HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-2012-07-02COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 5:00 p.m. July 2, 2012
PRESENT:
Mayor Myrick
Alderpersons (10) Brock, Dotson, Murtagh, Clairborne, McCollister, Fleming, Rooker,
Kerslick, Proulx, Mohlenhoff
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Clerk – Conley Holcomb
City Attorney – Lavine
City Controller – Thayer
Planning & Development Director – Cornish
Historic Preservation Planner – Truame
Planner - Wilson
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Myrick led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag.
ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA:
Individual Member Filed Resolutions:
Alderperson Proulx requested the addition of Item 14.2 under Individual Member Filed
Resolutions entitled “A Resolution Authorizing the Implementation, and Funding in the
First Instance of the State Multi-Modal Program-Aid [and State Administered Federal
Program-Aid] Eligible Costs, of a Capital Project, and Appropriating Funds Therefor”
No Council Member objected.
Alderperson Dotson requested the addition of Items 14.3 and 14.4 as follows:
14.3 Support For The Application of Grant Monies to Incorporate a Motion Picture
Museum into the Wharton Building at Stewart Park as outlined in the Stewart Park
Rehabilitation Action Plan – Resolution
14.4 Support for the Application of Grant Monies to Continue Restoration of the
Cascadilla Boathouse located in Stewart Park as outlined in Stewart Park Rehabilitation
Action Plan – Resolution
No Council Member Objected.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Town of Ithaca Report – Nahmin Horwitz
Mr. Horwitz updated Common Council on the following items:
• The Town met with Karen Cahill from NYS Department of Environmental
Conservation to listen to a presentation on the contamination of the
Emerson, Therm, and the South Hill business campus. A recent study
conducted by Cornell students indicated that contamination has moved
beyond the industrial site to downhill directions. The DEC assured the
Town that there is no evidence of serious contamination existing now in
residential neighborhoods and no evidence of current movement of
contamination.
• Road Use Protection Laws – the Town is considering modeling a law after
the law that was developed by Tompkins County.
• Pedestrian/Bike Path – the Town reaffirmed its support for a $1.4 million
project in the Pine Tree Road/ Route 366 area that includes a bridge
replacement
• 2013 Budget – the Town hopes to stay within or close to the 2% property
tax cap
• Recreation Partnership – the Town agreed to extend its commitment for
the next 5 years.
July 2, 2012
2
• Fire Protection – the Town pays $3.5 million annually to the City for fire
protection. An ad-hoc committee is studying potential cost reductions for
fire protection by contracting services through neighboring fire companies
that use volunteers.
Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Council – David Nutter, Chair
Mr. Nutter provided the following quarterly update for Common Council:
• Expression of thanks to the Mayor & Council for making appointments to
BPAC. BPAC is coordinating with the Planning Board to fill Planning
Board liaison vacancy.
• Policies: BPAC supports development projects that meet every day needs
and are within walking distance of dense residential housing areas, such
as neighborhood based grocery stores. They would like to see bicycle
and pedestrian issues prioritized as new development projects are
reviewed.
• Road designs – BPAC supports the inclusion of bike lanes in road
construction projects, and also supports the Bike Boulevard proposal.
• BPAC supports giving benefits to those who choose a lifestyle without
cars
• Ghost bike proposal/traffic calming devices
• BPAC would like to work with IPD/CU on enforcement issues and areas of
concern
• BPAC would like to provide input to the Comprehensive Plan
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
No one appeared to address Common Council
PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR – COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR:
Alderperson Murtagh responded to comments made regarding traffic calming
measures.
Alderperson Mohlenhoff provided an update on the status of the Neighborhood Pride
Grocery Store.
Alderperson Kerslick noted that pedestrian crossing signs have disappeared from the
East Hill area which makes for dangerous situations for pedestrians.
Alderperson Clairborne noted that the Neighborhood Pride Grocery Store is slated to
open late Fall or early Winter 2012. He also noted that engineering staff held a public
meeting to discuss the bike boulevard proposal. Mixed reactions were received, but he
feels the plans should work well within the five year time frame. He stated that Common
Council members may need to make sure this becomes a higher priority project for the
City.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:
City Clerk:
8.1 Ithaca Ale House Alcohol Permit Request – Resolution
By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Ale House has requested permission to utilize certain areas along
Aurora Street for outdoor dining, and
WHEREAS, this use of public property has been deemed proper and successful, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca wishes to promote diverse uses of the Primary and
Secondary Commons, including outdoor dining, and
WHEREAS, it is Common Council's responsibility to determine whether or not to allow the
serving and consumption of alcohol on the Primary and Secondary Commons, and
July 2, 2012
3
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that the use of this public property for
outdoor dining at the Ithaca Ale House, including the responsible sale and consumption of
alcohol, is desirable, and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that any use of this or similar public
property involving the same and consumption of alcohol should be covered by a minimum
of $1,000,000 insurance under the Dram Shop Act; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, For the year 2012, Common Council hereby approves a revocable Alcoholic
Beverage Permit for the outdoor sale and consumption of alcohol for the Ithaca Ale House
that includes the sale of alcohol in accord with the terms and conditions set forth in
application therefore, including minimum Dram Shop coverage in the amount of
$1,000,000 and the approval of an outdoor dining permit.
Carried Unanimously
City Administration Committee:
8.2 Common Council – Support for the Application of the Downtown Ithaca
Alliance to the 2012 New York Main Street Program - Resolution
By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS, the 2012 New York State Consolidated Funding Application (CFA) includes
the New York Main Street Program (NYMS) that will distribute $5,000,000 in increments
of up to $250,000 to assist downtown revitalization programs that include building
renovation projects and/or streetscape enhancements, and
WHEREAS, The Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA) is an eligible applicant for the
program, and seeks to submit an application to the NYMS program, and
WHEREAS, the NYMS program requires submission of a formal resolution of the
municipality supporting the grant application, and
WHEREAS, CFA applications are due by July 16, 2012, and
WHEREAS, The DIA has identified a target area for the grant that consists of the
primary and secondary Commons areas of downtown; and
WHEREAS, The DIA has identified a several downtown properties that could benefit
from both interior and exterior building renovation that are deemed to be strong
candidates for New York Main Street assistance, including, but not necessarily limited
to, the Outdoor Store building at 206 The Commons, the House of Shalimar building at
142 The Commons, the Homegrown Board Shop building at 104 The Commons, and
the Ithaca Journal building at 123 West State Street; and
WHEREAS, The Downtown Ithaca Alliance has also identified potential streetscape
improvement needs that meet the requirements of the MYMS program, particularly
along the 100 North and South blocks of Cayuga Street; and
WHEREAS, The Downtown Ithaca Alliance has successfully completed two NYMS
grants in recent years, addressing key downtown and community needs including
building façade renovation, anchor projects, and streetscape enhancement; and
WHEREAS, receipt of the NYMS grant will assist in building a strong, vibrant, and
sustainable downtown urban core and increase upper story housing opportunities, and
WHEREAS, no match funding is required from the City of Ithaca for this application;
now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby supports the 2012
application of the Downtown Ithaca Alliance to the New York Main Street program for a
revitalization program that includes upper story housing, exterior building renovations,
and possible streetscape improvements on Cayuga Street.
