3 i )E � D I o I f w E c•'^ c^'^ c r � � t ; Eg � , g I 3 q ai Q ^A C M C rtrt CD O N Attachment # 2 ( continued ) N_ 0 3 O 5 CL m 3 N_ C CL Cr c N a yy m � Y Y a Nw A4 Al O \ b \\ \//\ \\//\//\ \// /\//\\//\\//\\// / 0 O C U a oC? `' `1 r� r) oa ; B c0 a (� 000 . d o ci :r W Ea D o a : 00 s:; y $ Cu O ' O '; { \\/ o C eN / / \//\\1\\ // \ \/ \/\\ \\\ \ p v. ti �\\/\�\ \i o OC::*,: : O (A 46 Syr QO k Otib W W `lid ZD Q � Z 0 W O � y c r 0. wti � � � � � • Odd 16 p� W , IN y OM � r 1 k4 16 Q lo L4 r ti0 � a0 y Z .N `p Oy 20 0b 0 ` pa Kati k0 0 � 0 D ti y "' 16 a0 � s0 � M y � � y abp 4 Z TOWN OF ITHACA Material Evaluation Report Bv : Project : Date : Contractor : /lATERIAL : Granular Base ( NYSDOT SPEC . 304-2 . 02 type 2) Material Source : Date Sampled : Tested by : Date Tested : REQUIRED Type 2 ( Crushed Ledgerocic) Material Analysis Sieve Size Percent Passing Sieve Size Percent Passing 2 inch 100 2 inch 1/4 inch 25 - 60 1/4 inch No . 40 5 - 40 No . 40 No . 200 0 - 10 No . 200 D60 = D30 = D10 = Cu Greater than 4 Cu = D60/ D10 Cc 1 - 3 Cc = (D30*D30) / (D10*D60) TOWN OF ITHACA Material Evaluation Report BY : Project : Date : Contractor : \MATERIAL : Granular Sub- Base ( NYSDOT SPEC . 304-2 . 02 type 4) Material Source : Date Sampled : Tested by : Date Tested : REQUIRED Type 4 ( Gravel) Material Analysis Sieve Size Percent Passing Sieve Size Percent Passing 2 inch 100 2 inch IV 4 inch 30 - 65 '4 inch No . 40 5 - 40 No . 40 No . 200 0 - 10 No . 200 D60 = D30 = D10 = Cu Greater than 4 Cu = D60/ D10 Cc 1 - 3 Cc = ( D30*D30) / (D10*D60) ` ATTACHMENT # 7 ReCluest for Proposal Toxvn of Ithaca Public Works Facility Design I . Project Overview The Town of Ithaca Town Board is soticiting proposals from architectural and engineering firms for a facility design based on an earlier feasibility- study- . The proposal will include : I . Design development for renovation of existing and construction of additional space, based on the 1998 Feasibility study . 2 . Construction cost estimates for renovations and additional space . Construction documents-- Four primes (General , Electrical, HVAC, and Pluirribing) . 4 . Bidding phase . D . Construction administration . The Town Board has directed the High%vav Superintendent and the Public Works Committee to prepare this Request for Proposal because of the acute need for improved facilities to alloxv Town staff to effectively serve Town residents and the operations equipment space needs . II . Project Scope The objective of this proposal is to prepare an optimal design and cost estimates for an expanded Tmvn Public Works Facility . The Town Board' s approved Feasibility Study is the basis for design of the Public Works Facilitv . 1 . Specific Areas of Focus a . Heated storage for equipment and supplies . 1. . Dust control and air quality . 2 . insulation and heating system . � . Electrical services . 4 . Storage for equipment under corer . b . Wash bay facility . 1 . Moisture Control I Waste Water Management Page 2 C . Office space . 1 . Adequate office space . 2 . Break Room/ Lunch Room / Meeting Room / Locker lee� { 00111 Supplies storage for Records Management A . Highway Records d . Work space in mechanical shop . 1 . Fluid storage . 2 . Parts storage . Maintenance bays . 4 . Fabrication shop . General Terms and Conditions The Town of Ithaca intends to enter into a contract ( AIA agreement B141 , 1997 with modifications per Town Attorney ) with the design firm selected by the Town Board as best qualified to act as a design and construction consultant for the Town. The agreement will specify the terms and conditions of the services to be provided and will be consistent with the items of work specified in this request for proposal . III . Project Reports and Presentations The design firm will work under the direction of the Town Highway Superintendent and the Public Works Committee during the design phase . The design process will cover all of the requirements outlined in the scope of work, including a facility design and detailed cost estimates . Presentations will be made to the Public Works Committee upon completion of schematic, preliminary, and final phase of the project design and presented to the Public Works Committee and Town Board . IV . Submission Requirements All firms are requested to submit eight (8) copies of the following information : 1 . Name of firm and principals in firm . ? . Names, positions in firm, resumes, and project assignment of the personnel expected to work on this project . t t Page 3 3 . Names , resumes, and references for consultants that the architect/ engineer intends to retain for this project . "- 4 . Description of how the architect / engineer approach each of the tasks listed in the scope of project , including a description of how the project team \ % Ill L ol' gaRlzed . 5 . Provide a brief description of similar projects the firm has completed, the names and addresses of the clients , and the name and telephone number of a contact person for each client . 6 . Schedule to complete the v.vork . 7 . Proposed fee (one copy, in separate, sealed envelope) . V . Submission Schedule All proposals must be received in the offices of the Town Clerk, 215 N . Tioga Street, Ithaca , Nei-v York "1a850 no later than 3 : 00 p . m . , :Vlay 16 , 2001 . VI . Evaluation Criteria 7. . Experience of the firm in the development of design plans and construction cost estimates for facilities and rehabilitation/ reuse projects that are similar to the proposed project . The architect/ engineer should provide detailed information on any projects similar in scope that were completed successfully . 2 . Availabilitv and ability of the design firm to complete the design . The design firm should include the earliest date available to begin work with a description of other contracts and commitments that could limit architectural services during the next three months . 3 . Technical expertise in projects similar to the proposed project . The proposal should highlight any special skills, techniques, equipment, etc . which -vill be utilized in conjunction with the needs evaluation and feasibility study . 4 . Accessibility of the design firm and their staff so the Town of Ithaca staff have the opportunity to confer either in person or by telephone on a regular basis regarding any aspect of the project . The firm should indicate any limits on calls , hours available , meetings , etc . Page 4 Proposed fee ( a consideration , but not sole, determining factor) . VII . Interviews Approximately three primary contractors will be invited to an interview oil the basis of their responses to the RFP . Follovving the intervienvs , the Highvvay Superintendent and the Public Works Committee will make a recommendation to the Town Board as to Nvhicll firm most closel r meet the requirements of the RFP . Upon approval by the Town Board , contract negotiations will begin . VIII . General Information Proposals are to be prepared on 5 -1 / 2 " x 11 " paper . All pages are to be sequentially numbered . Unnecessarily elaborate proposals are not desired . Consultants are urged to be concise in their presentation, particularly with respect to past experience on other projects . Related experience is essential, with specific details describing the firm' s involvement and responsibilities . This request for proposal does not commit the To-k-vn of Ithaca to pay costs incurred in the preparation of a response to this request or to procure professional services . The Town of Ithaca reserves the right to accept or reject RFP for Town Public Works Facilitv Design any or all proposals received as a result of this request, to negotiate with anv qualified consultant, or to cancel in part or its entirely this RFP . All proposals and supporting materials prepared under this request by the consultant will become the property of the Town of Ithaca . The proposal shall be considered valid for the period of time it takes to negotiate a contract with the consultant . The proposal submitted in response to this request may contain data, which the consultant, or his / her proposed subcontractors, does not want disclosed for any purpose other than the evaluation of the proposal . The use and disclosure of any such data may be so restricted, provided the consultant identifies the pages of the proposal that are to be confidential and such request is not inconsistent with Town Law or General N/lunicipal Lavv . The consultant is required to have professional liability insurance in an amount not less than 51 , 000, 000 . Page 5 IX. Further InforIllation For further L11t01' nlat1011 abOLlt th1S project Or to SChedLile a tOLIr of the facility, Contact elther : Fred Noteboom , Highx-vav Superintendent, Town of Ithaca , or Gail Kroll, Administrative Assistant, Town of Ithaca . Both can be reached Nlondav through Friday , betvvveen 7 : 00 a . m . and 3 : 00 p . m . at "1. 06 Seven Mile Drive Ithaca, New York 14850 PHONE : (607) 273-1656 FAX : (607) 272-6076 E-1�/IAIL : Ll rl_ t � c � nu� ect . c �� ln 00 / 04 / 2001 12 : 31 116 - 381 - 1008 MHJ� bHUUP PAVE 02 / 18 MM yroup ToNvN OF ITHACA HIGHWAYTAms FACILITY EXPANSION FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT JUNE 1998 PREPARED BN' : MRB Group, P . C. 248013rotvncroft Blvd . Rochester, NY 14625 04 / 04 / 2001 1 ^ : 37 716 - 381 - 1008 MRB GPOUP PAGE 04 / 18 \ : i , l o '.. INTRODUCTION iviRB Group , P . C _ was hired by the Town of Ithaca to conduct a feasibility study on a proposed upgrade to the Town ' s highway/ parks facilities . This feasibility study included an evaluation of future space needs based upon a review of existing and projected future equipment storage requirements , employee numbers, growth expectations , etc:. In addition, an analysis of existing buildings and overall facility conditions was completed . This analysis included a review of all mechanical systems , site infrastructure capacities, electrical and lighting systems, and architectural elements , with specific attention being given to ADA and New York State Building and Fire Code compliance issues . The referenced space evaluation and building condition surveys were completed with assistance and input from Town of Ithaca Highway/Parks Department staff, in conjunction with. the Town of Ithaca Public Works Committee. Upon completion of the space evaluation and building condition analysis phases, several "concept" layouts and associated preliminary cost estimates were prepared by ivll.B and jointly reviewed with the Town of Ithaca Highway Department staff and the Public Works committee. The following recommendations represent a refined program for the proposed upgrade of the Town of Ithaca Highway/Parks facilities based upon identification of the highest priority program elements and the recognition of practical budgetary limitations. i i i i i I i t74 / U4 / UU1 1L : .J ! / 10 - JoI - 1 UU0 i•iRM urcuur rHUt b7 / ! ti r tQ1�. i1 (! I i � � i 'dCii I I1 ': ; 1 \1il•�' i iZCi � t !' �' 1 ' '.: cl:ii ' ` � I ; tV � ? �,iC+ 1' ! � C: �)� 11 { 1 OW Ply ® POSED PROGRAM COMPONENTS The recommended upgrade of the existing facilities for the Town of Ithaca ' s Highway and Parks Department consists of three (3) main components: I . Expansion of the Existing Structure . 11, Provision of Additional Salt Storage . M- Addition of Covered Outdoor Storage Space . f Figure 1 Proposed Site Plan L Expansion of Existing Structure The first and most extensive component is the expansion of the existing Highway Garage . The proposed expansion is designed to accomplish five (5) tasks . I . Expansion of the existing interior vehicle storage area. In order to properly house its existing and near future fleet of snowplows and other large equipment, the Town of Ithaca will require additional heated storage space similar to the existing clear span storage area in the main highway barn . This proposal adds approximately 7,000 SF of new heated storage area. As part of this upgrade, the existing heating, ventilation, electrical and lighting systems will be upgraded to address ADA and code compliance issues, as well as to improve existing systems operation . 2 . Expansion of vehicle maintenance capacity. The current vehicle maintenance space accommodates only one large vehicle at a time. This situation provides l 1 1 I I I I I i i I I I I i I I FJ4 / Ej4 / "? b �11 3 MKb IaKUU , YAUt U' b / 16 1 t C lall` 1 ` ll' � lUdV R ' htlii � i )�4I1 : � � � ( 1 : il � t. I_ � � Y11 `.lCl \• � ' il� � i ' � little flexibility for multiple vehicle repair situations , especially when the main bay is encumbered by a long- term repair on a vehicle . This proposal provides for two (2) maintenance bays , with improved access considerations. 3 . Expansion of administrative and program space . The proposed facilities expansion program provides for additional office space to accommodate the administrative staff currently housed within the existing highway facility, while also providing space for Parks Department and Water/Sewer Department administrative staff and equipment currently housed in a trailer on site . Additional improvements would include improved men' s and women' s locker rooms and facilities , a new break room sized to accommodate employee needs during break and meal times, a new conference room , and reconfigured storage space . 