HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CA-2013-07-01CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. July 24, 2013
PRESENT:
Alderperson Proulx — Chair
Alderpersons (4): Brock, Clairborne, Fleming, Kerslick
OTHERS PRESENT:
Asst City Attorney — Flaherty
Asst Superintendent — Whitney
Chief Inspector of Plumbing — Albanese
Director of Information Technology — Twardokus
Director of Planning - Cornish
GIAC Director — Fort
Director of Engineering - West
Controller - Thayer
Deputy Controller — Andrew
Human Resources Director — Michell -Nunn
Alderpersons — Dotson and Murtaugh
IURA Executive Director - Bohn
1. Call to Order
1.1 Agenda Review: None.
1.2 Review /Approval of Minutes: Alderperson Brock made a motion to approve the minutes, with
corrections, from the June 26, 2013 meeting of the City Administration Committee. Seconded
by Alderperson Kerslick. Motion carried 4 -1. (Alderperson Fleming was absent from the
vote.)
(Alderperson Fleming arrived at 6:02 p.m.)
1.3 Statements from the Public
Cindy Kramer, of Ithaca, spoke about the lease agreement the City has with Project Growing
Hope (PGH). She talked about the vision and values of PGH and said that PHG's decisions
are made on these. She stated that the environment is sustained and enhanced by the
Community Gardens. Ms. Kramer encouraged the City to move forward with solidifying the
agreement with PGH.
Megan Gregory, of Ithaca, is a graduate student at Cornell University. She is a member of the
Community Gardens. At its current site, the Community Gardens is easily accessible. This is
a place where people of different backgrounds meet and get to know each other.
Ron Lisa, of Ithaca, spoke about the community aspect of the Community Gardens. People
from different communities make use of the Gardens. The Gardens have workshops where
people learn from each other and make friends. It is a treasure for the City of Ithaca.
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 2
Sheryl Swink, of Ithaca, gave some history about the Community Gardens and encouraged the
City to renew its lease with PGH.
Peter Hyde, of Ithaca, has been a member of the Community Gardens for ten (10) years. One
reason he lives downtown is because of the easy accessibility to the Community Gardens. If
the Gardens is moved or become obsolete, he would reconsider his living arrangements.
Glen Robertson, of Caroline, works at Challenge Industries with a small group of adults who
are members of the Community Gardens. The Gardens is centrally located for this group. He
encouraged the City renew the lease with PGH.
Joel Fredell, of Ithaca, spoke about the lease and its early termination clause.
Doug Dylla, of Ithaca, read a letter from former Mayor Carolyn Peterson about keeping the
Community Gardens in its current location.
Dan Hoffman, of Ithaca, spoke about his term on Common Council when the City signed the
lease with PGH and gave some history on the lease with the Community Gardens.
John Graves, of Ithaca, talked about the lease renewal agreement and stated that NYSEG has
the right to put lights and bury lines on this property. Mr. Graves spoke against the renewal of
the lease.
Cythnia Yahn, of Ithaca, spoke about the renewal clause for the Community Gardens.
Zach Sims, of Enfield, talked about a program he oversees that works with kids. This group of
kids participates in the Community Gardens. Mr. Sims talked about the experiences of these
kids, who ranged from ages 8 -15 years. This program helps keep kids out of the foster system
and helps them be able to take fresh food home to their families. He encouraged the City to
have more discussions on this item and to allow the community more input into the process.
Ronda Porras, of Ithaca, supports the Community Gardens. Ms. Porras encouraged the City
to consider renewing the lease.
1.4 Statements from Employ. None.
1.5 Council Response
Chairperson Proulx read into the minutes a letter from attorney William J. Foster IV and
Building Links, Inc. President Cynthia Yahn about the lease with Project Growing Hope.
2. Standing Sub - Committee and Staff Reports
2.1 Diversity Initiatives — Information Technology
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 3
IT Director Duane Twardokus distributed and presented his Diversity and Inclusion report to
the Committee. After his report, Mr. Twardokus was asked about challenges that he has had
to address. One challenge is not being able to offer a paid internship in the IT Department.
Mr. Twardokus stated that since kids need money to help out their families, the City could have
a paid internship program.