Carried Unanimously
July 2, 2012
4
July 2, 2012
8.3 Department of Public Works - Request to Amend Personnel Roster -
Resolution
By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca, DPW, Water & Sewer Division, Water Treatment Plant
needs to provide for the regulatory required daily and periodic sample collection,
laboratory analysis, reporting, process control, etc. for the water plant, the sludge drying
lagoons, 6-water storage tanks, 2-booster chlorination systems, 100-miles of City of
Ithaca distribution system piping, and 46.5-square miles of watershed tributary to our
reservoir, and
WHEREAS, increasing pressure on our natural water resources in local watersheds is
consuming more staff time every year. Much time has been invested recently in dealing
with the issues of hydrofracking, dredging, and hydrilla, all of which promise to be
ongoing for the foreseeable future. Coupled consistently with increased demands to
address water quality related to watershed protection, development, climate change,
stormwater management issues, etc. and
WHEREAS, regulatory requirements and the resulting sample collection and laboratory
analysis are increasing steadily under the EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
program. In 2013 the implementation of the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Treatment
Rule (LT2ESWTR) and Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage
2 DBPR) will require additional benchmarking and monitoring for the control of
Cryptosporidium, TTHM’s and HAA5’s, and
WHEREAS, our drinking water quality and supply are dependent on the good health of
the all local watersheds, especially our Six-Mile Creek tributary watershed. Our
investment in watershed environmental protection efforts and in fostering environmental
stewardship of our water resources through public involvement is far more cost effective
than investment in advanced treatment systems at the Water Plant. In recognition of this
our Water Shed Coordinator/Lab Director for the City of Ithaca Water Treatment Plant
plays many pivotal roles in coordinating and maintaining these relationships and efforts
for the City. Efforts including building and maintaining a comprehensive water quality
monitoring programs in the local watersheds. Collecting, and archiving long-term,
internally consistent data sets which are essential to assess trends, and design, and
implement policies to protect our water resources. Data sets include chemical,
biological, microbiological monitoring along with the measurement of stream flows and
meteorological data. Our partners include many volunteers, professionals, municipal
and government representatives, private and public organizations, etc. We are partners
with, members of, provide and receive support from, and work in collaboration to care
for our local water resources with those listed below, and more:
• Cayuga Lake Floating Classroom Project for “Community Stewardship for
Cayuga Lake
• Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Organization and Technical Advisory Committee
• Cayuga Lake Watershed Network
• Cornell University
• Cornell Cooperative Extension
• Fall Creek Watershed Committee
• Finger Lakes – Lake Ontario Watershed Protection Alliance (FL-LOWPA)
• Finger Lakes Institute
• New York State Department Health (NYSDOH)
• NFP Community Science Institute
• Six Mile Creek Partnership
• Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District (TCSWCD) & USDA
• Tompkins County Planning Department
• Tompkins County Health Department & NYSDOH
• Tompkins County Solid Waste Division
• Tompkins County Water Resources Council (WRC)
• Town of Caroline
July 2, 2012
5
• Town of Dryden
• Town of Ithaca
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
• United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service
• United States Geological Survey (USGS) – Gaging Stations
• Wells College
• Other Adjoining Local Municipalities
• Etc.
and,
WHEREAS, this proposed new position has already been reviewed and approved by
the Civil Service Commission with respect to the New Position Duties Statement, Job
Title, and Job Description and by the Vacancy Review Committee with respect to
organizational necessity. The Vacancy Review Committee’s approval was contingent on
both the approval of the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works and City of Ithaca
Common Council; now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2012 authorized personnel
roster for the Department of Public Works, Water and Sewer Division as follows:
Add: One (1) Laboratory Technician (40 hours)
and, be it further
RESOLVED, That this requested roster amendment has been approved by the Vacancy
Review Committee, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the funds necessary for said roster amendment will be made within
the existing 2012 DPW, Water and Sewer Budget Authorization noting there may be
some savings realized by a reduction in current overtime costs associated with the
performance of these duties.
Carried Unanimously
8.4 Department of Public Works - Request Amendment # 9 to Capital Project
409 J Engineering Services Agreement for Septage Facility Design and Bid
Package - Resolution
By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant is in need of certain Capital
Improvements, and
WHEREAS, Capital Project 409J Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant was
authorized by Common Council in 2007 for $1,504,950, and
WHEREAS, in order for the staff to maintain its goals as embodied in its five year capital
plan, amendment #9 provides additional engineering services for completion of a design
to renovate the existing septage receiving facility, and
WHEREAS, the scope of this amendment has been drafted to accommodate changes
in the design associated with facilities needed to accept food waste and changes in the
bid package to deal with handling materials potentially contaminated by a manufactured
gas plant operated in the early 1900s, and
WHEREAS, this authorization for an amount not to exceed $44,683.10 will allow GHD
Stearns and Wheler to complete the design and bid package for the Septage Receiving
Facility, and
WHEREAS, the allocation of costs for previously authorized engineering services
contract for this project (409J) to GHD Stearns and Wheler is as follows:
July 2, 2012
6
Original Contract #1 $74,000
Amendment #2 $7,000
Amendment #3 $35,500
Amendment #4 $14,000
Amendment #5 $135,500
Amendment #6 $0000*
Amendment #7 $10,000
Amendment #8 $ 33,500
Total Authorized to Date: $309,500
* Amendment #6 not authorized, not acted on. Elements of this amendment were
included in the scoping of the energy performance audit and contract.
and,
WHEREAS, the Special Joint Committee (SJC) approved said contract amendment #9
at its meeting of May 9, 2012 contingent on fund availability, and
WHEREAS, Common Council Authorized funding in the amount of $1,504,950 on
December 5, 2007, amended on May 7, 2008 for the 2008 phase I (year 1 of 5) 416J
miscellaneous plant improvements project and again on October 6, 2010 for
amendments #7 and #8, and the available balance, as certified by the City of Ithaca
Controller is $225,308.64 after expenses incurred for the Stearns and Wheler
Amendment #7 & #8 for the design of a second round of Miscellaneous Plant
Improvements and support in litigating the Crane Hogan contract, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby recommends an amendment in the amount
not to exceed $44,683.10 to the previously authorized engineering services agreement
with GHD Stearns & Wheler, LLC for additional engineering services associated with
the aforementioned project amendment #9, giving a total engineering contract cost not
to exceed $354,183.10, and be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes this project amendment
contingent upon action by all wastewater partners committing their percentage of
reimbursement shares to the Joint Activity Fund allocated per the Joint Sewer
Agreement as follows:
Municipality Percentage Project Cost
City of Ithaca 57.14 $25554.26
Town of Ithaca 40.88 18,266.45
Town of Dryden 1.98 862.39
$ 44,683.10
and, be it further
RESOLVED, That funds necessary for said engineering contract amendments shall be
derived from existing Miscellaneous Plant Improvement Project authorization.
Carried Unanimously
8.5 Youth Bureau - Request to Amend Personnel Roster - Resolution
By Alderperson Mohlenhoff: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS the Ithaca Youth Bureau has requested an adjustment to the 2012 Youth
Bureau personnel roster, and
WHEREAS there will be no additional cost to the city since funds are being transferred
within the same program budget; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the Youth Bureau 2012 personnel
roster as follows:
Add: One (1) - Youth Program Assistant (35 hours per week) position
in the Paul Schreurs Memorial Program.
July 2, 2012
7
and, be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes that one (1) Youth Program
Leader (35 hours per week) position at the Youth Bureau remain on the roster as an
unfunded position.
Carried Unanimously
PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
9.1 Ordinances to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code to Repeal and
Replace in their entirety Chapter 73, entitled “Landmarks Preservation
Commission” and Chapter 228, entitled “Landmarks Preservation” –
A. Declaration of Lead Agency for Environmental Review - Resolution
By Alderperson Dotson: Seconded by Alderperson McCollister
WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead agency
be established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local
and state environmental law, and
WHEREAS, State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental
review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for
approving and funding or carrying out the action, and
WHEREAS, the proposed repeal and replacement of Chapter 73, entitled “Landmarks
Preservation Commission” and the proposed repeal and replacement of Chapter 228,
entitled “Landmarks Preservation”, is an “Unlisted” Action pursuant to the City
Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Ordinance, which requires environmental review
under CEQR; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself
lead agency for the environmental review of the repeal and replacement of Chapter 73,
entitled “Landmarks Preservation Commission” and the repeal and replacement of
Chapter 228, entitled “Landmarks Preservation”.