4 . Immoved storage and maintenance space . The proposed upgrade program will provide designated areas for specialized pieces of equipment, hazardous materials, and small tool storage. > . Provision of a separate wash bay. A separate wash bay has been proposed, which would eliminate the need for regular washing of vehicles within the heated storage portion of the main building. By isolating this facility, excessive humidity and moisture can be kept out of the working areas, thereby prolonging equipment life and helping to maintain comfortable working conditions . Large Equip I Storage Vehicle Storage i Vehicle ,Maintenance i Offices Wash I •.... '�i' Bay ; Equip / Break ( Tools ` Rm — . Figure 2 Proposed Expansion of Existing Structure i I I i I I 04 / 04 / 2001 12 : 37 716 - 381 - 1668 MRB GROUP PAGE 67 / 16 I 'LIcz? l "V sindiv l s' oort II. Additional Salt Storage A second salt storage building has been proposed to provide storage for an additional 1 ,000 tons of salt . The salt stored at this location will be put into a hopper where it is mixed with chemicals to prevent clumping, and then it will be transferred on to the existing storage facility. From this location it is loaded onto trucks for use . u II � 1 1 Additional Salt 1 Storage I Proposed Additional Salt Storage Figure 3 III. Covered Outdoor Storage Currently, several maintenance vehicles and other equipment are stored outside year-round. This continuous exposure to the elements expedited the aging of the equipment in addition to increasing the need for maintenance on these vehicles. Various materials are also stockpiled on the site, with items such as cold patch and topsoil requiring cover to reduce frost and moisture. A covered outdoor storage facility has been proposed to provide a means of protecting equipment and materials from continued exposure to the elements and to make these items more readily available for use . Towd! Vddde &F*T2mW Cold Agrh Figure 4 Proposed Covered Outdoor Storage ' ' I i I i I i I i FJ4 / 04 / = } t � i i i I I i I J� I I i I i I I 1 I J i I i 1 I 04 / 04 / 2001 12 : 37 716 - 381 - 1008 MPS (1HUUF PAGE 09 ; 18 I ( ti. . . •. ) � . ; ! ! � . : i ', I � ! v . ' i :" � ' ;:i. 11 '. 1V : :I', . . I ! • : �� i ; ii "• i \ Cll( 31i. The proposed new break room is sized to accommodate up to 30 people and is equipped with a small kitchenette and cabinets to store supplies . 111. Heating, Ventilation and ,4ir Conditioning Heating : Upgrade radiant heating system for enlarged vehicle storage area and small equipment area. Provide radiant heating systems for vehicle maintenance , wash area and miscellaneous storage. Extend existing hydronic heating system to new conference room, offices and brea =om . Upgrade boiler, pumps, etc . as required. Ventilation : Upgrade general exhaust in vehicle storage, vehicle maintenance and small equipment for general ventilation and purge rates . Provide overhead vehicle exhaust system in vehicle maintenance . Small equipment outlets to be extended to floor with hard ducts. Provide general exhaust in was bay to eliminate steam/moisture build-up in the area. Air Conditioning : Provide air conditioning for offices . IV, Plumbing Water : Upgrade water distribution system to all new fixtures and facilities . Upgrade hot water system as required. Provide pressure booster system for wash bay area. Sewer : Extend trench drain in vehicle storage area. Provide trench drain systems in wash bay and vehicle maintenance area. Provide oil separator for vehicle maintenance and small equipment areas . Natural Gas : Evaluate and upgrade natural gas distribution system and service to accommodate additional heating systems . Storm Water: Downspouts connected to on- site swales and/or storm sewers . Safety: Provide cyewash stations in designated areas . I , , , I i i I i U14 UC1 / '_ UUI 1 '! : jl / 1b - 3131 - 1UUU MH15 IaF:UUH FAbt lulib .i u :lc 8 . (_ ') 9 Pie ,electrical 1 . Service. Upg.-ade the size of the existing service to accommodate expansion and/or additional loads. Add new panel -boards as new loads require to relieve loads on existing overburdened panels . Provide main breaker panel at salt storage building . 2. Power Outlets : Install additional convenience outlets and branch circuits to accommodate expansion and architectural modifications . Provide GFCI outlets for code compliance . Provide outlets for truck block heaters . 3. Lighting: Provide nerw energy efficient, code compliant lighting and controls for , the expansion. Install energy efficient high intensity discharge (HID) fixtures on the walls around the perimeter of the building. 4. Emergency Lights: Provide new exit signs using long life energy saving led source with built-in battery pack throughout the existing building and expansion . Install individual emergency battery packs with lights to illuminate paths of egress . S. Communication/Data : Provide wiring and information outlets as directed . 6. Fire Alarm System : Provide new fire alarm system . Install horn/strobe devices to meet ADA compliance. 1 1 � � I I I 6J / �14 / 2 © D1 12 : 3 % 11b - 381 - 1P1b13 MK8 UKUUF' F'AUt 11 / 18 N O W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m O c o ti r W `ca n H V 00 0°o x G V pei O V) y 0 � c o o � ry kn oo r r O o = ao h oo a U "y 'y V1 •--� GO CD CD tn tn. ti W a C ,a x V; d \0 .. in 00 — c- o �1 ti yq r�q to an ( of v) V) v3 O \O 00 O C V n � � o = o � U ® O a Poo � o � a ►--1 � Q z V � o C C c a U h°. ' i � � 1 I I I. ii I I I I i I t74 / t74 / Z 'Uui 1Z . 3 ! / 10 ' 301 - 1000 I•IrD urUur r r-iv� � ci av N O N Iz: o c o o E . y o ^ G � E . LJ (Si � Q 7 � U o o C> oc 00 Q L O O N V 6A J9 �A IA y � O C o o C fro .] f+ °3 W Q V9 rlog w zn O rte.+ too O O O O G O c o O O 0. O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O 4 0 0 o C 0 0 0 49 b9 V9 69 b9 69 Ifi V) ^ 0 0 0 r J N S F `® r 64% 00 o 0 0 Q Q n N M ri rr` h� U z Q Z V p LTJ p v N O o v � W r_y Lsl F a o p U W U U c cz c_ 4 I �� � � 1 I I FJ4 / © 4 / 2001 12 : 31 / 1b - 381 - 1UIJ )3 MKti UHUUF' I Hlat l .i / lb 1 I 1 3 ' � 1 1 ' YO gTtT � � � Oy 7{ C I z SN � � Q < � a � P 6 = g 2 In blNw Me r Q :�� � �•^ tom. � L � � � �` �86��4 o I / 1 W � 7 (n F a a ` t: . U , 1 W 0 1 1 [ T • C - - - - - (1) 0 - - - - V) o JIL i 1. � 1 i 04 / 04 / 2001 12 : 3 / / 16 - 3131 - 1FJ �Jf� MNtS UNUUr rH�t lv / 1tt dc O 3 � uyx� N Cr um �1 1 n .a u � ` S O.• d V OM Z Z O (� 44 zo ZN � e � u A NNW p �� i r G T�j N U S y'C 4nb , rl Go q . Q l7y � yy _P Z 1� 1 a � a �. .. a C � . . U 0 0 0 � � � s I I I I I I I I 04 / 04 / 21001 12 : 37 716 - 381 - 18 08 MP3 GPOUP PAGE 15 / 18 > ao FIFO of � � � ; uWV `1r Fi G O 6Ql ps O U a Ca as e = m . r �y cn 69 t a vv ` l- i. 1�1 Q� C/i r H N C • • U O r7 p i � �. , -� I i i I I i I I I I I I I i i I 04 / 04 / 2001 12 : 3 < 716 - 381 - 1008 MPB GPOUP PAGE lb / 18 Oc t U � o U N CO T a 4g � q � z ^ Ufs v W f am N r0% W C� 00 V Q _ W ► D O 0 �; .. 7. r. �^ l' AAA AA O 0 A °° �. ; >4 N z ijo go t, A A 0 � \ I • �� I I 04 / 04 / 2001 12 : 37 716 - 381 - 1008 MRB GROUP PAGE 17 / 18 Fe VIP " � rA w y Z � Q V W C 00 z qo r � s o oUO - ffi � < � . w W 0i ; Q o � � z � ; , oc? �' vi � � N � o O i I _, i i i I I I I I I I I I I I i I I i btu ; J4 ; _ tJ }J1 l _ : dt ! lb — jtil - 1 �JtJti MR '.S- URUUR HAUL 18 / lb MRB/ group PC TOWN OF IrrHACA - HIGHWA.'Y GARAGE PRE - DESIGN PHASE Probable Cost of Construction Estimate (REVISED) December-00 f . +630004/adinin;itnaca•h wy cst..x1s �1R9 No 90201 SuMMARY SHEET FULL PROJECT Area Vehicle Storage 74000 Repair / Remodeling of Existing 11 ,000 Covered Outdoor Storage 47900 Vehicle Maintenance 3 ,000 Office Area 21040 Wash Bay 11625 Salt Storage 3 ,024 COST RANGE Sub-Total 32, 589 S 1 , 860,212 to S 19953 ,222 S 17860 ,000 S 119507000 FULL PROJECT W/O WASH BAY Area Vehicle Storage 7 ,000 Repair / Remodeling of Existing 11 ,000 Covered Outdoor Storage 47900 Vehicle Maintenance 3 ,000 Office Area 21040 Salt Storage 3 ,024 COST RANGE Sub-Total 307 964 S 1 ,698 ,917 to 3 1 ,783 , 863 $ 1 ,'00 ,000 5 17780,000 EXPANSION OF EXISTING ONLY Area Vehicle Storage 7,000 Repair / Remodeling of Existing 11 ,000 Vehicle Maintenance 37000 Office Area 2 ,040 Wash Bay 11625 COST RANGE Sub•Total 2405 S 1 ,556,092 to S 17633 , 897 $ 19550,000 $ 17600,000 STORAGE ONLY Area Covered Outdoor Storage 41900 COST RANGE Sub-Total 4 ,900 5 114,362 to S 1207080 S 114,000 5 120 ,000 STORAGE ONLY Area Salt Storage 31024 COST RANGE Sub-Total 3 ,024 $ 189 ,757 to S 1991245 S 190 ,000 S 200,000 I �L � I I i I ATTACHMENT # 8 BARNEY , GROSSMAN , DUBOW & MARCUS ATTORNEYS AT LAW SENECA BUILDING WEST oHN C. BARNEY ]DAVID A.G . GROSSMAN SUITE 400 AVID A. Dveow 11 9 EAST SENECA STREET FACSIMILE ( 607 ) 272-8806 IRANDALL B . MARCUS ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 (NOT FOR SERVICE OF PAPERS) 4WILLIAM J . TROY III ' JONATHAN A. ORKIN ( 807 ) 279 -6841 April 5 , 2001 Honorable Catherine Valentino and Members of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Re: Items for Town Board Meeting on April 9, 2001 Ladies & Gentlemen: We have briefly reviewed the proposed Agreement with Advantage Energy, Inc. for electricity services for the Town of Ithaca. We have also reviewed the materials submitted by the Municipal Electric and Gas Alliance and it does appear, based upon those materials, that the Agreement with Advantage Energy, Inc. is more advantageous than the Agreement that was offered from NYSEG Solutions. Accordingly, we have prepared a suggested resolution accepting that arrangement and authorizing the Town Supervisor to sign the Agreement. Bill Troy will be attending the meeting in my absence and if you have any questions, please feel free to direct them to him. Enclosed for your review is the proposed resolution together with a copy of the Agree= ment and a copy of the letter from the Municipal Electric and Gas Alliance. Very truly yours, JCB : sls Enclosures xc : Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk EATTEST 2001 N CLERK i I I I I I i I i i i I I I I I I I i I i I I I I I I I I I I I � . I I I I 13/ 1:3/ 2001 09 : 35 7166677735 ADVANTAGED PAGE 04 tP"�� t�•�r l Municipa a , Electric and Gas Alliance art W. Stein, Chair Frances W. Leavenworth Electric Power Committee Tioga County Courthouse Power Commission 320 Nordn Tioga Street 56 Main Street Ithaca, New York 14850 . Owego, New York 13827 MEMBER COUNTIES Broome County Otsego County Tioga County Tompkaas County March 2001 Dear Electric and Gas Alliance participant, As you know, you have; been saving money on your electric costs for about two years 1. through your participation in the Tompkins and Tioga Counties Electric and Gas Alliance (now known as the Municipal Electric and Gas Alliance). Our agreement and your two- year contract with NYSEG Solutions, Inc. is coming to an end, however, so we have taken competitive bids for electric supply for the next two years. The new preferred supplier will be Advantage Energy, Inc ., which made the best proposal that assures continued savings for Alliance participants. In the next few days, you will receive in the mail a proposed supply agreement from Advantage Energy, along with a letter from us, more fully explaining the pro gram. if you do not act on the Advantage Energy agreement that you receive, you will automatically revert to NYSEG utility rates, which are higher than those offered through the Alliance program. Please watch your mail, and give the Advantage Energy offer your prompt consideration. Sincerely, Stuart Stein Frances W. Leavenworth I ADVANTAGE '� 172 Lake Street Hamburg, NY 14075 ENERGY, 716.649.9862 • Fax 716.649.9927 ® INC . Toll free '1 .888.649. E-mail. info @ advantageenergyusa.co I � I Dear Electrilc and Gas Alliance Participant, I I Advl tage Energy, Inc. is pleased to have been chosen by the Municipal Electric and Gas Alliance as the Alliance ' s "preferred supplier" of electricity for the next two years. Our company is proud to have provided the Alliance with the best proposal through a competitive bid process . Advantage Energy, Inc. has been serving electric supply to NYSEG customers across the state since the inception of the deregulated market system in New York. During thistime, Advantage has established a strong record of saving customers substantial money on their monthly energy bills. As you may know, your local utility, New York State Electric & Gas (NYSEG), is providing an incentive of $ 0. 004/kwh (for small commercial) or $0. 002/kwh (for large commercial accounts) to encourage customers to begin or continue accepting electric from a supplier like Advantage Energy. By agreeing to the enclosed standard contract with us, you will receive more than half (up to 80%) of that credit, which is significantly better than any other offer available in the market today. You should also be aware that although NYSEG will assess your accounts a one-time charge if you are switching from another supplier, Advantage will pay half of such charges on your behalf. Our company has a strong commitment to you, the customer and we look forward to saving you money in the years to come. To get the process started, please fill out and sign the enclosed contract. A copy of this standard contract has been forwarded to and reviewed by the Alliance. If you wish to make a smooth transition from your current NYSEG or your current supplier to Advantage, please mail your contract back promptly. If you have any questions, please give us a call at 1 -888-649-6646 . Advantage would like to thank the Alliance for their endorsement and look forward to saving you money over the next two years . Sincerely,' V I Jody M. Spaeth V. P. of Marketing & Sales d I I MX fl 2 0 2001 ATTEST ITHACA TOW CLERK i i I I I T� s ELECTRICITY AGREEMENT ("Agreement") dated as of tered into by and between Advantage Energy, Inc. ("ADVANTAGE") and ( "CUSTOMER") TERM : This Agreement shall commence once both parties have signed this Agreement and you become eligible under the applicable electric utility tariff. It shall remain in effect for approximately two (2) years until and through your meter read date in March 2003 , This Agreement may be extended by mutual consent for up to three additional one-year terms. PRICE: The price that the Customer will pay will be equivalent to the applicable NYSEG Retail Access Credit, less the Additional Component of $0.002/kWh to $0 .004/kW , as applicable, plus $0 .00075/kWh. Customers will have the option to convert to a fixed price, at the customers option, if Advantage is willing to offer a price at a lower rate than the current and projected Retail Access Credit applicable to that customer's account. Utility & Account Nos. covered by this Agreement: All accounts unless otherwise specified. Referred by: ADDITIONAL TERMS , CONDITIONS AND DISCLOSURES ON REVERSE SIDE . ADVANTAGE CUSTOMER S' ned: Signed: e: Kyle G . Stone Name: Title: President Title: Advantage Energy, Inc. Company 172 Lake St. Address Hamburg , NY 14075 City,St, Zip Tel/Fax# (716) 649-9862 I (716) 649-9927fax i I I I I I I i 08/99 (ESAI ) DISCLOSURE STATEMENT I Full Requirements/Firm Service. Electric service will be provided ion a firm basis. Thus, if the Advantage fails to deliver the nominated quantity of electricity for reasons other than force majeure, as defined below, your shall be entitled to damages equal to your "cost of cover" above the amount you would have to pay as a utility sales