Alderperson Clairborne thanked Mr. Twardokus for having an internship program in the IT
Department. Mr. Clairborne asked what Mr. Twardokus needed to help get the internship
program to work. Mr. Twardokus responded that funding would be needed to get the
internship program to work.
HR Director Michell -Nunn suggested that Mr. Twardokus connect with Workforce Development
for funding.
The Committee thanked Mr. Twardokus for his report.
3. City Administration, Human Resources, and Policy
3.1 Discussion on Communitv Gardens
A discussion took place about the Community Gardens. Sheryl Swink, Joel Fredell, IURA
Executive Director Nels Bohn, Planning Director JoAnn Cornish, Assistant City Attorney Krin
Flaherty and Cynthia Yahn were asked to join in the discussion.
After discussion, Chairperson Proulx stated that, in summary, the Committee would need to
decide on whether or not to renew the lease with Project Growing Hope (PGH). If the lease is
renewed, what conditions should be included in the lease? The City Administration Committee
will ask the Mayor and the City Attorney to give them the criterion, which may include by not be
limited to:
• Simplifying the early termination clause /establishing ground rules
• Increasing the rent in the new lease
• Creating a timeline for PGH
• Scheduling a meeting that included all interested parties
• Not binding the hands of future Common Council members
The City Attorney's Office will take and review the lease with the Planning Department. They
will return in August for an update on the lease.
3.2 Approval of NYSEG Easement Parcel
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick. Seconded by Alderperson Brock.
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns a parcel of land, 55. -1 -1, bordering Route 79 (Slaterville
Road), which houses a water intake plant integral to the City's plan to increase the capacity of
its water treatment facilities, and
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 4
WHEREAS, the water intake plant requires a connection to the electrical system operated by
New York State Electric & Gas Corporation ( NYSEG), and
WHEREAS, NYSEG, in order to supply the plant with power, must expand its infrastructure by
installing a transformer on the City's property, and
WHEREAS, NYSEG has submitted to the City an agreement that would grant it a permanent
easement and right of way to install and maintain said transformer and its fifteen (15) feet by
fifteen (15) feet square concrete base on the City's land, to be located approximately 1200 feet
south of Route 79, and
WHEREAS, installation of the transformer will cost $1880, which has been included in the
Council- approved budget for the water system expansion, be it therefore
RESOLVED, That Common Council grants the permanent easement requested by NYSEG so
that the City may continue with the expansion of its water system, and authorizes and directs
the Mayor to sign the necessary documents.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Passed unanimously.
4. Finance, Budget and Appropriations
4.1 IURA - Restore NY3, Downtown Commons Upper Story Housing, Assign Loan of Restore NY
funds to ItalThai LLC from the City of Ithaca to the IURA
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick. Seconded by Alderperson Clairborne.
WHEREAS, ItalThai LLC, the owner of the Mia restaurant building (AKA the Plantation
Building) requests that the City assign its $900,000 Restore NY loan to IthalThai LLC to the
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA), and
WHEREAS, on May 1, 2013, the IURA recommended that the City assign its Restore NY loan
to ItalThai LLC to the IURA to administer, and
WHEREAS, in 2009 the City of Ithaca (City) received a grant award of $1.15 million from the
Empire State Development Corporation through the Restore NY program to complete upper
story redevelopment of the Plantation Building and the Petrune building (located at 126 -128
and 130 -132 E. MLK /E. State Street), located within the urban renewal project boundary area.