Carried Unanimously
B. Determination of Environmental Significance - Resolution
By Alderperson Dotson: Seconded by Alderperson McCollister
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is considering an amendment to the Municipal Code in
order to repeal and replace Chapter 73 entitled “Landmarks Preservation Commission”
and to repeal and replace Chapter 228, entitled “Landmarks Preservation,” and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted including the
preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), dated May 1, 2012,
and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment has been reviewed by the Tompkins County
Planning Department pursuant to §239-l–m of the New York State General Municipal
Law, which requires that all actions within 500 feet of a county or state facility, including
county and state highways, be reviewed by the County Planning Department, and has
also been reviewed by the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council and the City of
Ithaca Planning and Development Board, and
WHEREAS, the proposed action is an “Unlisted” Action under the City Environmental
Quality Review Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as lead agency, has
reviewed the SEAF prepared by planning staff; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby adopts
as its own the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Short Environmental
Assessment Form, dated May 1, 2012, and be it further
July 2, 2012
8
RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby
determines that the proposed action at issue will not have a significant effect on the
environment, and that further environmental review is unnecessary, and be it further
RESOLVED, That this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that
the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any
attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as
required by law.
Carried Unanimously
9.3 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code to Repeal and
Replace in its entirety Chapter 73 entitled “Landmarks Preservation Commission”
By Alderperson Dotson: Seconded by Alderperson McCollister
WHEREAS, Chapter 73 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled “Landmarks
Preservation Commission”, was first enacted in 1975 and was amended in 1984, and
WHEREAS, amendments to Chapter 73 have been proposed, the purpose of which are
to coordinate the content of Chapter 73 with the content of Chapter 228, entitled
“Landmarks Preservation”, and
WHEREAS, given the extent of the changes proposed it would be impractical to
accomplish such revisions by amendment, now therefore
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, as
follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 2012-__
Section 1. Chapter 73, entitled “Landmarks Preservation Commission”, of the City of
Ithaca Municipal Code is hereby repealed and replaced in its entirety to read as follows.
§73-1 Establishment.
To effectuate the goals of Chapter 228, entitled “Landmarks
Preservation”, there is hereby established in and for the City of Ithaca a
Commission to be known as the "Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission."
§73-2 Membership, Appointment, and Compensation.
A. Membership. The Commission shall consist of seven members.
B. Appointment. Members of the Commission shall be appointed by the
Mayor with the advice and consent of the Common Council. Three
members shall be selected, each of whom shall possess professional
qualifications evidencing expertise in historic preservation,
architecture, city planning or building construction. The four remaining
members shall be selected to represent the community at large. In
filling two of these four at-large seats, preference will be given to
individuals who represent the commercial interests of the community.
C. Terms. The original appointments of the members of the Commission
shall be three for one year, two for two years and two for three years
from January following the year of such appointment, or until their
successor is named to serve out the unexpired portion of their term of
appointment, or until their successor is appointed to serve for the term
of three years.
D. Vacancies. Vacancies occurring in the Commission other than by
expiration of term of office shall be filled by appointment by the Mayor,
but such appointment shall be only for the unexpired portion of the
term of the member replaced.
E. Reappointment. Members may serve for more than one term, and
each member shall serve until the appointment of a successor.
F. Method of selection to fill vacancies. Vacancies shall be filled by the
Mayor according to the original selection as aforesaid.
G. Compensation. Members shall serve without compensation.
July 2, 2012
9
H. Quorum. A majority of the Commission shall constitute a quorum for
the transaction of business.
§73-3 Organization.
A. Officers. The Landmarks Preservation Commission shall elect from its
membership a Chairperson and a Vice Chairperson whose terms of
office shall be fixed by the Commission. The Chairperson shall
preside over the Commission and shall have the right to vote. The
Vice Chairperson shall, in cases of absence or disability of the
Chairperson, perform the duties of the Chairperson.
B. Secretary. The Director of Planning and Development or his/her
designee shall serve as the Secretary to the Commission. The
Secretary shall keep a record of all resolutions, proceedings, and
actions of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, and shall have
the authority to act as provided for in §228-6C of the City Municipal
Code.
§73-4 Powers and Duties.
The powers of the Commission shall include:
A. Adoption of criteria for the identification of significant historic,
architectural, and cultural landmarks and for the delineation of historic
districts;
B. Conduct of surveys of significant historic, architectural, and cultural
landmarks and historic districts within the city;
C. Recommending designation by Common Council of identified
structures or resources as landmarks and historic districts;
D. Adoption of criteria for the evaluation of applications for a Certificate of
Appropriateness;
E. Approval or disapproval of proposals for exterior change resulting in
applications for a Certificate of Appropriateness pursuant to §228-4
and §228-5 of the City Municipal Code;
F. Approval or disapproval of applications for a Finding of Economic
Hardship pursuant to §228-9 and §228-10 of the City Municipal Code;
G. Making recommendations to the City concerning the acquisition of
preservation easements or other interests in real property as
necessary to carry out the purposes of §228-2 of the City Municipal
Code;
H. Increasing public awareness of the value of historic, cultural, and
architectural preservation by developing and participating in public
education programs;
I. Making recommendations to the City concerning the utilization of
state, federal, or private funds to promote the preservation of
landmarks and historic districts within the city;
J. Recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the City where
its preservation is essential to the purposes of §228-2 of the City
Municipal Code and where private preservation is not feasible;
K. Preparing a report or recommendation to other City boards and
committees regarding plans and proposals that could have an impact
on designated individual landmarks and/or historic districts;
L. Delegation of work to staff and professional consultants as necessary
to carry out the duties of the Commission, within the budget provided
therefore by the City of Ithaca.
§73-5 Promulgation of Rules; Meetings.
The Commission shall adopt rules for the transaction of its business,
which shall provide for the time and place of holding regular meetings.
Regular meetings shall be held at least once each month. The
Commission’s rules shall provide for the calling of special meetings by the
Chairperson or by at least three members of the Commission. All regular
or special meetings of the Commission shall be open to the public, and
any person shall be entitled to appear and be heard on a matter before
the Commission before it reaches its decision.
July 2, 2012
10
§73-6 Records and Annual Report.
The Commission shall keep a record, which shall be open to the public
view, of its resolutions, proceedings and actions. The vote or failure to
vote of each member shall be recorded. The concurring affirmative vote of
a majority of those members present shall constitute approval of plans
before it for review or for the adoption of any resolution, motion or other
action of the Commission. The Commission shall submit an annual report
of its activities to the Mayor and Common Council and make such
recommendations to the Common Council as it deems necessary to carry
out the purposes of this chapter and Chapter 228, Landmarks
Preservation.
§73-7 Committees.
The Landmarks Preservation Commission may, by rule, establish
permanent or ad hoc committees consisting of no less than three current
members of the ILPC for assignments delegated by the full Commission.
§73-8 Cooperation of City Departments.
As an aid toward cooperation in matters which concern the integrity of the
designated landmarks and historic districts, all City departments shall,
upon request, furnish to the Landmarks Preservation Commission, within
a reasonable time, the available maps, plans, reports and statistical or
other information the Commission may require for its work.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion
of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of
this ordinance.
Section 3. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in
accordance with law, upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Amending Resolution:
By Alderperson Dotson: Seconded by Alderperson McCollister
RESOLVED, That §73-2(B) be amended to read as follows:
“Appointment. Members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Mayor with the
advice and consent of the Common Council. Three members shall be selected, each of
whom shall possess professional qualifications evidencing expertise in historic
preservation, architecture, city planning or building construction. The four remaining
members shall be selected to represent from the community at large. In filling two of
these four at-large seats, preference will be given to individuals who represent the
commercial interests of the community possess demonstrated expertise in commercial
or business activity, including, but not limited to, banking or real estate.”
Carried Unanimously
Amending Resolution:
By Alderperson Clairborne: Seconded by
RESOLVED, That §73-2(B) be further amended to require that a majority of the
commission members be city residents.
Alderperson Dotson suggested incorporating this discussion into the work the
Government Performance and Accountability Committee will be doing regarding city
boards and commissions.