customer less any expenses saved. Neither party shall be liable to the other for consequential or punitive damages or lost profit. Creditworthiness/Security/Payment. This Agreement is subject to Advantage's approval of your creditworthiness. Please initial here to acknowledge your consent to a credit check. Payments shall be due on the tenth day after receipt of the bill. Interest on late payments shall be assessed at a rate of 1 percentage per month. You shall also pay all reasonable attorney fees, court costs, or other expenses that ADVANTAGE incurs in collecting overdue payments. Termination. If you default onlany of your obligations under this Agreement, ADVANTAGE may, in addition to other legal remedies, suspend deliveries or terminate this Agreement. You will receive notification at least fifteen ( 15) days before discontinuation of supply service to allow you the opportunity to pay the overdue bill or request service from another provider. You may terminate this Agreemient on 15 days prior written notice if Advantage breaches this Agreement. Agency Authorization/Billing. lInitial here to acknowledge your authorization for ADVANTAGE, and its agents and subcontractors , to obtain copies of your electric bills from the electric utility and otherwise act as your agent in dealing with suppliers and the utilities. You shall fully cooperate with ADVANTAGE with regard to transportation and nomination issues. Advantage is acting as your broker under this Agreement. Title, possession, control of the power and risk of loss will pass from the Power Pool or other supplier to you at the physical location where the electricity first enters a transmission system. Bills may be adjusted to correct miscalculations. Taxes. You are responsible folF any federal, Indian, state , or local sales, use, or consumption taxes, or similar taxes which now or hereafter may be imposed . You shall pay any such taxes unless ADVANTAGE is required by law to collect and remit such taxes, in which case you shall reimburse ADVANTAGE for all amounts so paid. If you claim exemption from any such taxes, you must provide ADVANTAGE a proper exemption certificate. i Force Majeure. If either party iIs unable to perform its obligations under this Agreement due to force majeure, performance of such obligations shall be suspended until the force majeure is corrected. The party claiming such inability shall give written notice thereof to the other party as soon as practicable after the occurrence of the force majeure. Force majeure shall mean acts of God , strikes , lightning , fires J floods , explosions, storms or storm warnings, breakage or failure of machinery or electric lines, failure or curtailment of supply or transportation , and any other non-financial cause not within the control of the party claiming force majeure. Force majeure shall also include any changes in (i) the applicable utility tariff or other terms and conditions relating to the electricity open access program (ii) supply prices that materially affect either party's ability to perform without losing money. If and when performance is suspended by either party pursuant to this provision , ADVANTAGE shall consistent with the terms of the applicable tariff, take the steps necessary to timely return CUSTOMER to sales service from utility. Confidentiality/Entire Agreement, Law and Dispute Resolution : Both parties shall keep the terms of this Agreement confidential except to the extent necessary to facilitate obtaining supplies or transportation of those supplies or to meet the requirements of 'a government body with jurisdiction over the matter for which the information is sought. This is the complete agreement between the parties and can only be amended in a writing signed by both parties. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with laws of the State of New York. You may request information from the New York State Public Service Commission at 1 -800-342-3377 (toll free) of New York Public Service Commission, Consumer Services Division , 3 Empire State Plaza , Albany, NY 12223. If the amount in dispute exceeds the jurisdictional limits of your local small claims court, you may contact the Better Business Bureau at 1 -800-828-5000. The parties will then use the Better Business Bureau's arbitration services to settle the dispute. i I I I ATTACHMENT # 9 Village of Lansin_ n ca N of rT� EIS fb9 TOWN OF ITHACA a� y YEAR 2001 ° ' # >' LA p ELECTION DISTRICT MAP ST ER 1B 2t . ♦ tip XO C p r Fn ADOPTED April 9 , 2001 i ° � <« POLLING PLACES �BLUEGRASS� , v�a 4 ® �t5x TD- 1 WEST HILL FIRE STATION , 1242 Trumansburg Rd . r TD-2 VETERAN VOLUNTEER FIREMANS ASSOCIATION , INC , 638 Elmira Rd . o��s�► -� °R TD-3 SOUTH HILL FIRE STATION , 965 Danby Rd . F F TD-4 REIS TENNIS CENTER @ CORNELL UNIVERSITY, 230 Pine Tree Rd . TD-5 HASBROUCK APTS . COMMUNITY CENTER, 121 Pleasant Grove Rd . , .; TD-6 B . O. C. E .S . , 555 Warren Rd . T■p a TD-7 CAYUGA HEIGHTS FIRE HALL, 194 Pleasant Grove Rd . TQwPBH ' ' i o�` TD-8 BOYNTON MIDDLE SCHOOL, 1601 North Cayuga St. TD-9 B . O. C . E .S . , 555 Warren Rd . TD- 10 SOUTH HILL FIRE STATION , 965 Danby Rd . .Y TD- 11 REIS TENNIS CENTER @ CORNELL UNIVERSITY, 230 Pine Tree Rd . Y PLE AVER,. TD4 0 - - Polling Place 1 'I f��S HGIICK Rf) 0 G) o o TD = Town District HONNESS IA Z O 0) a m sti o n m STATE OF NEW YORK) F °1 COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS . TOWN OF ITHACA) I , Tee Ann Hunter, Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca, New York, do hereby H certify that the attached Election District Map is a true and exact copy of the boundaries Gesso and locations of the Town of Ithaca Districts and of Polling Places as duly adopted by s� the Town Board of said Town of Ithaca at the regular Town Board meeting held on the h� 9th day of April 2001 , and that the same is a complete copy of the whole of such Election District Map. TD = 1 1 seal IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have here unto set my hand and the Corporate of the Town of Ithaca, New York this 10th day of April 2001 . 00 oy oT - °"� ��° --------SEAL----=-__ O 0JQ2 _ °9 Tee Ann Hunter Town Clerk, Town of Ithaca Dated: NOTE: Tompkins County Election District #10 C is comprised of Town Election Districts M 6, 7 and 8. c 0 \ Tompkins County Election District #11 is comprised of Town Election Districts 4, 5, 9 and 11 . Tompkins County Election District #12 is comprised of Town Election Districts 19 213 and 10. Town of UI sses IRADELL RD Town Of Ithaca W OOLF T N IND REEK RD GC TD = 8 �� p 1 � HAYTS RD i Town Ithaca o City of Ithaca z z TD '= 1 = SeGRc� m $ x A f/1 m i T in- 0 A i 0 MECKLENBURG RD m N 1 m z DREW RD l Eta+ sr EXr 1 POOLE RD 75 0 c ! Cb Cu C L W O C C �f 3 ti�s� ND 3 0 o L BOSTWICKRD o� TDm2 �. � NO rt1 � Zm Z PY� m TD -3�kiys� h EN Fql� k o z sF<11 P° CO RD Town of Ithaca Town of Ithaca Town of Newfield Town of Danby ATTACHMENT # 10 Job Classification Scale : Previous points Classification NEW POINTS . �� 573 - 597 S 610 + 548-572 R 570-609 523-547 Q 530-569 498-522 P 490-529 473-497 O 450489 448-472 N 410-449 423-447 M 370-409 398-422 L 330-369 373-397 K 290-329 348-372 J 250-289 323-347 1 210-249 298-322 H Not Applicable 273-297 G Not Applicable 248-272 F Not Applicable 223-247 E Not Applicable 198-222 D Not Applicable 173-197 C Not Applicable Prepared by JCD 4/9/01 cls_pts U) O Cn O O NO WO O N O O O IM W N I �4 O (n ? W N r o < m CD CD CD ami a' CD 0 ?0 O °y' -xa 0 W v (O 0 cc 0 m 0 D D C7 n n O a CC m M. CD � m a ' C7 � (n W n v n« y � a � O CD "I avi ao a0 ate' a � CL o TO =' c0 m Q m p m m p c° CD (n a m m co ° (n 0 3 y n "I CD CD -, (n m 0 CD ° v .. O p o O � a) W ° Co 0 (a O o co O O O M. M CD 0 CD CD m CD ° °: m �. �' m a) m co' c m � co a) �_' (n n' m : �1 CD CD a ° O ° �'. m ° 3 ° o —I CL CD 0(o cn �' a m CD m co ° °. X a O O fD 0 m y CD O (a -. cn a cn W O O N %� o a = to (n E N COD CD O 0 (n 0 =. (n n to °� C � G) _ 0 a � CD CD ° 0 0 = ° m ° O (n m O CD a7 m m c o ° ° m o CL o a m o ,a 0 ° m (n = ? a• (n a p CD p m 0 foil � o C 3 m (n CD (n ai (n ° 0 v ° a CD 3 CD CD M O (n -: mo � °' 0 m o' m E m * o o 0 O -0 O a � CL 3 O o W 5' �' X v, 0 0 0 cn v 0 0 0 O N ° r• 3 O CD CL m aoi a -0 o- W a �' c CD �' c Gj a m m .0 CD O -- m rn 3 CD 0 N a ^� (n CL ° m mn ° c 0 0 a o � ° � nmm � � � ni oo `0np m0 �' a -03 -• Q m '+ 3 CD O N o a to o �, 0 ° o ° m a . . a) N a CD m o m 0 � 0 a 3 (D 0 c a „� v ff m a (n a ° m a o (n (n Z 0 CD ° c m (n � o c o con = y ;r n) a Lnn CD N m o ° c _ rn CD o m m' o � W a ° y m m °c W o ; v 3 ° 3' ma a 0 m � a) m Cl v � �, � � a (n cn w C CD CD v, CD CD ° � � x ° ° � a � ° `gym a3 � ° a � �' �• -0 =r O CD CD a 0 a o o �, 0 o s o a m CD m v Z 0 CD a (n CD ,° a CD (D (D v ° O m a) m a -� m (n o _� _(n CD' y cn cn a y CD coo CD o m � wn �l o P m a� m ° �, a a) O 0 CD � ° c ° X � x CD ° °CD m o n D 2) w CD CD o cn ° X ° > -0 o' m °'. a m -o m x c CD O r o m a) �'. a) m a) (n °' 0 O ° (n a CD m m D = y ° _ 3 0 0 CD' 3 O mo m (D cl 7 N O n �' 0 (n ° j NO (n CD CD cn = c W 3 �' o v,' o ° (n' °�) v o c m (n m _v m o m p . « (D a m ° 0 -' � 0 y N m O n) v; 3 (n o c c 3 ° o < 3 o m o a _� � '_' ° 3. � CD ° c 0 � ° y r > v v (D < m = o CD a0 a co cD (n O (n 0 cQ = n 0 (D y _ o 1 v m m' f (n D o (n m D_ cc °. COD 0 0 0 CIO °: ma o .: m CL _i c cn <' c 0 °' x m o C) n j CD .yr a = a) m N a (n ° a O O N C a) CD y (D O O CD 3 CD ° Z O a < 0 O a O o O � a) O- � CD V) O v = -ten CD O c O C m (°=r 0 .Z7 C ) o O -n � N 3 mD CD fD fD O p C C7 O S "� O 0 -« CD n r 0 0 0 n CD O CD -+ O � a) CL CD � 3 � CD ID m l�D O = 0 oo ill 0 0' m co o N a 0 a) � Q (a c a = v 0 rn m a cn ° m CD 3 cn can CD `� CD Uf O 3 � O0 0 O ° C CD O CD CD CD CD (n a ,�• 3 FD 0 M � 7 �, (D a _ CD v m 2) CD X O CCD = O = > 7 O � _. O m a (n v a • -0 0 a) CD N 0 m � O O v o a CD v Co x m = m o �' v c m 3 3 -0 cn (n 0 0 0 0 0 cn a x a CD CC C_CDD a 0 a ° o . . a CDcr CAD CD CD CCDD = CD' n ° X m � _ 7 to CL X a o o ^' a a m m �. 3 (0 CD a 0 m CD `. O CD a) O CT CD CT CD = O O CA m CD cn FD Cr_ o r CL _= o U) m ° 3 m O a, O CD (O n' O 0 _a) CD ° 43 7 C O a s a `."' CD CD cc S a m CD 4 7 o O N � p X 3 ' D m W h, L" o o 4 o i -I (A � W N CY) tr -P6 W N I< 'T1 r' Cl) c c c cC, o m K w v � � � � v � � � � CD � � � � o � Nm D a a a a o . o o o o cn o o ro o o ro o 0 0 0 3 y n r ro ro ro o 0 N O v Cl)� (D - (D mn -1 (D � mn � -ti -ti � -1 O f/1 3 X X 3 X X cn X 77 (D 7< X -ti x 7C X X � 0 c � y. N. N. �. N CD 3 m m ro 3 vi ro M in' 3 � (n D m' cn cl 5' (A �' vi' x m C O °' v y 3 o a o a v < a < a -� < a < O i(n cron ai uroi -. Z cn 0 m O ro `< ° ro ro O (D O ° ro O ro O ° .N. n, °' o ro CD N 3 0 3 0 CCD c<D o a N o (<D o (<D o ° CD 3 °� < v �, N ° v O' m a a cn o N D -» v a a ' ° 3cw/) 3 (n n3 �. v3 -• n� 3 � -a � 3 O °' ro -» ro ro a °' -o cn ro ti ro ro ro c ro ro ° ro ro 3 sm 1 X c m CD a ro a 0 Q ro < a a a O Q n• 0 : � y N' 0 v ro N N m CD FD o Z = 0' .cam+ m N fl; 0 o (n o o (n N ro g n g n < ° m .� CD in' a m Q o o ° c a w' o m ro ro o �' ro O ro -� 3 =' ° �• ro ° vrom W CL � 3 CDM. � �. � 0 � cnQ cD � 3vm 3 -n < < �G ro ° N ro ro .+ 3 X a ro c v 3 v 3 -0 -, (j, < ro o con CD O 07 (n v,' o , « _ root v, 0 x 5 >c n. o ° � � a ,< a mom °-' °-' n? � v �' 3s cn a a 0 o ° < a c m ro m 3 .0 co' � rn v ro 3 0 a 0 cn croi v CD a cn a m O Vl a' (D 7 7 Q (ro/1 = � Z Q CD y (D ro 3 - o _ ro ro 3 cn v ° `° m ro m 0 ro w 0 > ro ° C ' 3 ° ° o 0 3 a 3 o- _� O_ � a � N � cn = � o (D cn (D ° cn �p (n to a .+ CD CD (D .+ a) ° (D CD N O (XD O. (<D (<D ro ° 0 C. � c � � � O O o m .1 v c ° ° �_ 3 O M. (n a CL 0 ED `< a M`< ° ai m v °r ° � cc ma o ° o > > n� roM9 En co -: cro O < 0va va na � M Z CL rush c En ro .0 v v M9 m �° m `n c a m a> CD 3 c cn ° �' n' nmi �: a� o m 3 > > m T ro v c v _'� ° v 0 0 ro Q Z N .-: o •c n (� cn'n <D fl o 0 0 � o 3' (n a n CD m O o c c o ° o m 3 y' � rD r. c o c o c 3 3 (° v v ° �' O n; a 0 a 0 _. .< Q << 3 a o X O' ro ro ° ro ° D N ro n� a s 0 ° L ro a3 CD CD m `< ° a m a ° 3' aa) W 0 �, � � 0 � � ro .a l< m0 a; o �' a v Q m " m =r CD m « DD N U) CD Oa Oa aro � m Na o. �' CD r � o ro o ro o a o a > > °'v = C -i o m O v a �i ro cc ro Q D x a ro a ro ° c ro c ro 0 a a cn a Q Q m v a O c to ° CL O 'N. v p �_ Q (D O p_ Z '+ O cc O 3 Q CD •" O•CD(n ro c• m `c' ro ro ro aro CL n- a o- < 3 cn 3 CD. CD co ro m ca m cQ v ro o ro = 0 0 W CD a oaf w' 3 ff ro o CD ro -, a a, o = o ? m 3 ro ro ff I 1 0 °' cn ro ° o (n cn 0 ro cn (n (n c 3 CD CD 0 0 o CD CD 9D Z m 0 o a o (n m (n .co < 0 0 m O ' -, � CL cn cn a � o a c _ro CD (o cn a c 3 < m CD CL mn OL v 0 CD CD v (n Z CD > > �' o0 o m r _ m a, CD a 3 3 a a O k m a 3 rn 0 vyi n• 3 o' o m > > cn ro D i W N co O O CD P W Oo N ICI)� r -06 W N W N W N o r n c •°� o o co ° 0 0 CD '�' Imn z CD _ D (O J7 N W CD CD 3r y CD C) CCDD N (n y 3 N y v c a g a a a m o o m u°i ~ ° v ° voi = ma ma 0 3 3 m m a CD w cn m m ci cn CD CD CD su cn � v, CD a ° N W m m N CD o � (1 CD CD o < o ?� c n 3 m y 3. 5 we CD a `< n CD a < O O � cn N ? a a co 0 O O a CD 3 � = y < 0 3 CD CCDD O Vr W n CD O O W CD (/r O O ? CD O W . . y 0 0 O COD < (n CD a 3 O CD O CD X < CD (n O� � CD p� 7 CD N "O CD X N CD r« O _rt N r � O O� O C 7' n N CD Q 7 77 W r« C7 rt 3 7 O �< W �' Q S 7 (n O CD c . !CA CEY 3' OL a (D O O� a 0 =r CD c 3 O 3 7 CL rt N 7 CD 0 W 7 =� D O N O N (L] O 3 W CD = a O 0 j N 3 0 0 p n CD CD O < G O CD ? a > > CD CD 3 c a EMI n ° � n v 0 `< C]. W 3 -n ' n Me mo 3 r« D W n CD ? CD �. CD 7 W .0 O r« coi c on I CD W m N c o a c UD v, CL =r 3 CD c 0 L 0 a CD °c W a m CL (n N O W a a o . « CD �' c _ CD 0 O CD � CD ° 0 ni 0 o o < mo 0' 3 W ° (o ° CD c it < D D �< o a (n cl rt CD r TI CD .o p 0 CD O � O � 0 N c —I N (n (n O O O. CD 0 O N 3 0 n a CD CD W c Z N O 0 CD O W (Q C W -ti O (n (n .. a CD 0 X c 0 o a (n CD eeel 3 0 Fne °Q (n mo mo (n CD o eeeel (n r. CD — o (n °: c 0 m e"et .0 eeeeS mo N G• c W .0 C7 O eeeeS CD a 0 mo cn (n CD 3 CD a CD 0 W CD CD c (n E5. B moo 7 0 �' 0 �. 3 CD O (p = CD In = CD to O CD CD vie CD O (n 3 CD a = 3 CT (N (n cn Men Be CD �' m °_' 0 ° (a N Cap ° O (n � �_ 3 0 CD CD CD W CD O C1 Q . � Z W 0 D W W y � feeele O y CD O 7 W "O CD ? - W CD � D N O O O O O O O b O N O ICA r `n r 6 0 0 0 fn 0 K m (� 0° m m o o m V D D O p CD CD CD r > > 3 m ni ° a CD MU m CD o (n CD m n p Cn (n (n CD am 3 Cn CD � c 3 °' rt M a C1 a (pD 7yC N v N a =+j y p M 0 n CD CD CD a) CD M N (n O a) CD 0 C7 0 0 O C7 N 3 CD 07 cr(D CD 0 p a) 7 CD ^" C 'p. 