WHEREAS, $900,000 of assistance was earmarked to ItalThai, LLC (managing member Sunit
"Lex" Chutintaranond) in the form of a grant to fill a financial gap in a proposed $2.5 million
redevelopment of the Plantation building at 130 -132 E. MLK Street, and
WHEREAS, the City authorized the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) to administer and
implement the Restore NY3 grant, and
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 5
WHEREAS, a City /ItalThai LLC Restore NY pass through grant agreement was developed to
provide for payment of a $900,000 grant to ItalThai LLC upon completion of the project, which
agreement was executed by the City on January 10, 2011, and
WHEREAS, in 2011 specialized tax credit legal counsel, Cannon, Heyman & Weiss, informed
ItalThai LLC that injecting Restore NY3 funding from the City into the project as a grant would
reduce the eligible tax basis of the project thereby decreasing the amount of tax credits
available to investors and resulting in a financial gap for the project, and
WHEREAS, a critical component of the financing plan for the $2.5 million project was to
leverage federal and state historic tax credits generated by the project into investor equity of
over $550,000, and
WHEREAS, injecting Restore NY3 financial assistance into the project in the form of a loan
does not reduce the eligible tax basis, and
WHEREAS, as the project financing relied on attracting at least $550,000 in equity through
historic tax credits, ItalThai LLC did not execute the Restore NY pass through grant agreement
and requested that Restore NY funding from the City be provided in the form of a $900,000
loan at 0% interest with no payments due until the end of a 30 -year loan term as a means to
maximize equity attracted through historic tax credits, and
WHEREAS, on April 25, 2011 the City and ItalThai LLC executed an agreement to loan
$900,000 in grant funds awarded to the City of Ithaca to ItalThai LLC, which loan is secured by
a mortgage on the project property, and
WHEREAS, at that time, ItalThai LLC indicated they intended to seek City approval in the
future to forgive this loan upon satisfactory completion of the project in recognition of the
project's public benefits and that the City had originally agreed to provide Restore NY3 funds in
the form of a grant to the developer, and
WHEREAS, the mixed -use project has been successfully completed with a new ground floor
restaurant, 16 FTE new living wage jobs created, 1,100 SF of office space, and 8 new housing
units created of which two are occupied by low -and moderate - income households at affordable
rents, and
WHEREAS, both the Restore NY and federal and state historic tax credit programs have
minimum 5 -year compliance periods and the Restore NY program includes a "clawback"
provision requiring repayment of grant funds to NYS in the event the project property is sold in
the first 5 years, and
WHEREAS, total project debt on the Plantation Building is approximately $1.7 million as of
2013, which exceeds the appraised value of the finished project, thereby impeding ItalThai's
capacity to refinance and consolidate existing debt or take out new line -of- credit or term debt,
and
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 6
WHEREAS, the Restore NY loan, as currently structured, creates a significant obstacle to the
ItalThai LLC financing repairs and building improvements during the 30 -year term of the
Restore NY3 loan, and
WHEREAS, the IURA developed the Restore NY3 funding application, administered the
Restore NY3 funds, loaned additional funds to the project to close financing gaps, regularly
monitors the project and manages a loan portfolio of over $4 million, and
WHEREAS, the IURA is better positioned than the City to administer the Restore NY3 loan
and analyze future requests to subordinate the mortgage to new financing, modify collateral
requirements and possibly forgive the loan to financially stabilize the project and facilitate
future reinvestment in the property while ensuring that not more than a reasonable financial
return is earned on the owner's equity investment, and
WHEREAS, any assignment of the loan would transfer liability for compliance with regulatory
requirements, including the "clawback" provisions of the Restore NY3 program, to the IURA,
and
WHEREAS, Section 503 -a of GML authorizes assignment of the Restore NY3 loan from the
City to the IURA, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca assign to the IURA the $900,000 Restore NY3 loan to
ItalThai LLC, for the Plantation Building project located at 130 -132 E. MLK Jr. /E. State Street,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor, subject to review by the City Attorney, is authorized to execute
any agreement to assign the loan to the IURA, and be it further
RESOLVED, That such assignment agreement with the IURA require the IURA to pay over to
the City any net proceeds received from the loan, and be it further
RESOLVED, That any out -of- pocket costs of the City to assign this loan shall be paid by
ItalThai LLC.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Passed unanimously.
4.2 Authorization of Transportation Enhancement Program (TEP) Application
Moved by Alderperson Brock. Seconded by Alderperson Clairborne.