Planning and Development Director Cornish explained how difficult it is to find experts in
these fields who are interested in volunteering their time to serve on the Commission.
She stated that narrowing the applicant pool to the city boundaries would create an
extreme hardship and requested that this issue be discussed in depth in the future.
Alderperson Clairborne withdrew his motion while expressing his desire to have more
seats on boards and commissions reserved for city residents.
July 2, 2012
11
Main Motion As Amended:
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
9.2 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code to Repeal and
Replace in its entirety Chapter 228, entitled “Landmarks Preservation”
By Alderperson Dotson: Seconded by Alderperson McCollister
WHEREAS, Chapter 228 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled “Landmarks
Preservation”, was first enacted in 1975 and has since been periodically amended, most
recently in 1998, and
WHEREAS, substantial revisions to, and reorganization of, Chapter 228 have been
proposed, the purpose of which are to better effectuate the goals of the Landmarks
Preservation Ordinance, to improve efficiency in carrying out such goals, and to improve
the clarity of the Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, given the extent of the changes proposed it would be impractical to
accomplish such revisions by amendment, now therefore
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, as
follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 2012-___
Section 1. Chapter 228, entitled “Landmarks Preservation”, of the City of Ithaca
Municipal Code is hereby repealed and replaced in its entirety to read as follows:
§ 228-1. Title.
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “City of Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Ordinance.”
§ 228-2. Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to:
A. Promote the educational, cultural, economic and general welfare of the
public through the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of
buildings, structures, landscape features, archeological sites, and
districts of historic and cultural significance.
B. Safeguard the city’s historic, aesthetic and cultural heritage as reflected in
such buildings, structures, landscape features, archeological sites, and
districts.
C. Protect the value of historic properties and their owners’ investment in
them, and stabilize historic neighborhoods.
D. Foster civic pride in the legacy of beauty and achievements of the past.
E. Protect and enhance the city’s attractiveness to tourists and visitors and
the support and stimulus to the economy thereby provided.
F. Strengthen the economy of the city.
G. Promote the use of buildings, structures, landscape features,
archeological sites, and districts of historic and cultural significance as
sites for the education, pleasure and welfare of the people of the city.
H. Insure the harmonious, orderly, and efficient growth and development of
the city.
§ 228-3. Designation of Individual Landmarks or Historic Districts.
A. As set forth in §73-4, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission is
responsible for recommending to Common Council the designation of
identified structures or resources as individual landmarks and historic
districts within the city.
B. The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission may recommend such
designation of an individual property as an individual landmark if it:
July 2, 2012
12
1. Possesses special character or historic or aesthetic interest or
value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history
of the locality, region, state, or nation; or
2. Is identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s); or
3. Embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural
style; or
4. Is the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced
an age; or
5. Represents an established and familiar visual feature of the
community by virtue of its unique location or singular physical
characteristics.
C. The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission may recommend such
designation of a group of properties as an historic district if the group:
1. Contains primarily properties which meet one or more of the
criteria for designation as an individual landmark; and
2. Constitutes a distinct section of the city by reason of possessing
those qualities that would satisfy such criteria.
D. Notice of a proposed designation shall be sent to the owner or owners of
the property or properties proposed for designation, describing the
property proposed, or if in a district, the proposed district boundary, and
announcing a public hearing by the Commission to consider the
designation. Where the proposed designation involves so many owners
that the Commission deems individual notice to be infeasible, notice may
instead be published at least once in the City’s official newspaper at
least 15 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Once the
Commission has issued notice of a proposed designation, no building
permits or demolition permits shall be issued by the Building
Commissioner as long as the proposed designation is under active
consideration by the Commission and until the Commission has made its
decision.
E. The Commission shall hold a public hearing prior to designation of any
individual landmark or historic district. Notice of the public hearing shall
be published at least once in the City’s official newspaper at least 15
days prior to the date of the public hearing. The notice shall specify the
time and place of the public hearing, a brief description of the proposed
designation, and the location where the proposal may be reviewed prior
the hearing. The Commission, property owners, and any interested
parties may present testimony or documentary evidence at the hearing
which will become part of a record regarding the historic, architectural, or
cultural importance of the proposed individual landmark or historic
district. The record may also contain staff reports, public comments,
expert testimony, or other evidence offered outside of the hearing.
F. Within seven days after it has recommended designation of an individual
landmark or historic district, the Commission shall file a copy of such
recommended designation with the Planning and Development Board
and with Common Council.
G. Within 60 days of the Commission recommending designation, the
Planning and Development Board shall file a report with Common
council with respect to the relation of such proposed designation to the
Comprehensive Plan, the zoning laws, projected public improvements,
and any plans for the renewal of the site of area involved. The Council
shall, within 90 days of said recommendation of designation, approve,
disapprove, or refer the proposed designation back to the Commission
for modification.
H. Any designation approved by the Council shall be in effect on and after
the date of approval by Council. The Commission shall forward notice of
each property designated as an individual landmark and the boundaries
of each designated historic district to the Building Commissioner and the
City Clerk for recordation.
July 2, 2012
13
§ 228-4. Certificate of Appropriateness for Alteration, Demolition, or New
Construction Affecting Individual Landmarks or Historic Districts.
As set forth in §73-4, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission is
responsible for the approval or disapproval of proposals for exterior
changes to a designated historic property. No person shall carry out any
exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new
construction, or moving of an individual landmark or property within an
historic district, nor shall any person make any change in the exterior
appearance of such property, its site, its light fixtures, signs, sidewalks,
fences, steps, paving, or other exterior elements, without first obtaining a
Certificate of Appropriateness or Finding of Economic Hardship from the
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, or obtaining approval by
the Commission’s Secretary pursuant to §228-6 C. All changes to City-
owned property affecting an, individual landmark or within an historic
district shall be subject to the provisions of this ordinance.
§228-5. Criteria for Approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness.
A. The Commission shall approve the issuance of a Certificate of
Appropriateness only if it determines that the proposed work will not
have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or
architectural significance and value of either the individual landmark, or if
the proposed work is within an historic district, of the neighboring
properties in such district.
B. In making this determination, the Commission will be guided by the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and by the
following principles:
1. The historic features of an individual landmark shall be altered as
little as possible and any alterations made shall be compatible
with the historic character of the landmark.
2. The historic features of a property located within, and contributing
to the significance of, an historic district shall be altered as little
as possible and any alterations made shall be compatible with
both the historic character of the individual property and the
character of the district as a whole.
3. New construction located within an historic district shall be
compatible with the historic character of the district within which it
is located.
C. In applying the principle of compatibility set forth above, the Commission
shall consider the following factors:
1. the general design and character of the proposed alteration or new
construction relative to existing features of the property;
2. the scale and visual compatibility of the proposed alteration or new
construction in relation to the property itself, surrounding
properties, and the neighborhood;
3. texture, materials, and color, and their relation to similar features
of the property and other properties in the neighborhood;
4. visual compatibility with surrounding properties, including the
proportions of the property’s façade; proportions and
arrangement of windows, doors, and other openings; roof shape;
and rhythm of spacing of properties along the street, including
set-backs; and
5. the importance of historic, physical, and visual features to the
significance of the property.
D. In passing upon an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, the
Landmarks Preservation Commission shall not consider changes to
interior spaces or to exterior paint colors.
§228-6. Certificate of Appropriateness Application Procedure.
A. Prior to the commencement of any work requiring a Certificate of
Appropriateness, the owner shall file an application for a building permit
with the Building Department and an application for such Certificate with
July 2, 2012
14
the Commission. The application, available on the City’s website and
through the Department of Planning & Development, shall contain:
1. Building permit application number, as assigned by the Building
Department
2. Name, mailing address, email address, and telephone number of
the applicant;
3. Location and photographs of the property;
4. Elevation drawings of proposed changes, if available;
5. Perspective drawings, including relationship to adjacent
properties, if available;
6. Samples of building materials to be used, including their
proposed color;
7. Where the proposal includes signs or lettering, a scale drawing
showing the type of lettering to be used, all dimensions and
colors, a description of materials to be used, method of
illumination, and a plan showing the sign’s location on the
property; and
8. Any other information that the Commission may deem necessary
in order to visualize the proposed work.