'O. O CD 7 7 ' • o _,, 3 N v O a v ° ° O a � a m v O TI N Cn Cn O N d O n .+ (n En � 3 -� cn •G _ _mmmmmmo Vy1 O N `� (n O S O N 7 v (�D C, 3 3 N °_ CL • O _5 . CD 0' CL O C' O _0 Cll C O E 0 3 7 p (D O N n. Er -. O N w 3 d (D ': p n. . 0 C CD O a D N c N =r CD (n (n •O Ma MO CL 0 7 (Q CD C1 p (-pn 0 Mn 0 fn O 0 (n om. CDD O 'n. y j. D_ p 3 (n m < _ o cn 0 0 CD Mo (D (D ' + = S N CD C n y Vi CD CL O- 0 � w ~'. y O X O M Ort O Mn CD p = (On CL CD 0 0 Mn= -0 C O 3 CA 0 O N d N O"mmml - CCD n O C O O CD ' C�-D CD w 3 0 < N N 3 cnn n 0 CD p d a) x < � 0 C \ (D � Vpi O• Z CD (n CD y K y CD M CD CD 0 O O 0 CD C(n 0 c' c' o ° 3 v con z o CD 0 ° D Z v' 3 < y `° 0 .+ CD m CD v O 0 ° ' �a o 4 a a) O ;a Q 0 3 p 3 n> (n W -0 in p '. -O -« 0 v o cn m o -°a N �• CD =r 0 O < Z7 U) CD D D c 3 m :D O C •O a v a (D D CD m (° O CD 3 -00 ° v cn ° Z c c rn 0 � r; �c O• �. a ::r (n a CD 0 _ c n v �' =$ o a (u o ° v ° CD < n y o c� CD �. 0 m � w CD N (Q 3 a °c CD w CAD O• 'D ff CL 0 � c' mmo CD 0 °c 0 " o O a = a) y O O y C7 r• 7 3 x ° CD C c 0 7 D 3 CD (n (n 7 am CD d 0 fn CD ° II) p CD Mo p fn �• O O - O Z 3 0 y D CD r 0 v CD -• a 3 aa) 3 ' =r c 0 s O CD ? D W N N IMo Cn O y O O O 00 N O O r n O N r mn W N W N W N - ` 4�6 W N r -' m n p -' -n Z �= n a = � a ao n a v CD 0 cn n(n .m m O r Mi p� CD O ((n y N C0 O CA O y CD < cn CD � CD � CD =y N (n s "O � "o 0 Q Mo a -o -* Q < y' < x � CD � Q' O m v CD `<v, � 0 CD rn S. m O yi a=i y m CD x = CD = X � C7' 0 CCDD O y 0 -on -xp y CD 0. 0 n' CD -ten CD o y � fU _ m 0 � .� N CAD O a (D Cp O O c O cl ° 0 ° 3 = y CD O ° CD o = sZ 3 a = _ (n 7 O ° (n c y . . 11 CD y << ? c � a�i °' °o y °o s v (n o CD o Ml 0 v c C1 CD C1 0 m y CCDD w Cep O C1 c y y N CD v CD jy y II tC] CD N y =CD M y (D CD = N L O O C1 CD CT 3 CD c Cp y (D v CD CD d O sli ° -° co .< m a 3 g n ° CD = y o c CCD `� n� v o ° m a a Mo CD v r: O O c �' C L CT (o ;: O CD a v a L1 _: 0 p CD O o �. m sv o o CD 3 3 �' o � �» 0 nog _ = O N O = lZ v CD ID ° = a O O y y cn M r; _ = CD sy COD tan c (D O ° Mo y cn d y CD O Os o W m sli o o °En CD o -� 3 3 0 CD a CD CD (p to L1 O a CD N CD O y 0 ca a� ° a o = m cc �' CD ° � 0 ._. N n c C7 - , ' Z ?� m y = o. a a o m ?� (C) �° CD ?� Mi x ~ CD ° a n D CD o Co c �' a = m � O 0 a a =• _ 3 X CD (D to O CD 0 L CD 0 �Q o a a a o cl 3 CD o W a CD Moo CD o m � 0 m y v r: �o = 3 0 0' r (n o (° a m o a °—' D CL 3 - 0' N ;: o o m w m o 0 O CD a v o O 3 3 Z c ° S' r n •0 cn O — ° N O O CD -� — O_ y O a (o (Q ;:p N <' cCDD CCDD y .: O = 0 CD CD ° — c° y ° 3 � v � 0 CD a 3 C < CD O o m v _ CD c0i cn ( 3 CD o CD v 0 _ X v a. < v o CD CD 3 0 c su ?� y' = CD Z � a a D 3 0• r 0 `< S 3 0• m cfl Mo cc POINT - FACTOR RATING SHEET POSITION TITLE : Points per LEVEL Level TOTAL KNOWLEDGE 20 CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS 5 AUTONOMY/INDEP . JUDGEMENT 25 SUPERVISION 19 PSYCHOLOGICAL DEMANDS 13 INTERPERSONAL SKILLS 30 INTERNAL CONTACTS 6 EXTERNAL CONTACTS 6 PUBLIC CONTACT 10 RISK OF INJURY 10 WORK ENVIRONMENT 5 VISUAL EFFORT 6 MACHINES/TOOLS/EQUIPMENT 10 PHYSICAL EFFORT 5 TOTAL POINTS ALLOCATED LABOR GRADE CONVERSION EVALUATED BY: DATE : cls_pts t s s ATTACHMENT # 11 MEMO TO : Town Board FROM : Bill Lesser RE : County Freight ement Study Update The consultants , Sear-Brown , held an update session on the 4th to present progress to (late. This followed closely the release of the first technical report (known as the 30 % report) . The remaining schedule is as follows : • Traffic counting has been resumed following a snow-imposed hiatus • 70 % report will be released at the end of A ril • Second public hearing will occur in early May to discuss proposed truck routes and impacts • Third public hearing will be held in June wi h project completion about August Highlights of the meeting were : • Origin/destination study indicated only 6 % f trucks were through vehicles (had no business in Tompkins County) • 400 surveys were collected from residents, but the sampling was non-random • Potential truck routes and alternates were identified in a very preliminary manner on a map ; issues and alternatives Will be discussed in May • Designating a truck route has limited effecti on controlling use of other roadways We may need to consider the following : 1 . Designating truck routes in the Town , and effects of designations on Town roads 2 . Adopting an ordinance controlling truck tra is outside designated routes , and enforcement of those regulations Z00 [n NZX3 ffiti Z09T SSZ L09 XVa VZ - CT TO / SO / t0 Draft by Bill Lesser MEMO TO : John Lampman Tompkins County Highway Department FROM : Bill Lesser Town of Ithaca RE : Coddington Road Repairs DATE: April ?? Thank you for taking the time on the 3`d to dis uss with me plans for the reconstruction of Coddington Road , As I mentioned , Coddington Road is a key conduit in the Town so the Board is intent on being involved at all stages in the reconstruction process , and Supervisor Valent'no asked me to coordinate our efforts . Indeed , I had asked at the County Transportation Policy Committee that the Town be involved before the project was resubmitted , but that did not come to pass . I had also spoken previously with Wad about the Town's involvement in the interview process for the consulting engineers - It is somewhat upsetting to have learned the interviews with four firms on the State pre-selected list have already taken place . I recognize you were not involved in my earlier discussions but the issu of what opportunities communities are entitled to in these projects isapparently clear to neither of us . Hence I will be asking Stu Stein to clarify that after at a future Transportation Policy Committee meeting _ We do very much appreciate your offer to see written comments from the previously-interviewed firms regarding community Involvement in the planning process . The questions the Town would like to have answered are as .follows : • What have been your experiences with acc mmodating community concerns in road design ? Of particular issue is design flexibility to mitigate speeding in residential areas and multi-modal use with inotor vehicles , bicycles , and joggers . • Please give at least two examples of how your past design adjustments have successfully accommodated motorists needs and community wishes . Once those answers are available, the Town can comment on our preferences among the applicant firms . In the more distant future , I understand the approximate schedule is as follows - 1 . Await the contract between the State DOT and County 2. Select the consulting engineer. If the contact with DOT is finalized by June then one of the four interviewed firms from he State pre-selected list can be chosen . If not an alternative and lengthier g rocess must be undertaken . coo [A KZX3 3T1HY Z09T BSZ L09 XHd VZ : CT TO / SO / fi0 3 . Within 3 -4 months of selecting the consulting firm , conduct first public meeting to identify problems and concerns (The Town can assist in arranging the public meetings) 4 . Hold 2nd and possibly 3 I public meeting id ntifying options (scoping ) , hearing process to be completed in 6 — 12 months. Necessary ROW must also be secured during this phase _ 5 . Complete final design . 6 . Bid and construction , fall 2005 or spring 2006 , Thank you again for your support on this matt r of great importance to the Town , and we look forward to a successful project d sign _ Cc_ K. Valentino S _ Stein too In N113 3MV Z09T SGZ L09 YU 6Z - CT TO / SO / ro ATTACHMENT # 12 AGENDA NO . 2 3 a TOViTIV CLl(✓ RK ' S ® NTHJC , X RlElP � I2T 'OWN OF ITHACA ! NEW YORK MARCH , 2001 TO THE SUPERVISOR , PAGE 1 Pursuant to Section 27 , Subd I of the Town Law , I hereby make the following statement of all fees- and moneys received by me in connection with my office during the month stated above , excepting only such fees and moneys the application and payment of which are otherwise provided for by law : 2000 SPORTING LICENSES 2001 SPORTING LICENSES 5 MARRIAGE LICENSES NO , 01010 TO 01014 43975 AGRICULTURE REPORT COPY AERIAL PHOTOS 15 MISC . COPIES 8 . 40 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL . REVIEW MARRIAGE TRANSCRIPT NOISE ORDINANCE RETURNED CHECK — CLERK RETURNED CHECK — TAXES 1 RETURNED CHECK — W& S 5900 OPEN SPACE REPORT 1 .084 OPEN SPACE REPORT 1997 POSTAGE 1 SIGN ORDINANCE 3 . 00 SIX MILE CREEK REPORT SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS 3 TAX SEARCH 15 . 00 1 USE OF- PARKS & BLDG 50900 WETLAND GUIDELINES. WATER & SEWER SEARCH 1 ZONING MAP 3450 6 ZONING ORDINANCE 51 . 00 A1255 TOTAL TOWN CLERK FEES 179 , 65 A1555 81 DOG ENUMERATION 81 . 00 A1556 1 SPCA CONTRACT 416 . 02 A1557 2 SPCA IMPOUND FEES 60 . 00 A2530 GAMES OF CHANCE LICENSES BINGO LICENSES _ BINGO FEES A2540 TOTAL A2540 " A2544 81 DOG LICENSES 162 . 00 A2701 REFUND PRIOR YEAR EXPENS 7 BUILDING PERMIT 1 . 115 . 00 2 BUILDING PERMIT EXTENSIN 50000 FOUNDATION PERMITS _ 2 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY 100000 3 TEMP. CERT . OF OCCUPANCY 535 , 00 USE PERMITS 1 • OPERATING PERMITS 50000 TOWN CLERK .' S MONTHLY REPORT MARCH , 2001 PAGE . 2 2 FIRE . SAFETY INSPECTIONS 100000 3 SIGN PERMITS 259088 5 ZBA AREA & USE VARIANCES 400900 ZBA ADDITIONAL MTG . FEE . 2 ZBA SPECIAL APPROVALS 200900 ZONING SIGN APPROVALS B2110 TOTAL B2110 2 , 8G9 . 88 _ SUBDV . REV . INITIAL APL . SUBDV . REV . PRELIM . PLAT SUBDV . REV . FINAL PLAT _ SBDV . REV , PLAN REAFFIRM 1 SITE PLAN INIT . APL . FEE 75000 2 SITE PLAN PRELIM . PLAN 200 . 00 _ SITE PLAN FINAL PLAN _ ADD , MTG . FEE AGENDA PRO ASS . MTG : FEE P . H . PROCE B2115• TOTAL B2115 275900 _ SUBDIV . REV . INSPECTION _ SITE PLAN REV . INSPECTIN SUBDV , PRELM . REV . DEPOS _ SUBDV . FIN REV . FEE DEP SITE PLAN PREL , FEE DEPO SITE PLAN FIN . FEE DEPOS BP615 TOTAL BP615 Paid to Supervisor for General Fund, 89896 $. Paid to Supervisor for Part Town 34084 . 88 Paid to County Treasurer for Dog Licenses 1410 . 97 Paid to Ag & Markets for Dog Licenses 27 . 00 Paid to NYS Health Department for Marriage Licenses 56 . 25 Paid to State Comptroller for Games of Chance Licenses f Paid to State Comptroller for Bingo Licenses Total Disbursements 4 , 208 . 75 APRIL 2 , 2001 !+ , SUPERVISOR STATE OF NEW YORK , COUNTY OF TOMPKINS , TOWN OF ITHACA TEE -ANN HUNTER , being duly sworn , says that she is the Clerk of the TOWN OF ITHACA that the foregoing is a full and true statement of all Fees and Moneys received by her during the month above .stated , excepting only such Fees the application and payment of which are otherwise provided for by law . --`Z RE Subscribed and sworn to before me this LOA x011di6052877 . day of I 20 OL n 'C{oga County ATTACHMENT # 13 Agenda Item # 23b Town of Ithaca Town Board, April 9, 2001 Highway Department Report For March 2001 Administrative March has been the snowiest month of 2001 . We checked the official total. Snow Fall at the Game Farm Road Station November 2000 December 2000 January 2001 February 2001 March 2001 3 .9 " 19 .3 " 17.5" 6.4" 35 " Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal 504" 153" 16 .9 " 147" 10 .2" The extra snow put a real crunch on salt delivery throughout the County . The Highway Departments in the County were trying to make it through the winter without purchasing more salt. The snow hit, supplies of salt ran low, and Cargill Salt mines could not meet all deliveries in a timely manner . Our neighbors were calling for help and we assisted where we could . We think we have made it through the winter . Iacovelli Park: We began filling the site where the play structure is to be built. The work went with fits and starts because of the weather . The build date for the play structure is to be May 2, 2001 , when we begin to set poles . We will have the site graded by that date and ready for the work to begin. The agreed to $2,000 fee paid to Leathers and Associates covers schematic design, design development, construction plans, reproduction expenses, and final material list. The hours spent working on the play structure obtaining volunteers and working with the volunteers is entirely donated . Traffic Counts: The Town of Ithaca has acquired four new traffic counters . We will work closely with Tompkins County sharing counters and software so that together we will be able to receive more data on the traffic patterns within the Town of Ithaca . We are going to do a three-day traffic count in the Forest Home area . We have set April 23, 2001, as the day we will put the counters out and we will pick them up on April 26, 2001 . We will have the data available at the Highway Department for the Planning Department and Planning Board to have base counts for any decisions that they need to make . If there any other priority areas that the Town Board feels that we need to get counts for, please let me know. Cornell University and Ithaca College classes are finished in May and start again in September, so we will need to plan our counts towards fall and spring times . Transitional Duty Program: The Safety Committee is bringing a transitional duty program to the Town Board for their approval . The Safety Committee finalized the draft on Thursday April 5, 2001 , which was too late for the mail out. The need for the Agenda Item # 23b program is to have a consistent policy for all employees and to show were responsibilities lie . The concept is to provide transitional work duties for an injured employee . The transitional work duties will be within the limitation described by an approved physician. There is a definite limit to the length of the transitional duties . We don't want to create a new job . We want to keep our employees in the work force because it is easier for them to return to his or her regular duties when a physician tells us they are able . We will also save money on our Workers Compensation rate with this program in place . Highway Work Water / Sewer: There have been no water breaks during March. We did change two fire hydrants during the month. During March we cleaned out the bird boxes along the water and sewer easements and other sites within the Town. Tree and Brush Removal: We continued to work on trimming and removing dead trees and brush along road sides . Hearing tests for the work crews were administered during March. As evident by the amount of snowfall this month, we spent a tremendous amount of time on snow removal—road, trails, and Town Hall . Projects for April 1 . Resume work on Park Lane . 