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation has noticed the availability of
the federal Transportation Enhancement Program, and
WHEREAS, on June 2013 the Board of Public Works considered various projects that would
be eligible for such funding and recommended a project for the West Martin Luther King
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 7
Jr. /West State Street corridor between Floral Avenue and Taughannock Boulevard, which is
eligible for funding under Title 23 U.S. Code, as amended and
WHEREAS, enhanced pedestrian and bicycle accommodations in this corridor would help
connect the West Hill and West End neighborhoods to the rest of the City's commercial,
recreational, natural, educational, and residential destinations, and
WHEREAS, corridor enhancements would also help connect the rest of the City to the
burgeoning non - motorized circulation system in and among the city's various waterfront
districts for residents and visitors alike, including the recent Floral Avenue trail, the Cayuga
Waterfront Trail, and the Black Diamond Trail, and
WHEREAS, Common Council is interested in applying for a Transportation Enhancement
Program grant in order to design and construct enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities in
this corridor; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Mayor of the City of Ithaca, is hereby authorized and directed to submit
an application for funding to the New York State Department of Transportation in accordance
with the provisions of the Transportation Enhancement Program, in a amount not to exceed
$750,000, and upon approval of said request to enter into and execute a project agreement
with the State for such financial assistance to the City of Ithaca for design, right -of -way
acquisition, construction and construction inspection of a project to enhance pedestrian and
bicycle accommodations in the West Martin Luther King Jr. /West State Street corridor from
Floral Avenue to Taughannock Boulevard, and be it further
RESOLVED, That contingent upon award of the Transportation Enhancement Program funds,
the Common Council hereby authorizes the establishment of Capital Project #790 to pay in the
first instance 100% of the federal and non - federal share of the cost of all work for the Project;
and be it further
RESOLVED, That contingent upon award of the TEP funds, the sum not to exceed $750,000 is
hereby appropriated from serial bonds and made available to cover the cost of participation in
the above Project in the first instance; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the total project cost shall not exceed $750,000 with the understanding that
the breakdown of funds to be approximately $600,000 in federal Transportation Enhancement
Program funds, and $150,000 in City of Ithaca serial bond financing, to be administered by the
Superintendent of Public Works, and be it further
RESOLVED, That in the event the full federal and non - federal share costs of the project
exceeds the amount appropriated above, the City of Ithaca Common Council shall convene as
soon as possible to appropriate said excess amount immediately upon the notification by the
NYSDOT thereof; and be it further
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 8
RESOLVED, That the Mayor of the City of Ithaca be and is hereby authorized to execute all
necessary Agreements, and that the Superintendent of Public Works is hereby authorized to
execute all certifications or reimbursement requests for Federal Aid and /or Multi -Modal
Program Funding on behalf of the City of Ithaca with NYSDOT in connection with the
advancement or approval of the Project and providing for the administration of the Project and
the municipality's first instance funding of project costs and permanent funding of the local
share of federal -aid and all Project costs that are not so eligible; and be it further
RESOLVED, That a certified copy of this resolution be filed with the New York State
Commissioner of Transportation by attaching it to any necessary Agreement in connection with
the Project; and be it further
RESOLVED, That this Resolution shall take effect immediately.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Passed unanimously.
4.3 An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 146 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled "Building
Code Enforcement" Article 4, entitled "Plumbing ", Section 146 -30 entitled "Permits, C. Fees"
Moved by Alderperson Brock. Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick.
WHEREAS, Plumbing Permit Fees are a necessary and reasonable cost to the public for the
local administration and enforcement of public health and sanitation laws required by State
regulations, and
WHEREAS, it is a necessary function of government to assess public service activities from
time to time to determine the actual cost to the community and to establish reasonable fees for
the proper discharge of said public services, and
WHEREAS, the current Plumbing Permit Fee structure for the City of Ithaca is significantly
lower than the surrounding area, owing mostly to the fact that these fees have not been
changed in over 40 years, and
WHEREAS, it is desirable to have a more accurate cost sharing of plumbing review and
inspection services in the form of Plumbing Permit Fees for end users who are the primary
recipient of those services than to rely on rate payer revenues, now therefore
ORDINANCE 2013-
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows:
Section 1:
Chapter 146, Building Code Enforcement, Article 4, Plumbing, Section 146 -30 Permits, C.
Fees shall be amended by adding enumeration (1) as follows:
(1) City of Ithaca Plumbing Permit Fee Schedule
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 9
New construction
• Single Family Residences: $50 application fee plus $5 per fixture
• Multiple Residences 2 -10 units: $100 application fee plus $ 5 per fixture
• Multiple Residences 11 -20 units: $250 application fee plus $5 per fixture
• Multiple Residences 21 units or more: $500 application fee plus $5 per fixture
• Commercial or Other Plumbing work under $25,000: $100 application fee plus $10 per
fixture.
• Commercial or Other Plumbing work between $25,000 to $100,000: $250 application fee
plus $10 per fixture.