B. No building permit shall be issued for the proposed work until a Certificate
of Appropriateness has first been issued by the Commission. The
Certificate of Appropriateness required by this chapter shall be in
addition to and not in lieu of any building or other permit that may be
required by any other ordinance of the City of Ithaca.
C. The Commission may delegate to the Commission’s Secretary the
authority to:
1. Determine whether proposed work constitutes ordinary
maintenance and repair for which a Certificate of
Appropriateness is not required;
2. Approve work that is considered replacement-in-kind;
3. Approve work that is of any other type that has been previously
determined by the Commission to be appropriate for delegation
to staff.
D. Upon application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, a public notice of
the proposal shall be posted by the owner or owner’s representative on
the property for a minimum of 10 days. This notice must remain in place
until a decision to approve or deny the Certificate of Appropriateness has
been made. The notice shall specify the proposed work, the time and
place of the public hearing, and to whom and by when any public
comments are to be communicated. The notice must be placed at or
near the property line in the front yard so that it will be plainly visible from
the street, and, in cases where a property has frontage on more than
one street, an additional sign must be placed at or near the property line
on any additional street frontage so that the sign will be plainly visible
from the street on which it has such additional frontage.
E. The Commission shall hold a public hearing prior to rendering a decision
on any application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. Notice of the
public hearing shall be published at least once in the City’s official
newspaper at least 5 days prior to the public hearing. The notice shall
specify the time and place of the public hearing, a brief description of the
proposal, and the location where the proposal may be reviewed prior to
the hearing. The property owner and any interested party may present
testimony or documentary evidence regarding the proposal at the
hearing, which will become a part of the record. The record may also
contain staff reports, public comments, and other evidence offered
outside of the hearing.
F. The Commission shall approve, deny, or approve with conditions or
modifications the Certificate of Appropriateness within 45 days from the
completion of the public hearing, except as noted below. The failure of
the Commission to act within 45 days from the completion of the public
July 2, 2012
15
hearing, unless an extension is mutually agreed upon in writing by the
applicant and the Commission, shall be deemed to constitute approval.
1. In the event, however, that the Commission shall make a finding
of fact that the circumstances of a particular application require
further time for additional study and information than can be
obtained within the aforesaid 45-day period, then the
Commission shall have a period of up to 90 days within which
to act upon such an application.
2. In the event, however, that environmental review of an
application is required, the Commission shall approve, deny, or
approve with conditions or modifications the Certificate of
Appropriateness within 65 days from the completion of
environmental review. The failure of the Commission to act
within 65 days from the completion of the environmental
review, unless an extension is mutually agreed upon in writing
by the applicant and the Commission, shall be deemed to
constitute approval.
G. All decisions of the Commission shall be in writing. A copy shall be sent
to the applicant by mail, and a copy filed with the Building Commissioner
and City Clerk for public inspection, within 10 days of the date of the
decision. The Commission’s decisions shall state the reasons for
denying or modifying any application.
§228-7. Expiration of Approval; Extension of Approval
If the construction of a project approved for a Certificate of Appropriateness
has not commenced within twenty-four (24) months of the date of the
approval, such approval shall expire, unless an extension has been granted
by the Landmarks Preservation Commission following a written request by
the applicant. An application for an extension of Certificate of
Appropriateness approval shall not be considered a new Certificate of
Appropriateness application.
§228-8. Early Design Guidance.
A. Large projects that could potentially have a significant impact on an
individual landmark or historic district are required to participate in the
Early Design Guidance process. The purpose of this process is to
provide input from the Commission on the design of the project as it
relates to criteria for the approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness at
a time when such input may readily be incorporated into the design
without adversely affecting design costs or the project schedule.
B. For the purposes of this chapter, large projects are defined as:
1. New construction in an historic district of any primary structure,
or
2. New construction on the same tax parcel as an individual
landmark, or in an historic district, of any accessory structure
with a gross square footage of 800 square feet or more, or
3. New additions that will increase the existing footprint of an
individual landmark or a structure located within an historic
district by 50% or more, or
4. Any renovation or reconstruction (excluding projects that
involve only the replacement of roof coverings) that will affect
50% or more of the exterior envelope of an individual
landmarks or a structure located within an historic district.
C. Applicants subject to Early Design Guidance shall submit materials for
review by the Commission as soon as the design has reached a stage
of development that would allow the Commission to understand the
basic proposal and its significant details.
D. Based on the limited information provided, the Commission will provide
general feedback and non-binding recommendations and comments
that might help the applicant further refine the project prior to
submitting an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness.
July 2, 2012
16
§228-9. Criteria for a Finding of Economic Hardship.
A. An applicant whose Certificate of Appropriateness for a proposed
alteration has been denied may apply for relief on the ground of
economic hardship. In order to prove the existence of economic
hardship related to a proposed alteration, the applicant shall establish
that the denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness will prevent the
owner from earning a reasonable return on investment, regardless of
whether that return represents the most profitable return possible. In
the case of non-profit ownership, the applicant shall establish that the
denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness will seriously interfere with, or
prevent, the owner from carrying out its chartered purpose.
B. Demolition of an individual landmark, or of a structure located within,
and contributing to the significance of, an historic district, shall be
allowed only in cases of economic hardship, unless the Building
Department, upon due deliberation, has made an express finding that
the structure presents an imminent threat to the public health, safety,
and welfare. In order to prove the existence of economic hardship
sufficient to justify demolition, the applicant shall establish to the
satisfaction of the Commission that:
1. The denial of the Certificate of Appropriateness will prevent the
owner from earning a reasonable return on investment,
regardless of whether that return represents the most
profitable return possible; and
2. The property cannot be adapted for any other use, whether by
the current owner or by a purchaser, which would result in a
reasonable return on investment; and
3. Diligent efforts to find a purchaser interested in acquiring the
property and preserving it have failed;
Or, in the case of non-profit ownership that:
1. The denial of the Certificate of Appropriateness will either
physically or financially prevent, or seriously interfere with, the
non-profit owner carrying out its chartered purpose; and
2. The property cannot be adapted for any other use that would
result in the non-profit owner being able to carry out its
chartered purpose.
§228-10. Finding of Economic Hardship Application Procedure.
A. After the Landmarks Preservation Commission has denied a Certificate of
Appropriateness, an applicant may commence the economic hardship
process. Consideration of an application for a Finding of Economic Hardship
may occur at the same meeting as consideration of an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness. No building permit or demolition permit shall
be issued unless the Commission determines that an economic hardship
exists and issues a Finding of Economic Hardship, except in cases where
the building Department, upon due deliberation, has made an express
finding that the structure presents an imminent threat to the public health,
safety, and welfare.
B. The Commission may hold a public hearing on the hardship application
at which an opportunity will be provided for proponents and opponents
of the application to present their views.
C. The applicant shall consult in good faith with the Commission, local
preservation groups, and interested parties in a diligent effort to seek
an alternative that will result in appropriate preservation of the
property.
D. All decisions of the Commission shall be in writing and shall state the
reasons for granting or denying the requested Finding of Economic
Hardship. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by mail and a copy
filed with the Building Commissioner and City Clerk for public
inspection within 10 days of the date of the decision.
E. If a Finding of Economic Hardship is issued, the Commission shall
approve only such work as is necessary to alleviate the hardship.
July 2, 2012
17
§228-11. Maintenance and Repair Required.
A. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the ordinary
maintenance and repair of any exterior architectural feature of an
individual landmark or property within a historic district that does not
involve a change in design, building materials, color, or outward
appearance; however, the Commission’s Secretary shall determine
whether proposed work constitutes ordinary maintenance and repair
or requires a Certificate of Appropriateness.