2 . Water and sewer maintenance . 3 . Brush and tree removal. 4 . Hauling materials . 5 . Iacovelli Park. 6 . Spring yard waste collection—week of April 161h . 7. Park and trail spring clean ups . ATTACHMENT # 14 Town Engineer's Report for 4/9/01 Town Board Meeting GENERAL Staff Craig Ballard, Engineering Technician, has been assisting in the office on the final design detailing of the Hanshaw Road Sewer Rehabilitation project and on other active projects. Operations & Facility Management The wood trim around the original postal boxes installed in the Hall by the Town Clerk' s office has been installed and has been painted to match the other window trim. A list of small maintenance and repair jobs at the Town Hall jobs is being kept and most of the jobs can be completed by existing Town staff'. Work is being scheduled so that several similar jobs can be done at one time to allow more efficient operation . The Engineering Staff replaced the incandescent bulbs in the Lobby Globe lamps with high efficiency florescent replacement units. These units draw 26 watts of electricity while producing light equivalent to a 130 Watt incandescent bulb. They also have an estimated operating life of 10,000 Hours compared to 1000 hours for standard bulbs, which will eliminate frequent awkward bulb changes in the hanging fixtures. Records Management Engineering staff is continuing to work with all departments on implementation of the Town of Ithaca records management system. The system incorporates effective use of the various filing resources available in the Town Hall with a computerized database to keep track of the documents. Training on using the various database files is being done informally on an individualized basis. Park and Open Space The Engineering staff is coordinating with the Highway Department and Planning Department on the development of the Hanna Pew Trail Plan. Assistance will be provided on project planning and development, survey work, design development and construction document. The agreement has been approved by New York State DOT and the project budget is being completed. Survey work has been authorized and will be underway shortly. Highway The Engineering Staff completed the final design and construction documents for the Maple Avenue roadway and walkway improvement project, and the project was put out for bids to be opened April 5 , 2000. This project is on the April Town of Ithaca Board Agenda for approval and award of the Contract. 91 ] /Emergency Operations Center Committee The County Communication Capital Project committee has been reviewing the information on several different sites and design configurations for the 91 1 Dispatch Center, which will also be the base for the Emergency Operations Center. The decision making process on the site must be completed prior to advancing the design development. I have attended several committee meetings regarding the project and locating the site adjacent to Station 5 on the South Hill has been ranked as the most suitable site, for several reasons, including proximity to the Ithaca College antenna site which could provide. stand alone coverage to a great part of the County, and the ability to share existing services in the Fire Station . TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 4/9/01 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT East Hill The Eastern Heights drainage improvement project includes the work nearing completion on Park Lane and the stabilization of the drainage channel above Rte. 79 adjacent to the Ewing ' s property. This portion of the drainage channel will be stabilized with heavy rock Rip Rap and the final design is being completed to build the protection this summer. EARTH FILL PERMITS There has been no activity on the City of Ithaca application for the proposed demolition and construction spoil disposal site on the Landstrom lot. The Town of Newfield supervisor has contacted the Town Engineer to reiterate that they are very interested in commenting on the project during the review. One fill permit application is being processed for construction of two ponds on Tax Parcel 47 .-2-6.2 on the east side of Coddington Road. The project will entail placement of approximately 3500 cubic yards in fill excavated form the two pond pool areas. The project was started prior to the permit application and after protecting the area with silt fence the contractor has stopped work until a permit is received . The site is within the Six Mile Creek Conservation Zone. The project has been be reviewed by the Planning Board as part of the subdivision approval . WATER PROJECTS Integrated Water System Final project planning and design work on improvements for the integrated water system is on hold until completion of the revised SCLIWC agreement. A meeting of the Integrated Water System Committee is scheduled for April 5 , 2001 at Bolton Point. West Hill Water System Final design work on a new pump station to replace the aging Cliff Street Pump Station is being completed. The City Board of Public Works reviewed the project on March 7 , 2001 and granted approval with the condition that the final plans be approved by the Superintendent of Public Works prior to construction. The City planning staff will also review the site plan . Construction documents are being prepared for advertisement for Bid after the May 2001 Town Board meeting. Several tank locations to site a tank to reinforce the Trumansburg Road Tank are being evaluated and will be reviewed by the Public Works Committee and the Planning Board . The Engineering Staff is continuing to work on preliminary plans and an engineering report for the part of the West Hill Water System behind the Biggs complex and the Hospital . This is an old watermain and as the Hospital complex has developed over the years, significant regrading has occurred which has resulted in sections of the line being covered by over 20 feet of fill . This makes locating and repairing the line very difficult. Relocation of a portion of the line will be considered for construction and plans are being reviewed along with the development plans for the Biggs A building. LATB prep\Apr. 9, 200 1 \ERPTO I 04.doc Daniel R . Walker Page 2 04/05/01 �I �I TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 4/9/01 SEWER PROJECTS Joint Sewer Agreement The SJS partners are continuing to work on the revised agreement for the Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Facility and jointly used interceptor sewers. Intermunicipal Sewer System The Intermunicipal sewer Committee has been continuing to work on the Draft Agreement for expanding the partnership in the sewer system . A workshop was held on February 10, 2001 to review the agreement and solicit comments from the elected officials of all six of the municipalities involved in the project. The Intermunicipal Sewer Group includes the three existing partners in the Joint Sewer Subcommittee of the City of Ithaca, The Town of Ithaca, and The Town of Dryden, plus the three potential partners which are the Village of Lansing, The village of Cayuga Heights and the Town of Lansing. The group is also working on the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement required by NYSDEC North East Sewer Improvements The design and contract documents for relining the Hanshaw Road sewer main from the Village of Cayuga Heights line to Warren Road has been completed. A public meeting was held on March 21 " at the Northeast School to respond to the concerns from the residents regarding tree removal and environmental impacts of the project. That meeting was attended by approximately 40 residents, and the consensus was that the concerns had been adequately addressed, especially with the assurances of the staff and Town Supervisor that restoration acceptable to the residents would be completed by the Town . West Hill Sewer System The sewer line on the East Side of Trumansburg Road from the City line north to the Biggs complex is one of the oldest sewer mains in the Town. This sewer, which serves the Hospital and the Lakeside Nursing Home, is old vitrified clay the and is at capacity as well as requiring frequent maintenance for cleaning and root removal . The line is also a significant source of I&I. The Town Engineer is in the process of developing a design and construction plan for replacement of this sewer line in 2001 . LATB prep\Apr. 9, 2001 \ER PTO I04.doc Daniel R . Walker Page 3 04/05/01 ATTACHMENT # 15 AGENDA # 23 ( d ) Planning Director' s Report for April 9 2001 Town Board Meeting DEVELOPMENT REVIEW The following are actions that were considered by the Planning Board, March 13 , 2001 Meeting: Theisen 2-Lot Subdivision, 1502 Slaterville Road : The Planning Board adjourned consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2-lot subdivision of a 55 ,089 +/- square foot lot located at 1502 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 57 - 1 - 11 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . The 55 ,089 +/- square foot lot will be divided into two lots of 18,961 +/- square feet and 36, 128 +/- square feet (containing the house and the garage) . Henry Theisen, Owner; Lawrence P. Fabbroni , P.E. , L. S . , Agent. Note : This project will be discussed at the April 3 , 2001 Planning Board meeting. Warehouse Carpet Outlet Space, East Hill Plaza: The Planning Board granted Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed renovation of the former Warehouse Carpet Outlet space in the East Hill Plaza, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 62-2- 1 . 121 , Business District "C," for offices of Cornell University Human Resources Department. Modifications include providing work space for approximately 32 employees , replacement of exterior windows and doors and install a new concrete ramp to the new exterior door on the northwest corner of the building. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Egner Architectural Associates, LLC , Agent. Walker / VanValen Subdivision, Coddington Road : The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval and made a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals with respect to a request for Special Approval , for the proposed subdivision of 13 .4 +/- acres from Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47 -2=6 . 2, to be consolidated with Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47-2-6 . 5 , and subdivision of a triangular piece in the Southern portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47 -2-6 . 5 to be retained as part of the parcel that lies in the Town of Danby; both parcels are located on the north side of Coddington Road, Tax Parcel No. 47-2-6 . 2 being approximately 1200 feet east of Updike Road, and Tax Parcel No. 47-2-6 . 5 being approximately 2500 feet east of Updike Road ; Residence District R-30 and Conservation District. The Special Approval is being sought for the excavation of two ponds, construction of a driveway and related grading. Richard & Ruth Walker, Owners ; George VanValen , Applicant. Subdivision and Renovation of the County 's Biggs A Building for Cayuga West Professional Campus, 301 Harris B. Dates Drive : The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval and Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cayuga West Professional Campus , located on Harris B . Dates Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-3 -2 . 22, Special Land Use District No. 3 . The proposal involves the substantial interior renovation and conversion of the County' s 1 Biggs A Building, consisting of 120,000 +/- square feet, into multi-tenant office space, with associated accessory uses such as a deli/cafe to serve the employees of the office complex . Parking lot and access drive modifications are also proposed . The proposal also includes subdividing off a 12 . 272+/- acre lot containing the building and related grounds of the County' s Biggs A Building from the County ' s 49 . 22 +/- acre parcel . Tompkins County, Owner; Klaff Realty LP, Applicant ; Robert A. Lama, Agent, March 20, 2001 Meeting : Longview, an Ithacare Community, Walkway, 1 Bella Vista Drive : The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Approval for a proposed walkway on the north lawn at Longview , an Ithacare Community, 1 Bella Vista Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 39- 1 - 1 . 31 , Special Land Use District No . 7 . The proposed walkway would be a 1 ,200 +/- foot loop, 8 +/- feet wide, with a blacktop surface, to provide access for residents and visitors to the north lawn . Ithacare Center Service Co . , Inc. , Owner/Applicant; Mark A. Macera, Agent. Willowood Resort, Route 327 : The Planning Board considered a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign variances to increase the size ' of the off- premise sign by 3 square feet to 20 square feet for Willowood Resort. The sign is located at the corner of Route 327 and Route 13 , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33- 1 -9 . 3 , Residence District R-30. Clayton Moore, Property Owner; Charlie Barbay, Owner; James Hannah, Agent. Note : A favorable recommendation was given as a result of a no action. Iacovelli 2-Lot Subdivision, Pennsylvania Avenue : The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of 2, 880 +/- square feet from Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 54-5-30, +/- 120 feet east of 271 Pennsylvania Avenue, to be consolidated with Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 54-5-31 , +/- 70 feet east of 271 Pennsylvania Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue, Residence District R-9 . The subdivision and consolidation will create two lots of 9037 +/- square feet and 13 ,835 +/- square feet. Orlando Iacovelli, Owner/Applicant. Cornell University Baker Institute Expansion, Hungerford Hill Road : The Planning Board granted Preliminary Site Plan Approval and made a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed expansion of the James A . Baker Institute for Animal Health at Cornell University, located on Hungerford Hill Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 61 - 1 -7 . 