• Commercial or Other Plumbing work between $100,000 to $500,000: $500 application fee
plus $10 per fixture.
• Commercial or Other Plumbing work over $500,000: $750 application fee plus $10 per
fixture.
Renovations and Additions:
Single Family Residences: $25 application fee plus $5 per fixture
Multiple Residences: $100 application fee plus $ 5 per fixture
Commercial or Other Plumbing work: $100 application fee plus $10 per fixture.
Partial Service Users
All permit fees for work conducted on premises not connected both to City water and City
sewer service or not anticipated to be connected both to City water and City sewer service
once connected to any water or sewer service shall be based on the City of Ithaca Plumbing
Permit Fee Schedule for Commercial or Other Plumbing work plus 15 percent of the total
therein specified.
Section 2. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this
local law. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this local law is
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion.
Section 3. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with
law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Legislative Intent
The revenues collected by the City through the regular issuances of water and sewer bills
establish the budget and spending allowances of the Water and Sewer Division. The office of
the Plumbing Inspector is an expenditure within that Division. Although plumbing permit fees
do contribute to the Water and Sewer revenues, 95% of the expenditures required for
plumbing services are now covered by rate payer revenues. It is the intension of this legislation
to shift more of that cost onto the primary user of the service, specifically, the permit holder in
the form of plumbing permit fees that more accurately reflect the actual cost to the City to
provide plumbing review, inspection and enforcement.
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 10
This proposed Plumbing Permit Fee structure will bring our rates in line with the rates of other
jurisdictions in our area while providing a more equitable cost sharing solution between the
rate payers and permit holders. A planned "phase -in" of all rates seems impractical and
counterproductive due to the historically low existing rates.
Sliding Scale.
The fee schedule keeps the Single Family Residential permits at a reasonable cost at
somewhere in the $30 -$40 range for most work while providing a "sliding scale" for all other
types of construction. The increases in the fees are proportional to the amount of review that
is associated with more complicated or compound plumbing construction (multiple types, high
rises, mixed uses). The issues that necessitate a higher degree of plan review such as: fire
flows, large meter sizing, valve placements, equipment locations, backflow requirements,
grease trap sizing, utility service sizing and entrance coordination, storm water regulations,
sanitary discharge requirements and others, qualify the higher fees.
Within the "sliding scale" fees there are two general categories of Multiple Residence and
Commercial. In the Multiple Residence fees, the application cost increase with the number of
units and reflects the increased administrative effort needed to approve plans and
specifications, coordinate with department personnel and resources, and to execute the
requirements for issuing the permit. The fixture fees are universal for multiple residence
applications and represent the costs associated with inspections and the administration of the
actual construction phase.
Commercial and Other
The Commercial or Other (Academic, Industrial, etc) application fees are similar to the Multiple
Residences fees accept that, instead of units, the fee is based on the dollar value of the
plumbing work (Actual Total of Labor and Material). Our Building Department uses a similar
method of total construction cost to determine the Building Permit fee. The actual formulas
may vary but the concept and premise are the same. The dollar value is used to represent the
amount of plumbing work or equipment being installed. The greater the dollar value, the
greater the administrative review. Fixture fees are higher but universal within the category and
represent the costs associated with inspections and the administration of the actual
construction phase. The higher fixture costs associated with commercial plumbing equipment
is justified in that there can be found in these types of fixtures more specialized and unique
installation requirements than standard household plumbing. Here the gamut extends beyond
bathrooms and kitchens to plumbing items designed for other Industries. Examples are:
cooling towers and chillers, steam and hot water boilers, commercial dishwashers, chemical
rinse dispensers, sterilizers, surgery tables, dental aspirator, medical vacuum /water systems,
fume hoods, lab sinks, wok stoves, landscape irrigation systems, grease and sediment
interceptors, sewage ejectors, water filtration systems, make -up water for fan /coil systems,
etc... Commercial plumbing fixtures will therefore require more effort and knowledge of code
and manufacturers requirements than fixtures associated with Multiple Residences.
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 11
Plumbina Permit Fees for Dartial service users within the Citv of Ithaca
Water and Sewer revenues make up the largest funding source for plumbing inspection
services. This revenue stream is generated by quarterly billings for water usage (metered
water) and sewer charges based on water consumption. However, not all properties within the
City take both water and sewer from the City. These customers are identified herein as "partial"
service users since the City bills them for water only or for sewer only and, as such, they
contribute less to the Water and Sewer revenue budget for similar service.