B. No owner or person with an interest in real property designated as an
individual landmark or included within an historic district shall permit
the property to fall into a serious state of disrepair. Maintenance shall
be required, consistent with the provisions of the Property
Maintenance Code of New York State and all other applicable
regulations.
§228-12. Enforcement and Violations
A. All work performed pursuant to a Certificate of Appropriateness issued
under this chapter shall conform to the requirements included therein.
It shall be the duty of the Building Commissioner to inspect periodically
any such work to assure compliance. In the event work is found that is
not being performed in accordance with the Certificate of
Appropriateness the Building Commissioner shall issue a stop work
order and all work shall immediately cease. No further work shall be
undertaken on the project as long as a stop work order is in effect.
B. Any owner or person in charge of a property who demolishes or alters
a property in the absence of a Certificate of Appropriateness, a
Finding of Economic Hardship, or approval by the Secretary of the
Commission pursuant to §228-6C of the City Municipal Code, may be
required to restore the property and its site to its appearance prior to
the violation.
C. If, in the judgment of the Commission, a violation of §228-11 exists
that will result in a detrimental effect upon the life and character of a
designated historic property or on the character of a historic district as
a while, the Commission shall notify the building Commissioner. If,
upon investigation, the Building Commissioner finds non-compliance
with the requirements of the Property Maintenance Code of New York
State, or any other applicable regulation, the Building Commissioner
shall order such remedies as are necessary and consistent with this
Chapter and shall provide written notice thereof to the Secretary of the
Commission.
D. Any violation of any provision of this chapter shall be deemed an
offense and shall be punishable as provided in Chapter 1 of the
Municipal Code, General Provisions, Article I, Penalties. Each day’s
continued breach shall constitute a separate additional violation. In
addition, the City shall have such other remedies as are provided by
law to enforce the provision of this chapter.
§228-13. Appeals.
Any person aggrieved by any decision by the Commission may apply to
the Supreme Court in the State of New York for review under Article 78 of
the Civil Practice Law and Rules within 60 days of publication of the
decision.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion
of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of
this ordinance.
Section 3. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in
accordance with law, upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
July 2, 2012
18
Amending Resolution:
By Alderperson Dotson: Seconded by Alderperson McCollister
RESOLVED, That §228-3D be amended to read as follows:
“D. Notice of a proposed designation shall be sent to the owner or owners of
the property or properties proposed for designation, describing the
property proposed, or if in a district, the proposed district boundary, and
announcing a public hearing by the Commission to consider the
designation. Where the proposed designation involves so many owners
that the Commission deems individual notice to be infeasible, notice may
instead be published at least once in the City’s official newspaper at
least 15 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Once the
Commission has issued notice of a proposed designation, no building
permits or demolition permits shall be issued by the Building
Commissioner as long as the proposed designation is under active
consideration by the Commission and until the Commission has made its
decision, but in any event no longer than 60 days after completion of the
public hearing.”
and be it further
RESOLVED, That §228-8.B.2 be amended to read as follows:
“2. New construction on the same tax parcel as an individual
landmark, or in an historic district, or of any accessory
structure with a gross square footage of 800 square feet or
more, in an historic district, or new construction of any
accessory structure with a gross square footage of 800 square
feet or more on the same tax parcel as an individual landmark
when that tax parcel is less than five acres in size, or new
construction of any accessory structure with a gross square
footage of 800 square feet or more on the same tax parcel as
an individual landmark when that tax parcel is more than five
acres in size and when the proposed accessory structure will
be located within 150 feet of the individual landmark,”
and, be it further
RESOLVED, That §228-13 be amended to read as follows:
“Any person aggrieved by any decision by the Commission may apply to
the Supreme Court in the State of New York for review under Article 78 of
the Civil Practice Law and Rules within 60 30 days of publication of the
decision.”
Carried Unanimously
Main Motion As Amended:
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
10. GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE:
10.1 Update from the June 20, 2012 GPA Committee Meeting
Chair Mohlenhoff provided the following update::
Redistricting: The GPA Committee will be reviewing the redistricting legislation at the
July meeting.
Performance Measures: The GPA Committee will be developing a pilot City Report
Card and will select measures that align with concerns identified in the City survey data.
The first few areas to pilot measures will be: emergency services, streets and facilities,
downtown and the Commons, and public safety. A memo to the Mayor will be prepared
requesting a budget for the performance measure initiatives.
Public Information: A lot of discussion emerged around neighborhoods – the
Communications sub-committee will be preparing an analysis of current neighborhood
July 2, 2012
19
communication tools/methods and making recommendations on how neighborhood
councils can be enhanced.
Common Council Rules of Procedure: A formal process for filling vacant Council
seats caused by resignations is being developed by Alderpersons Rooker and Proulx in
consultation with the City Attorney for approval by Common Council.
Charter/Code analysis: The Committee will be performing a comprehensive
assessment of all committees and board roles, reporting structures, and membership.
CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
11.1 A Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $1,790,000 Bonds of the City of
Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, to Pay the Cost of the Reconstruction of the
East Clinton Street Bridge (PHASE II), in and for said City
By Alderperson Clairborne: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS, all conditions precedent to the financing of the capital project hereinafter
described, including compliance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality
Review Act, have been performed; and
WHEREAS, it is now desired to authorize additional bonds for the financing thereof,
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, by the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the total voting
strength of the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, as
follows:
Section 1. For the specific object or purpose of paying the cost of the reconstruction
of the East Clinton Street Bridge (Phase II), including incidental improvements and
expenses in connection therewith, in and for the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New
York, there are hereby authorized to be issued $1,790,000 bonds pursuant to the
provisions of the Local Finance Law.
Section 2. It is hereby determined that the maximum estimated cost of the aforesaid
specific object or purpose is $1,790,000, and that the plan of financing thereof is by the
issuance of the $1,790,000 bonds of said City authorized to be issued pursuant to this
bond resolution; provided, however, that the amount of bonds to be issued shall be
reduced by State or Federal grants-in-aid received therefor.
Section 3. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the
aforesaid specific object or purpose is twenty years, pursuant to subdivision 10 of
paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law.
Section 4. The faith and credit of said City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York,
are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on such
obligations as the same respectively become due and payable. An annual
appropriation shall be made in each year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on
such obligations becoming due and payable in such year. There shall annually be
levied on all the taxable real property of said City, a tax sufficient to pay the principal of
and interest on such obligations as the same become due and payable.
Section 5. Such bonds shall be in fully registered form and shall be signed in the
name of the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, by the manual or facsimile
signature of the City Controller and a facsimile of its corporate seal shall be imprinted or
impressed thereon and may be attested by the manual or facsimile signature of the City
Clerk.
Section 6. The intent of this resolution is to give the City Controller sufficient authority
to execute those agreements, instruments or to do any similar acts necessary to effect
the issuance of the aforesaid serial bonds without resorting to further action of this
Common Council.
July 2, 2012
20
Section 7. All other matters, except as provided herein relating to such bonds,
including determining whether to issue such bonds having substantially level or
declining debt service and all matters related thereto, prescribing whether manual or
facsimile signatures shall appear on said bonds, prescribing the method for the
recording of ownership of said bonds, appointing the fiscal agent or agents for said
bonds, providing for the printing and delivery of said bonds (and if said bonds are to be
executed in the name of the City by the facsimile signature of the City Controller,
providing for the manual countersignature of a fiscal agent or of a designated official of
the City), the date, denominations, maturities and interest payment dates, place or
places of payment, and also including the consolidation with other issues, shall be
determined by the City Controller. It is hereby determined that it is to the financial
advantage of the City not to impose and collect from registered owners of such serial
bonds any charges for mailing, shipping and insuring bonds transferred or exchanged
by the fiscal agent, and, accordingly, pursuant to paragraph c of Section 70.00 of the
Local Finance Law, no such charges shall be so collected by the fiscal agent. Such
bonds shall contain substantially the recital of validity clause provided for in section
52.00 of the Local Finance Law and shall otherwise be in such form and contain such
recitals in addition to those required by section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law, as the
City Controller shall determine.