1 , Residence District R-30. The proposed 41 .,400 +/- square foot (gross) , three-floor expansion will include new laboratories, offices , a kennel facility, and a 100-seat lecture theater. Modifications to the parking lots and walkways are also proposed . Cornell University, Owner/Applicant ; James Pung, Architect/Project Manager, Agent . April 3 , 2001 Meeting: 2 • P Theisen 2-Lot Subdivision, 1502 Slaterville Road: The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2-lot subdivision of a 55 ,089 +/- square foot lot located at 1502 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 57- 1 - 11 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . The 55 ,089 +/- square foot lot will be divided into two lots of 18 ,961 +/- square feet and 36 , 128 +/- square feet (containing the house and the garage) . Henry Theisen, Owner; Lawrence P . Fabbroni , P .E. , L. S ., Agent. Rogan 's Corner Modification, 825 Danby Road : The Planning Board adjourned Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed site plan modifications to Rogan ' s Corners located at 825 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 40-4-2 , Business District "A." The proposal includes the addition of a wood deck and awning to Franco ' s Italian Restaurant for outdoor seating, the addition of a 225 +/- square foot wood storage shed on the north end of the laundromat, the addition of a 355 +/- square foot wood storage shed on the south side of the convenience store, locating the waste/recycle bin area to the west of the laundromat, and other related site changes (all improvements are existing) . James and Julie Rogan, Owners ; Frank Rogan , Applicant, Note: This proposal has been adjourned to the May 0 meeting, to allow some of the details and issues of the proposal to be examined further. Italian Carry-Out, Danby Road : The Planning Board granted Preliminary Site Plan Approval and made a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeal regarding Special Approval for the proposed Italian Carry-Out located on Danby Road, approximately 150 feet north of the intersection of Danby Road and West King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 39- 1 - 16 . 1 , Business District "C ." The proposal includes the construction of a 1 ,024 +/- square: foot building, 14 +/- parking spaces and associated drives, and related lighting and landscaping. Joseph M. Salino and Todd M. McGrill, Owners/ Applicants; Thomas M. Schickel, Schickel Architecture, Agent , CURRENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECTS The following are accomplishments or issues that have been dealt with over the past month . SEQR Reviews for Zoning Board: One SEQR review for the Zoning Board was done since the March report: request for a special approval to be permitted to move more than 2,500 cubic yards of fill material , located near 999 Coddington Road, Residence District R-30 and Conservation District, George R. VanValen , Agent. Codes and Ordinances Committee: The Committee met on March 16 , 2001 . The agenda focused on reviewing a new draft section regarding "Second Principal Use Authorized by Special Approval Only" and completing the review of the remaining sections dealing with Special Regulations , General Provisions , and Administration. The committee scheduled their next meeting for April 18 , 2001 to revisit the issue of the Town Board having the authority to appoint an alternate member to either the Planning Board or the 3 Zoning Board of Appeals , to revisit any other items needed, review the Zoning Map, and discuss the process and activity over the next few months . Spring Newsletter: Planning Department staff prepared the Spring 2001 Newsletter which was mailed out on April 2 , 2001 , Third Annual New York PRD Conference : Susan Ritter and Michael Smith attended a one-day conference in Syracuse on Purchasing Development Rights on Farmland. The conference focused on many topics relating to PDR including an introduction to PDR, the New York State PDR Program including tips on how to prepare a grant, building community support, steps after receiving a grant, and what farmers have to say. At the conference we learned that the Town did not receive any funding for the PRD proposal submitted last summer. Planning Review Process Presentation to Cornell : Susan Ritter and JoAnn Cornish, from the City of Ithaca, provided a joint presentation to Cornell University project managers and staff on the municipal approval process . The presentation was part of a series that Cornell 's Planning, Design, and Construction had arranged to educate and inform their staff on the local planning and approval process . The presentation included an overview of the site plan review process and procedures , SEQR process, and similarities and differences between the Town and City process . Cornell Stream Ecology Class at Oxley Project : Susan Ritter and Michael Smith met with two Cornell University stream ecology classes at the site of the proposed Oxley Parking Lot development to discuss and answer questions from the class about the proposed project, the approval process, and potential impacts on Cascadilla Creek. The class will be preparing recommendations on the proposed project and any potential impacts as it relates to the Creek. Review of General Municipal Law § 239 Review Process : Susan Ritter and Michael Smith met with representatives from Tompkins County Planning Department and the Village of Dryden to discuss the County's GML § 239 review process . The County organized the meeting in order to solicit input from the municipalities on the County's GML § 239 letters . Staff discussed the usefulness of the comments submitted by the County, provided recommendations on the review process , and discussed how the Boards use the information provided. William and Hannah Pew Trail Project: The Town has received from NYSDOT the signed agreement for the state grant for the Pew Trail . Town staff met with Peter Bartolotta of NYSDOT to review the procedures of the grant. Michael Smith along with Engineering and Park's staff met with T. G. Miller to discuss details for the survey work. T . G . Miller will be scheduling the survey work in the near future . 4 STATE OF NEW YORK EXECUTIVE CHAMBER GEORGE E. PATAKI, GOVERNOR Press Office 518-474- 8418 212-681 -4640 http ://www. state-W. us FOR RELEASE : DvRvIEDIATE, Tuesday March 27, 2001 GOVERNOR PATAHI ANNOUNCES $12 NIILLION TO PROTECT FARMLAND Governor George E. Pataki today visited Indian Ladder Farms in Altamont to announce the award of more than $ 12 million in grants to municipalities throughout the State to help protect economically viable farmland from development. "For generations, New York' s farmers have been excellent stewards of our landscapes, caring for more than a quarter of the land in our State," Governor Pataki said. "With increasing development pressures, it is more important than ever that we take steps now to help our farmers preserve endangered farmland and keep it in production. "Since 1996, . we have invested more than $40 million to preserve thousands of acres of pristine farmland, ensuring that our next generations will enjoy these same scenic landscapes," the Governor . said. "The funding announced today will help continue that progress, keeping mur farmland viable for farm families across New York State." . Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno said, "Saratoga County farms arelsignificant to our local economy and essential to Saratoga's historic and. environmental preservation. The grant program will allow these farms to continue the long tradition of supplying the region with products harvested locally while also providing natural borders of protection against further development for the Saratoga Battle Monument, Saratoga National Historical Park and : Saratoga National Cemetery. " Senator Nancy Lorraine Hoffinan said, "Once again Governor Pataki has -shown his , commitment to New York's number one industry, agriculture. These grants. .will : relieve. the. pressure for many historic farms, and .ensure their continuation for the benefit of all :their owners and all citizens who enjoy the pastoral beauty and the opportunity to obtain extra fresh locally . grown produce. " : . . . Assembly Republican Leader John J. Faso said, "Preserving viable farmland enhances the quality of life for all New York families. Through these grants, Governor Pataki has once again demonstrated his commitment to conserving our natural resources and proud agricultural tradition. " - more - Indian Ladder Farm, owned and operated by Peter Ten Eyck H and his daughter Laura, will receive $628 ,670 for the development rights on their 317-acre orchard. This is the first farm in Albany County to receive Farmland Protection funds and is co-sponsored by the Town of New Scotland and the Albany County Land Conservancy. Peter G. Ten Eyck R, Owner of Indian Ladder Farms said, "When I was born there were 52 fruit farms in Albany County, now there are only two of us left. This grant will give us the resources and courage to continue for another generation or so . " The farm, one of the few apple orchards remaining in Albany County, produces apples, pears, blueberries, raspberries, pumpkins, corn, squash, sunflowers, and assorted vegetables, and has effectively marketed their produce through their farm market and u-pick operation to the more than 400,000 people that visited their farm last year. The. farm affords dramatic views of the Helderberg Escarpment in New Scotland and since 1954, more than 75 percent of the land used for agricultural production within this town has been converted to other uses. The Governor' s Farmland Protection Program provides financial assistance to counties and towns to support their own farmland protection plans. The localities purchase the development rights on farmland to promote the viability and profitability of local participating farms. There is no cap on the amount of funding which may be requested and the cost-share ratio is 75 percent state and 25 percent local. Proposed projects must preserve viable agricultural land, be located in areas facing significant development. pressures and serve. ;as a buffer for a significant ecosystem or -habitat characteristics . Consideration is also given to the number of acres preserved, the quality of the soil resources, the percentage of the farm available for production agriculture, whether or not bordering properties are protected by a conservation easement, the cost effectiveness .of the proposal and the likelihood of the property' s succession as a farm. American Farmland Trust Northeast Regional Director Jerry Cosgrove said, "The strong interest from farmers and. communities across the state shows how vital the farmlandoprotection program is to New York's agriculture and quality of life. We commend Governor Pataki for his leadership in efforts like these to promote quality communities in New. York State." New York Farm Bureau President John W. Lincoln said, "Farmland protection is critical for farmers in areas of the state that are under high development pressure. For many farmers, the opportunity to sell their development rights means that the farm can remain in farming. Farmland protection helps preserve the next generation of family farms in New York State and we appreciate Governor Pataki ' s commitment to agriculture." The Governor announced Farmland Protection awards of$3 .6 million for projects on Long Island; $ 1 .2 million for proj ects in Onondaga County; $ 1 . 1 million for proj ects in both Orange and Wayne Counties;. $ 865 ,000 for Cortland County projects and $ 863 ,000 for Dutchess County: Another $ 128 ,000 will be awarded to various municipalities for farmland protection planning. - more - State Agriculture Commissioner Nathan L. Rudgers said, "New York has lost more than half a million acres of farmland to development since 1992, but under the leadership of Governor Pataki, we are helping to put a stop to that trend and helping farmers maintain their valuable land base through the Farmland Protection Program. Farmland has so much to offer New York that it is imperative that we preserve our working landscapes and Governor Pataki is making sure we do just that. " There are currently 39,000 farms in New York State, a number that has increased slightly since 1995 , following years of declines . Complementing the Farmland Protection Program is the Governor' s recent announcement of Lt. Governor Mary Donohue ' s Quality Communities Interagency Task Force Report. The report includes 41 recommendations designed to improve the quality of life in communities throughout the State, including the need to preserve open space for agriculture. Task Force recommendations pertaining to agriculture include : considering farmers ' markets with land use policies; authorizing the creation of open space districts; and exploring the creation of a voluntary transfer of development rights pilot project. Since taking office, Governor Pataki has not only protected thousands of acres of viable farmland, he has cut school property taxes for farmers up to 100 percent; reduced energy costs for farmers; slashed workers ' compensation rates for farmers more than 25 percent; strengthened agricultural 4istrict.laws;. introduced new marketing programs to promo_ to our homegrown products and has fought to make New York State the next member of the Northeast .-Interstate 'Dairy Compact. In his 2001 -2002 Executive Budget, Governor Pataki has proposed is an extension of the Farm School Tax Credit to cover rented lands; a farmland restoration tax credit; and a conservation donor tax credit. A list of funded projects is attached. GRANT RECIPIENTS OF THE 2000-2001 FARMLAND PROTECTION GRANT PROGRAM Onondaga County . $ 1 ,1539200 A 460-acre crop farm located between the Village of Elbridge and the Town of Camillus. This four-generation family farm, in continuous operation since 1912, is proximate to three other agricultural operations that have protected, or are in the process of protecting their farms with a conservation easement. This farm, which grows everything from soybeans to small fruits, vegetables and flowers, is adjacent to NYS Route S and is also bisected by NYS Route 321 . Three new commercial businesses have been built adjacent to the farm since 1992. Towns of Kinderhook and Stuyvesant (Columbia County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6079250 A 400-acre dairy operation with an additional 395 rented acres within the Towns of Kinderhook and Stuyvesant. This three-generation, family-run farm, which was granted a Dairy of Distinction Award in 1989, is in close proximity to several farms being protected in the county. The development rights will be held by the Columbia Land Conservancy through the two cooperating towns to help buffer the farm from several nearby subdivisions which have been approved for development over the past 10 years. Town of Macedon (Wayne County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1 ,1339954 Four farms that total 1, 250 acres, including the first farm settled in Macedon circa 1789, three farms are used for dairy production and one farm raises beef cattle. The four properties are located adjacent to or near 10 parcels of land totaling over 800 acres that were previously selected for protection under the program. Macedon is located in an area designated by the American Farmland Trust as being the eleventh most threatened farmland region in the U. S. Town of Marilla (Erie .County) . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3759000 60 eligible parcels comprising nearly 2, 700 acres of land on as many as 15 separate farms. The town, in conjunction with the Western New York Land Conservancy, will purchase the development rights for selected farms .that produce field crops, vegetables, dairy, nursery stock and hay. Urban sprawl is an urgent planning issue as the Town of Marilla is 11 miles east of the Buffalo City limits. Town of Mtnisink (Orange County) 00000 9989686 be eseseemen @ * * see $1 ,1289000 A 285-acre farm that supports a 90-cow dairy operation just outside of the hamlet of . Westtown. Hay and corn are produced on the farm for a. herd of 90 Holsteins. This farm, - in existence for more than 150 years, lies adjacent to a 100-acre town park Orange County is ranked among New Yorks fastest growing counties due to its proximity to New York City and its good public transportation systems. Town of New Scotland (Albany County) : . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6289670 A 317-acre orchard and farm market that produces apples, pears, berries, pumpkins, corn, sunflowers and assorted vegetables and hay. The farm borders two marshes and affords dramatic views of the Helderberg Escarpment. Since 1954, more than 75 percent of the land used for agricultural production within the town has been converted to other uses. Town of Pine Plains (Dutchess County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $8637000 A 183-acre dairy farm with 1,. 980 acres of additional rented land that borders the Village of Pine Plains where development pressure is emerging. This grant will allow for the protection of a highly visible family farm that has been active for nearly three-quarters of a century. Town of Preble (Cortland County) , , , , , , , to go , , , go 00 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , $864,675 A 174-acre dairy farm bordering a.farm with a conservation easement, Interstate 81 and near local industrial properties. . A railroad line runs through the property and makes this parcel attractive for commercial development. The farm also borders a prime trout stream and overlays a portion of the sole source aquifer system for the surrounding region. Town of Pittsford (Monroe County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6839000 Two farms with a combined acreage of 119 acres, both adjacent to a protected block of farmland. The farms produce field crops, vegetables and sheep, The town 's ongoing farmland protection initiative has helped identify 2, 700 acres of working farmland in the town and the town has acquired easements on over 1, 000 acres. Town of Riverhead (Suffolk County) . . . . . . . . . . so auto s & $ a $6009000 Eight farms that produce vegetables, potatoes and other crops are eligible for protection. The Town of Riverhead contains 25 percent of the remaining farmland within the County. The town may select which farms and how many acres to preserve. The intrinsic rural nature of the town creates.a; ,unique ambiance, which appeals to visitors who desire the experience of agricultural vistas, open spaces and agri-tourist attractions. Town of Saratoga (Saratoga County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * & see o . . . . . . : : . . : $2629500 Three adjacent family farms containing 150 acres, one of which is a u pick fruit operation with a farm market, and another which has been farmed for six generations, are adjacent to the Village of Schuylerville. With expanding development coming from the east and west, ,the town is experiencing substantial growth. The three parcels contain over one mile of road frontage, with a majority of this frontage located on Route 29. The properties are located just west of the Hudson River and their protection will also protect the important viewshed for the- adjacent 155 foot tall, nationally significant Saratoga Battle Monument. Town of Southampton (Suffolk County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 17200,000 - Four eligible farms that encompass 204 acres, used to produce a variety of crops such as grapes, corn, vegetables, strawberries' and horses. The town may select which and.how many acres to preserve. Preserving farmland helps protect the town 's water supply by promoting water recharge and preventing degradation of the town 's sole source aquifer. Town of Southold (Suffolk County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $600,000 Seven eligible farms that produce potatoes, vegetables, sod, grapes and hay. The town may select which farms and how many acres to preserve. The town has been a farming community since its founding over 350 years ago. A large and thriving agricultural community exists -in the town, and this grant will help maintain its long-term viability. Town of Stillwater (Saratoga County) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1609000 A 135-acre parcel used as part of a dairy operation. The farm is located across the road from the Saratoga National Historical Park and approximately one-quarter mile from the Saratoga National Cemetery. This parcel will serve as an effective buffer between the important wildlife areas within the park and encroaching residential development. The town will work with the American Farmland Trust and the landowner to complete this important farmland protection project. Suffolk County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1 ,1501000 51 eligible parcels, comprising 1, 891 acres which produce vegetables, horticultural crops, grapes, pasture, field crops, potatoes, wheat and horses. The county may select which parcels to preserve. The county is facing intense development pressure, which has already consumed a large portion of the open space in the four western towns. Ulster County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $647,469 Three farms, encompassing 448 acres of farmland, producing apples, hay, oats, wheat, field corn and cattle. All three properties have been farmed for over 100 years, one of which has been owned by the same family for over 160 years. Two of the farms are located next to orchards previously selected for protection under the program. These farms are located in view of the Sha*angunk Ridge, which contains over 40, 000 acres of protected lands within 100 miles of New Fork City. Local Farmland Protection Planning . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1285077 Dollars for county farmland protection planning efforts. ;TOTAL : $12,1849795 ATTACHMENT # 16 TOWN OF ITHACA REPORT OF BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2001 MONTH YEAR TO DATE TYPE OF PERMIT YEAR # OF PERMITS AMOUNT # AMOUNT SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED 2001 0 0 0 0 RESIDENCES 2000 0 0 0 0 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 2001 0 0 2 364,944 RESIDENCES 2000 1 3705000 2 5209000 2001 0 0 0 0 TWO FAMILY RESIDENCES 2000 2 220,000 2 220,000 2001 2 60,000 6 103,651 RENOVATIONS 2000 1 5 ,000 3 19,527 2001 1 30,000 1 307000 CONVERSIONS OF USE 2000 0 0 1 51600 2001 1 25,000 2 42,500 ADDITIONS TO FOOTPRINT 2000 2 38,000 2 38,000 2001 0 0 0 0 MULTIPLE RESIDENCES 2000 1 450,000 2 477,000 2001 0 0 3 493 ,000 BUSINESS 2000 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 AGRICULTURAL 2000 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 AINDUSTRIAL 2000 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 1 419000 EDUCATIONAL 2000 6 113059000 7 116617333 MISCELLANEOUS 2001 1 Replace roof of attached single family 3,300 2 139570 CONSTRUCTION 2000 14 32,906 12 2,8017367 TOTAL NUMBER OF 2001 5 118,300 17 1 ,088,665 PERMITS ISSUED 2000 17 2,420,906 31 5,742,827 TOTAL FEES 2001 5 290 17 2,055 RECEIVED 12000 17 3 ,965 31 6,665 Date Prepared: April 2, 2001 Dani L. Holford Building/Zoning Department Secretary 2 TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY ISSUED THIS MONTH - 16 I . Alumni Field at Tower Road (CU) - lighting, bleachers, and decorative wall - temporary. 1441 Slaterville Road - existing two-family home. 3 . 101 Dates Drive (CMC) - catheterization lab. 4. 197 Christopher Lane - remodel kitchen. 5 . 229 Stone Quarry Road - residential building addition - temporary. 6. 126 Pine Tree Road - new rear deck. 7. 301 Maple Avenue (Maplewood Apartments) - parking lot improvements. 8 . 103 Longview Drive - remodel kitchen. 9. 23 Chase Lane - family room addition ( IY x 19' 6"). 10. 237 Troy Road - building renovations. 11 . 112 Halcyon Hill Road - residential elevator and shaft. 12. 311 Winthrop Drive - renovate two bathrooms. 13 . 131 Lexington Drive - 16' x 32' indoor inground swimming pool. 14. 317 Warren Road - interior building renovations to three bathrooms. 15. 197 Bostwick Road ( 1st Assembly of God Church) - new church - temporary. 16. 165 East King Road - pole barn. TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY YEAR TO DATE, 2001 - 50 TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY YEAR TO DATE, 2000 - 40 INQUIRIES/COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED THIS MONTH - 6 I . 110 Juniper Drive - building code - pending. 2. Summerhill Lane - burning - abated. 3 . 1235 Trumansburg Road - property maintenance - pending. 4. 1469 Trumansburg Road - property maintenance - pending. 5 . 221 Dubois Road - property maintenance - pending. 6. 370 East King Road - building code - pending. From February 1 . 1442 Hanshaw Road - noise - abated. From January 2000 : 1 . 213 North Tioga Street (Post Office) - building code - pending. From December 2000: I . 172 Calkins Road - property maintenance - pending. From February 1998 : I . 803 Coddington Road - building code (illegal apartment) (apartment vacant) - abated. From May 1995 : I . 1 152 Danby Road - zoning and building code - legal action pending. TOTAL COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED YEAR TO DATE, 2001 - 9 TOTAL COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED YEAR TO DATE, 2000 - 10 TOTAL FIELD VISITS THIS MONTH - 62 Uniform Building Code - 34 Local Law and Zoning Inspections - 16 Fire Safety - 6 (2 apartments [8 units], 2 day care, 1 church, 1 museum) 3 Fire Safety Reinspections - 5 ( 1 church, I restaurant, 1 school, 1 business, 1 senior apartment) ire/Emergency Occurrences - 1 (college dorm - trash can) ire Occurrence Reinspections - 0 OTAL FIELD VISITS YEAR TO DATE, 2001 - 202 TOTAL FIELD VISITS YEAR TO DATE, 2000 - 292 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS THIS MONTH - ( Ides) - 3 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS YEAR TO DATE, 2001 - 5 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS YEAR TO DATE, 2000 - 4 "ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS I MEETING, 2 CASES, l ADJOURNED CASE, AGENDA ATTACHED TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, MARCH 19, 2001 7 : 00 P.M. By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Monday, March 19, 2001 , in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Tioga Street Entrance, Ithaca, N.Y. , COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P .M. , on the following matters : APPEAL of Richard Walker, Owner/Appellant, George R. Van Valen, Agent, requesting a special approval from the , �a�}e�Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII, Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to move more than 2,500 cubic yards of fill material, located near 999 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47-2-6. 5 , Residence District R-30 and also within the Six Mile Creek Conservation Zone. APPEAL of Rocco Lucente, Owner/Appellant, Donald Miller, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 14 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a two-family home with a rear yard setback of 28 ± feet (30 foot setback required), located at 107 Briarwood Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 70- 10-32, Residence District R- 15 . ADJOURNED APPEAL (FROM FEBRUARY 26, 200 1 ) of Margaret Rumsey, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 18 and 19, and Article XIII, Section 68 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to maintain a Bed and Breakfast operation, with up to ten guests in a single-family residence and up to four guests in a detached second dwelling unit at 110 East Buttermilk Falls Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 38- 1 -2, Residence District R-30. An approval was granted on January 18, 1984 to permit up to eight guests in one residence only. Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7 : 00 p.m. , and said place, hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual or hearing impairments or other special needs, as appropriate, will be provided with assistance, as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Andrew S . Frost Director of Building and Zoning 273 - 1783 Dated : March 7 , 2001 Published : March 14 , 2001 p 0 m c C C 3 b m D —I v n r z A Co z a a r r � W c _ v N 0 3 o v o z ° n o o g o � n 0 0 c a z ° W ° r o 0 0 o r > v� p� p °° °o °o o N r N z � e N N ° ° z 0 00 00 ° o U' l®1 J - A 00 R7 77 ° ° O O O ' W W r y C S2 ICI z ►71 O tlj o � 0 0 - 0 Z J n J to z 3 o v, ° N O 0 W n O C J > n y Icy C:) zai - � w C:) I-] C) o NJ Fj C ° O Oc Z 0 3 a 3 rn o o O o v� 0 z ° ° o o °o z 0 00 lT7 [s7 cc::)) a 3 ° Z c o °o ° C] °° °o o °o A O N N A - r p A A J r O 00 00 Vj 00 00 O O ATTACHMENT # 17 Town Board Meeting 4/09/2001 Agenda Item Number 23 (f) Human Resources Report for March Personnel Committee : See attached minutes from the January meeting . In March the committee discussed the Town ' s Prescription Safety Glasss Program and made a recommendation for the Town Board . Safety Committee : The committee began discussion of a Transitional Duty Program . This program would allow the Town to encourage physician to return employees to work on a restricted basis instead of waiting until they can come back on full duty . This program is a benefit for the Town , because it would help lower the lost days and the amount that workers' compensation has to pay the employee for being out of work . It helps the employee because they are staying in the working cycle instead of being home and less physically active . Training and Development: 4 employees attended the first of many supervisory classes . They attended the session entitled " The Write Stuff' , which allowed the participants to ask about grammatical problems , i . e . , who-whom , I -me , etc . The next session will be in May , which is entitled " Understanding Supervisory Communication " . Personnel — Civil Service : Cathy and I met with the Highway crew to listen to their concerns about the wage scale and how far they are falling behind other municipalities . I have continued the work on the job classification criteria and point scale . Commercial Insurance : Nothing to report. Workers ' Compensation : See attached loss run report for the past 4 years . Disability Insurance : Nothing to report . Life Insurance : The employees have all received the life insurance enrollment packets . Charlie Gibson , Ithaca Agency, and I held meetings at all locations to explain the program . We are using June 1St as a target effective date . Submitted By : Judith C . Drake , PHR Human Resources Specialist Final Final Final Town of Ithaca Personnel Committee Meeting January 24, 2001 12 : 00 noon At the regular meeting of the Personnel Committee for the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County, New York held at the Town Hall , 215 N . Tioga St. , Ithaca , New York, there were present: Members : Catherine Valentino , Town Supervisor; William Lesser, Councilman ; Ed Conley, Councilman ; Dani Holford , Senior Typist; Larry Salmi , Heavy Equipment Operator. Staff : Judith Drake , Human Resources Specialist. Others : Paul Tunison , General Manager, SCLIWC ; Larry Parlett, Administrative Manager, SCLIWC . Call to order: 12 : 10 noon . Persons to be heard : None . Agenda Item #2 : Review of minutes of the November 8 2000 meeting . Approved . Agenda Item #3 : Persons to be heard . Mrs . Holford said that there were two things to bring up . 1 . Could employees be involved in the State contract to buy computers? Committee members thought an employee purchasing through State contract is illegal . Mrs . Drake will look into it. 2 . Review of the Jury Duty policy. Mrs . Holford is losing personal time because of travel to Waterloo . Mrs . Drake read the policy as it is stated in the Personnel Manual . After discussion the Committee thought the wording allowed payment for travel to and from court as well as payment for work hours . Agenda Item #4 : Review of Percentages for Part-time employees . The Committee reviewed the printed handout that explained the percentages for Health Insurance for part-time employees (copy attached ) . The members said the percentages were fair, and approved them . The Town Supervisor Review Committee will review the statement in the insurance paragraph , concerning elected officials so it might change after that meeting . Agenda Item #5 : Review Quote for Met Life buy up Options The Committee reviewed a quote by the Town insurance agent. The Town of Ithaca would pay the premium but the employee has the option of adding insurance for family members at a reduced amount of insurance . No 1 Final Final Final medical examination is necessary. The cost to the employer for $25 , 000 coverage would be $90 per employee for a year. The total being $5 , 850 per year. The employee would pay for any additional insurance for family members . The Committee voted unanimously to send the proposal on to the Bolton Point Commission and to the Town of Ithaca Town Board in February. Agenda Item #6 : Approve Meeting Dates for 2001 . After discussion the Committee approved the list of meeting dates as proposed . (Attached ) . Agenda Item #7 : Other. Mrs . Drake asked about the review of Personnel Manual by Bolton Point. Mr. Tunison stated he is almost finished with the review. As yet he has not received comments by Bolton Point employees . Safety Glasses: Mrs . Drake read the policy concerning the requirement that certain employees wear safety glasses or goggles . The Town now pays $55 at Ithaca Cayuga Optical for the glasses . Costs have risen sharply and the $55 only covers less than half of the charge . The Committee discussed what constitutes the necessity of wearing Safety glasses . Mrs . Valentino suggested that whatever fee is paid , the policy should state that the glasses should meet OSHA standards . The Committee asked Mrs . Drake to research the cost of the glasses versus paying a flat fee . Also, the Safety Committee will discuss the policy at their meeting . Long-term Disability: Mrs . Drake said that she has added the Long-term Disability Insurance paragraph to the Insurance Section of the Personnel Manual . The Committee suggested that the sentence "Coverage continues until the employee returns to some form of work or age 65" be changed to "Coverage continues until the employee returns to some form of work or is covered by Social Security Disability" . Meeting adjourned : 1 : 00 p . m . 2 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT 10 . ) INSURANCE Refer to the Human Resources /Administration Office for information about the health and dental insurance plans , benefits and the cost to employees . New employees are given an opportunity to elect insurance with coverage effective on the date of hire . The Town/Commission will not pay any benefits directly. Only benefits paid by the insurance carrier are available to employees . The Town/Commission reserves the right, however, to change the insurance carrier and , in conjunction with such change , to alter the level of benefits that may be provided . A) HEALTH INSURANCE : Health insurance coverage is offered to all full time , part time , and long-term temporary full-time employees , (works more than 6 months) . Employees shall pay the monthly premium based on the following basis for either family or individual coverage . Employee Works : Employee Pays : Town Pays : Less than 18 3% hours 100% of premium 0% of premium 18 % hours but less than 25 hours 50% of premium 50% of premium 25 hours but less than 35 hours 20% of premium 80% of premium 35 hours or more 0% of premium 100% of premium Elected officials have the option to enroll in the plan , but must pay 50% of the monthly premiums . B) DENTAL INSURANCE : Dental insurance is offered to all employees , including elected officials , but not including short term temporary employees . All employees opting for dental insurance shall pay 100% of the family or individual premiums . 11 .) COBRA (Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985) COBRA mandates that all employees and their dependents are offered the option of continuing their membership , for a limited time , in the group health and or dental insurance plan to which they belonged . Spouses and dependents are also offered COBRA in other instances such as divorce , death of spouse , reduction in spouse's employment hours , etc. Dependent children can elect to continue coverage in the group plan when they no longer meet the eligibility requirements of their parent's contract Under COBRA , the person electing to continue coverage is required to pay 100% of the health premium and is normally not eligible to continue this coverage if he or she becomes a member in another group insurance plan . Payment of premiums are due by the 20th of the month prior to coverage , and the Town reserves the right to cancel any person 's coverage with accounts 60 days or more past due . Refer to the Human Resources Office for further information regarding continuation of health and or dental insurance coverage . See exhibit Jfor COBRA information sheet. 37 y u o o 0 0 O 11 J m O W H n \ \ < \ y n o o m o C n r r m u \ \ \ I r N C7 N ro II %D O M O II %D O O ;D n .D o O II D O H £ u \ \ O Z 11 O O N r r & O 11 \ \ '+'J II N N II O O co H 11 O O It o r I n n n y u u n r n o u N II P II I II u n it I n it u n n I u a n u 1 n n u it n u u n u f] y 3 y o It to to to C n n 3 trop � ��Uf Y vl iiz r a to M Y 3 (] 3 G] to 11 orb tm*� yMM n ro m ?u to K x In n a r K d O 0 � � £g H n O r Or Z o m ro n O N z m n rotn O Ntn n b M TJ C) \ M 3 ii H N r M n o %D 3 o m t0 n t) r o t*] m n H N 11 O ,ro It - - b r M lP N W O N ro J 0 u O J N O O w u n z cn r y w n J m H to ID u �D o m to I it It u u u u it In u to ro H - y M o n o K x & II � M t%9 It z o n o o to o n o o Cl) M u u n u n u O n r u O II J N Y! m r u J W UI W it P m In it N 11 J to to G] It f II i II i ( N It to l s _ i s m u 11 �j o m to u • • to 90 D to m M r 3 0 a r J ATTACHMENT # 18 0FIp _ �9 TOWN OF ITHACA �, 1B2' �� 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET , ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 TOWN CLERK 273-1721 HIGHWAY 273- 1656 PARKS 273-8035 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273- 1747 ZONING 273- 1783 FAX (607) 273- 1704 Agenda item : 23h NetworklRecord Specialist Report for Town Board Meeting April 9, 2001 Web site: Web site database design proposals will be evaluated through the Records Management Advisory Board meeting next week. A web site constructed with databases would provide a framework for Town staff to update the site on our own. Network: Memory upgrades to Town Hall PCs have been completed. Compaq Deskpro 2000 and 4000 PCs are being replaced this month as part of the Town's equipment rotation schedule. ArcView 3 .2 software licenses will be purchased this month for the Planning, Engineer, Zoning and Highway Departments. These purchases will ensure that the Town is using the correct number of legal versions of this application. Records Management Please see Town Clerk's report. Respectfully submitted, Lisa B . Titti Network/Record Specialist ATTACHMENT # 19 0 3 S' FOR THE APRIL 5 , 2001 COMMISSION PACKET 1 - PROPOSED LEGISLATION A AN ACT TO AMEND THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW TO AUTHORIZE MUNICIPALITIES IN TOMPKINS COUNTY TO INCLUDE CORNELL UNIVERSITY AS A MEMBER OF A GOVERNING BOARD CREATED BY INTERMUNICIPAL AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF WATER TREATMENT PLANTS AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows : Section 1 . The general municipal law is amended by adding a new section 119-oo- 1 to read as follows : § 119-oo- 1 . Inclusion of Cornell University as a member of the governing body of an entity created by intermunicipal agreement to construct and operate water treatment plants and water distribution systems in or adjoining the County of Tompkins . 1 . Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the municipalities in or adjoining the County of Tompkins, including but not limited to the Towns of Ithaca, Dryden, and Lansing, the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing, and. the City of Ithaca, and Cornell University may jointly provide for water services in the municipalities in and adjoining Tompkins County and the water districts located within the municipalities in or adjoining Tompkins County. 2 . In addition to the powers set forth in Articles 5 -13 and 5-G of the general municipal law , the municipalities in or adjoining the County of Tompkins and water districts within such municipalities , shall have the power to, jointly with Cornell University (a) Contract, acquire, finance, and sell common water supplies ; (b) Construct , operate, maintain , lease, sell , and otherwise deal in and supervise water intakes , water treatment plants , water lines , pumps , storage facilities , distribution facilities , and all other activities normally or reasonably related to the provision of such services which municipalities individually are authorized to undertake ; (c) Create, continue, maintain and modify by agreement a governing body to supervise and operate such facilities which governing body may be made up of representatives from the participating municipalities and representatives from Cornell University ; and (d) Issue debt instruments pursuant to the provisions of the local finance law and in accordance with the provisions of the general municipal law for the Lp\my documents\temp\proposed legislation re cu .doc FOR THE APRIL 5 , 2001 COMMISSION PACKET purposes of financing the construction , modification or improvement of any of such water treatment and supply facilities . 3 . The inclusion of Cornell University as a party to any such agreement and as a joint debtor on any financing issued jointly by the municipalities and Cornell University, and the . inclusion of any representatives of Cornell University as members of any governing body, shall not be deemed to change the characterization of such body as a municipal body with all of the benefits , liabilities, immunities , and responsibilities of a municipal body, nor prevent the municipalities from issuing joint indebtedness with Cornell University pursuant to the provisions of the local finance law in the same manner and with the same effect as would exist if Cornell University were not a party to such agreement or indebtedness . 4 . The powers granted by this section shall be in addition to and not in substitution of any other powers granted to the municipalities in or adjoining Tompkins County and Cornell University to provide water services , including, without limitation, the power to jointly contract for obtaining and operating such services pursuant to articles 5 -B and 5 -G of the general municipal law and the power to issue joint indebtedness with respect to such facilities pursuant to such articles of the general municipal law and the local finance law . Section 2 . This act shall take effect immediately. Lp\my clocuments\temp\proposed legislation re cu .doc