This proposal adds a "cost recovery" fee for properties identified as partial service users of
15% added to the total cost of the Plumbing Permit. It is intended to help defray costs that full
rate payers subsidize now and create a more equitable end user fee that more accurately
reflects the true costs of providing plumbing review and inspection services for each user type.
Cost Justification
The old black leather -bound ledger found in the Vault at the Water and Sewer Division held the
historical record of plumbing permits issued in the City of Ithaca. The first entry, dated October
31, 1973 was issued to a plumbing contractor by the name of Albanese. The permit was for a
new house to be built at 253 Westwood Knoll and included the installation of 14 plumbing
fixtures at $1 per fixture and an application fee of $5 as a single family residence... total $19. If
Mr. Albanese were to apply today for the same permit (40 years later) it would be issued at the
cost of ... $19! Let this be submitted as cost justification #1.
A cost comparison of Plumbing permit Fees among other jurisdictions in our area was done in
2012 and reported in an e -mail to the Superintendent of Public Works and to the Assistant
Superintendent, Water and Sewer Division attached. The proposed fee structure is well within
the ranges being charged in areas such as: Cortland, Elmira, Auburn, and the Bolton Point
Water Authority (Town of Ithaca, Lansing, Dryden....)
The actual cost vs. revenues for the City is represented in the bar chart below. The proposed
fees will not exceed the cost of supply plumbing inspection services. It is evident that water
and sewer rate payers will continue to be the major funding source for plumbing services even
after shifting more of the costs to the permit holders.
2012 Plumbing Permits:
Actual Plumbing Permit Fees
collected in 2012 $5,138.00
Proposed Plumbing
Permit Fees $36,135.00
$110,000
100,000
90,000
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 12
❑(Plumbing Inspection
Expenditures)
Salary 80,000
Overhead (200 -400
accounts)
Inspection Services
Contract 70,000
Staff assistance
]Plumbing Permit Fees Collected
in 2012
Proposed Plumbing Permit
Fees
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
An analysis of 2012 Plumbing Permits for the City of Ithaca shows:
Number of permits ...........................117
Total revenue from permits ............ $5,136
Expenditures
Inspector's salary ........................$64,493
Salary overhead (40 %) ...............
$25,797
Contractual services ..................
$12,000
Office overhead and staff support .....
$ 8,000
Total budgeted expenditures ....... ($110,290)
Revenues from Proposed Fees ...............$36,135
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Passed unanimously.
4.4 Gateway Pedestrian Bridge - Authorization for Allocation from Bridge Reserve Fund
Moved by Alderperson Fleming. Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick.
WHEREAS, the City constructed the Gateway Pedestrian Bridge over Elmira Road in 2001
and
City Administration Committee Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 13
WHEREAS, a portion of the pedestrian bridge occupies state -owned property, and
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation granted permit 33669 to the
City of Ithaca to build, occupy and maintain the pedestrian bridge on state -owned property,
and
WHEREAS, a provision of the permit from the New York State Department of Transportation
requires that the City provide and pay for periodic inspection of the bridge, and
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation has requested that the City
conduct such an inspection, and
WHEREAS, engineering staff estimates that the cost of such an inspection will not exceed
$15,000, and
WHEREAS, the City has a bridge reserve Capital Reserve #4 Bridges, in place with a current
balance of $92,000; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby allocates an amount not to exceed $15,000 from
the Bridge Reserve Fund for the purpose of engaging a licensed engineer to conduct the
required inspection of the Gateway Pedestrian Bridge.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Passed unanimously.
5. 2014 Budget Process: 2014 budget submittals are due on August 1, 2013.
6. Committee Discussion Items. None.
7. Meeting Wrap -up
7.1 Announcements
Community Celebration: There will be a Latin, Native American and African American
community celebration on Saturday — July 27, 2013, at Conway Park. The celebration will start
at 11:00 a.m. with a parade at the Bowl -a- Drome.
7.2 Review, Agenda Items for Next Meeting. None.
7.3 Adjourn
With no further business and on a motion by Alderperson Fleming, the meeting was adjourned at 9:10
p.m.