Section 8. The validity of such bonds and bond anticipation notes may be contested
only if:
1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said City is not
authorized to expend money, or
2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of
this resolution are not substantially complied with,
and an action, suit or proceeding contesting such validity is commenced within twenty
days after the date of such publication, or
3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution.
Section 9. This resolution shall constitute a statement of official intent for purposes of
Treasury Regulations Section 1.150-2. Other than as specified in this resolution, no
monies are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis,
or otherwise set aside with respect to the permanent funding of the object or purpose
described herein.
Section 10. This resolution, which takes effect immediately, shall be published in
summary form in the official newspaper, together with a notice of the City Clerk in
substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law.
A roll call vote resulted as follows:
Alderperson Brock – Aye Alderperson Dotson - Aye
Alderperson Clairborne – Aye Alderperson Murtagh - Aye
Alderperson McCollister – Aye Alderperson Fleming - Aye
Alderperson Kerslick – Aye Alderperson Rooker - Aye
Alderperson Mohlenhoff – Aye Alderperson Proulx - Aye
Carried Unanimously
11.2 A Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $400,000 Bonds of the City of
Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, to Pay the Cost of the Reconstruction of the
Forest Home Drive Retaining Wall, in and for said City
By Alderperson Clairborne: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS, all conditions precedent to the financing of the capital project hereinafter
described, including compliance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality
Review Act, have been performed; and
WHEREAS, it is now desired to authorize additional bonds for the financing thereof,
now, therefore, be it
July 2, 2012
21
RESOLVED, by the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the total voting
strength of the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, as
follows:
Section 1. For the specific object or purpose of paying the cost of the reconstruction
of the Forest Home Drive Retaining Wall, including incidental expenses in connection
therewith, in and for the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, there are hereby
authorized to be issued $400,000 bonds pursuant to the provisions of the Local Finance
Law.
Section 2. It is hereby determined that the maximum estimated cost of the aforesaid
specific object or purpose is $400,000, and that the plan of financing thereof is by the
issuance of the $400,000 bonds of said City authorized to be issued pursuant to this
bond resolution.
Section 3. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the
aforesaid specific object or purpose is ten years, pursuant to subdivision 35 of
paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law, it having been determined by
an appropriate engineering professional that said object or purpose has such a useful
life.
Section 4. The faith and credit of said City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York,
are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on such
obligations as the same respectively become due and payable. An annual
appropriation shall be made in each year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on
such obligations becoming due and payable in such year. There shall annually be
levied on all the taxable real property of said City, a tax sufficient to pay the principal of
and interest on such obligations as the same become due and payable.
Section 5. Such bonds shall be in fully registered form and shall be signed in the
name of the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, by the manual or facsimile
signature of the City Controller and a facsimile of its corporate seal shall be imprinted or
impressed thereon and may be attested by the manual or facsimile signature of the City
Clerk.
Section 6. The intent of this resolution is to give the City Controller sufficient authority
to execute those agreements, instruments or to do any similar acts necessary to effect
the issuance of the aforesaid serial bonds without resorting to further action of this
Common Council.
Section 7. All other matters, except as provided herein relating to such bonds,
including determining whether to issue such bonds having substantially level or
declining debt service and all matters related thereto, prescribing whether manual or
facsimile signatures shall appear on said bonds, prescribing the method for the
recording of ownership of said bonds, appointing the fiscal agent or agents for said
bonds, providing for the printing and delivery of said bonds (and if said bonds are to be
executed in the name of the City by the facsimile signature of the City Controller,
providing for the manual countersignature of a fiscal agent or of a designated official of
the City), the date, denominations, maturities and interest payment dates, place or
places of payment, and also including the consolidation with other issues, shall be
determined by the City Controller. It is hereby determined that it is to the financial
advantage of the City not to impose and collect from registered owners of such serial
bonds any charges for mailing, shipping and insuring bonds transferred or exchanged
by the fiscal agent, and, accordingly, pursuant to paragraph c of Section 70.00 of the
Local Finance Law, no such charges shall be so collected by the fiscal agent. Such
bonds shall contain substantially the recital of validity clause provided for in section
52.00 of the Local Finance Law and shall otherwise be in such form and contain such
recitals in addition to those required by section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law, as the
City Controller shall determine.
Section 8. The validity of such bonds and bond anticipation notes may be contested
only if:
July 2, 2012
22
1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said City is not
authorized to expend money, or
2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of
this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or proceeding
contesting such validity is commenced within twenty days after the date of such
publication, or
3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution.
Section 9. This resolution shall constitute a statement of official intent for purposes of
Treasury Regulations Section 1.150-2. Other than as specified in this resolution, no
monies are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis,
or otherwise set aside with respect to the permanent funding of the object or purpose
described herein.
Section 10. This resolution, which takes effect immediately, shall be published in
summary form in the official newspaper, together with a notice of the City Clerk in
substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law.
A roll call vote resulted as follows:
Alderperson Brock – Aye Alderperson Dotson - Aye
Alderperson Clairborne – Aye Alderperson Murtagh - Aye
Alderperson McCollister – Aye Alderperson Fleming - Aye
Alderperson Kerslick – Aye Alderperson Rooker - Aye
Alderperson Mohlenhoff – Aye Alderperson Proulx – Aye
Carried Unanimously
11.3 A Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $2,596,000 Bonds of the City of
Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, to Pay the Cost of the Reconstruction of
Prospect Street, in and for said City
By Alderperson Clairborne: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS, all conditions precedent to the financing of the capital project hereinafter
described, including compliance with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality
Review Act, have been performed; and
WHEREAS, it is now desired to authorize additional bonds for the financing thereof,
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, by the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the total voting
strength of the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, as
follows:
Section 1. For the specific object or purpose of paying the cost of the reconstruction
of Prospect Street, from S. Aurora Street to Turner Place, including curbing, paving,
sidewalk improvements, and other incidental expenses and improvements in connection
therewith, in and for the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, there are hereby
authorized to be issued $2,596,000 bonds pursuant to the provisions of the Local
Finance Law.
Section 2. It is hereby determined that the maximum estimated cost of the aforesaid
specific object or purpose is $2,596,000, and that the plan of financing thereof is by the
issuance of the $2,596,000 bonds of said City authorized to be issued pursuant to this
bond resolution; provided, however, that the amount of bonds to be issued shall be
reduced by State or Federal grants-in-aid received therefor.
Section 3. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the
aforesaid specific object or purpose is fifteen years, pursuant to subdivision 20(c) of
paragraph a of Section 11.00 of the Local Finance Law.
July 2, 2012
23
Section 4. The faith and credit of said City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York,
are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on such
obligations as the same respectively become due and payable. An annual
appropriation shall be made in each year sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on
such obligations becoming due and payable in such year. There shall annually be
levied on all the taxable real property of said City, a tax sufficient to pay the principal of
and interest on such obligations as the same become due and payable.
Section 5. Such bonds shall be in fully registered form and shall be signed in the
name of the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, by the manual or facsimile
signature of the City Controller and a facsimile of its corporate seal shall be imprinted or
impressed thereon and may be attested by the manual or facsimile signature of the City
Clerk.
Section 6. The intent of this resolution is to give the City Controller sufficient authority
to execute those agreements, instruments or to do any similar acts necessary to effect
the issuance of the aforesaid serial bonds without resorting to further action of this
Common Council.
Section 7. All other matters, except as provided herein relating to such bonds,
including determining whether to issue such bonds having substantially level or
declining debt service and all matters related thereto, prescribing whether manual or
facsimile signatures shall appear on said bonds, prescribing the method for the
recording of ownership of said bonds, appointing the fiscal agent or agents for said
bonds, providing for the printing and delivery of said bonds (and if said bonds are to be
executed in the name of the City by the facsimile signature of the City Controller,
providing for the manual countersignature of a fiscal agent or of a designated official of
the City), the date, denominations, maturities and interest payment dates, place or
places of payment, and also including the consolidation with other issues, shall be
determined by the City Controller. It is hereby determined that it is to the financial
advantage of the City not to impose and collect from registered owners of such serial
bonds any charges for mailing, shipping and insuring bonds transferred or exchanged
by the fiscal agent, and, accordingly, pursuant to paragraph c of Section 70.00 of the
Local Finance Law, no such charges shall be so collected by the fiscal agent. Such
bonds shall contain substantially the recital of validity clause provided for in section
52.00 of the Local Finance Law and shall otherwise be in such form and contain such
recitals in addition to those required by section 52.00 of the Local Finance Law, as the
City Controller shall determine.
Section 8. The validity of such bonds and bond anticipation notes may be contested
only if:
1) Such obligations are authorized for an object or purpose for which said City is not
authorized to expend money, or
2) The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of
this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or proceeding
contesting such validity is commenced within twenty days after the date of such
publication, or
3) Such obligations are authorized in violation of the provisions of the Constitution.
Section 9. This resolution shall constitute a statement of official intent for purposes of
Treasury Regulations Section 1.150-2. Other than as specified in this resolution, no
monies are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis,
or otherwise set aside with respect to the permanent funding of the object or purpose
described herein.
Section 10. This resolution, which takes effect immediately, shall be published in
summary form in the official newspaper, together with a notice of the City Clerk in
substantially the form provided in Section 81.00 of the Local Finance Law.
A roll call vote resulted as follows:
July 2, 2012
24
Alderperson Brock – Aye Alderperson Dotson - Aye
Alderperson Clairborne – Aye Alderperson Murtagh - Aye
Alderperson McCollister – Aye Alderperson Fleming - Aye
Alderperson Kerslick – Aye Alderperson Rooker - Aye
Alderperson Mohlenhoff – Aye Alderperson Proulx - Aye
Carried Unanimously
11.4 Finance/Controller’s Office - Approval of Policies and Procedures Related
to City Credit Cards – Resolution
By Alderperson Clairborne: Seconded by Alderperson Brock
WHEREAS, Common Council authorized the use of commercial credit cards for
approved governmental purposes, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has contracted with JP Morgan Chase for said
commercial card services, and
WHEREAS, Common Council is required to approve, by resolution, Policies and
Procedures relating to the commercial credit cards; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby approves the Policies and Procedures
related to the use of commercial credit cards by authorized City personnel.
Carried Unanimously
11.5 City Employee Retirement Incentive – 2012 - Resolution
By Alderperson Clairborne: Seconded by Alderperson Kerslick
WHEREAS, the City’s projected 2013 budget shortfall will potentially require a number
of layoffs in various City departments, and
WHEREAS, in the absence of a state-enacted retirement incentive program and in
acknowledgement of the City’s current financial state, City staff has developed a City
Employee Retirement Incentive that would mitigate the option of employee layoffs, and
WHEREAS, the terms of said City Retirement Incentive are reflected in a Memorandum
of Understanding to be signed by the applicable City Unions; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the City will allow eligible City employees to request inclusion in the
City Retirement Incentive, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Retirement Incentive is subject to a Memorandum of
Understanding to be approved by the Mayor with the CSEA DPW Unit, CSEA
Administrative Unit, the Executive Unit, the Chief Officer’s Unit affiliate of the Ithaca
Professional Fire Fighters Association, the Ithaca Professional Fire Fighters Association
and Ithaca Police Benevolent Association agreeing with the terms and conditions of the
City’s Retirement Incentive.
Mayor Myrick explained the retirement incentive and answered questions from Council
members.
A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
City Employee Retirement Incentive – 2012
For those employees who are members of the New York State Retirement System, Tier
1, 2, 3 and 4, Plan ID 75I, A14 or A15 with at least ten (10) years of service in the
retirement system and have reached age 55 or older by October 1, 2012. Each eligible
employee must select Option A or Option B, but not both:
Option A -
The City would agree to pay an amount of $11,000 as a regular salary increase from
October 1, 2012, to their established retirement date. That established retirement date
cannot extend beyond December 28, 2012. Each employee within this group must
select a retirement date between October 1, 2012 and December 28, 2012. Each
July 2, 2012
25
employee would have to agree in writing to voluntarily notify the State Retirement
System in writing of their intent to retire, and be actually retired and off the payroll by
December 28, 2012. The employee must also sign an agreement to pay back all of the
salary increase if he/she does not, in fact retire and is not off payroll by December 28,
2012. The salary increase of $11,000 shall be paid as regular salary on an hourly basis
for that established period of time. The employee would need to notify Human
Resources and the Controller’s Office of their intention to retire no later than September
1, 2012.
Option B –
The City would agree to freeze the employee’s current health insurance contribution
percentage for a period of five (5) years. This will result in a savings to the employee
from not paying the retiree health insurance contribution percentage, currently 33.5%,
which is higher then the employee contribution rate at retirement. This frozen
percentage rate would start immediately following the employee’s established
retirement date. That established retirement date cannot exceed beyond December 28,
2012. Each employee within this group must select a retirement date between October
1, 2012 and December 28, 2012. Each employee would have to agree in writing to
voluntarily notify the State Retirement System in writing of their intent to retire and be
actually retired and off payroll by December 28, 2012. The employee would need to
notify Human Resources and the Controller’s Office of their intention to retire no later
than September 1, 2012.
For those employees who are members of the New York State Police and Fire
Retirement System, Tier 1 and 2, Plan ID 375I and 384D with at least twenty (20) years
of service in the retirement system, and be otherwise eligible to retire by October 1,
2012. Each eligible employee will be qualified for the following:
The City would agree to pay an amount of $11,000 as a regular salary increase from
October 1, 2012 to their established retirement date. The established retirement date
cannot extend beyond December 28, 2012. Each employee within this group must
select a retirement date between October 1, 2012 and December 28, 2012. Each
employee would have to agree in writing to voluntarily notify the State Retirement
System in writing of their intent to retire, and be actually retired and off the payroll by
December 28, 2012. The employee must also sign an agreement to pay back all of the
salary increase if he/she does not, in fact retire and is not off payroll by December 28,
2012. The employee would need to notify Human Resources and the Controller’s Office
of their intention to retire no later than September 1, 2012. The salary increase of
$11,000 shall be paid as regular salary on an hourly basis for that established period of
time.
The employee’s accumulated leave time payments and extended insurance coverage
obtained through the conversion of accumulated leave time shall be calculated by using
the 2012 hourly rate, without the $11,000 incentive salary increase having been added.
The employee expressly waives his/her right to any other New York State or City of
Ithaca Retirement Incentive.
Terms of Participation:
1. This agreement is executed subject to final approval by Human Resources
Director and the City’s Common Council.
2. The City agrees to pay the employee $11,000 as a regular salary increase from
October 1, 2012 to December 28, 2012 or the individual employee retirement date,
whichever is applicable.
3. The employee agrees to notify in writing the New York State Retirement System
of the employee intent to retire, and the employee must, in fact, retire and be off the City
payroll by December 28, 2012.
July 2, 2012
26
4. The employee agrees to pay back to the City all of the $11,000 salary increase if
the employee does not, in fact, retire and is not off the payroll by the established date of
retirement between the dates of October 1, 2012 and December 28, 2012.
5. The salary increase of $11,000 shall be paid as regular salary on an hourly basis
for the period of time from October 1, 2012 to the employee’s established retirement
date, which shall be between the dates of October 1, 2012 and December 28, 2012.
6. The employee’s accumulated leave time payments and extended insurance
coverage obtained through the conversion of accumulated leave time shall be
calculated by using the employee’s 2012 hourly rate without the $11,000 incentive
salary increases being added in.
7. The employee understands that pursuant to New York State Retirement
guidelines the $11,000 salary increase will most likely not be included in the employee’s
final average salary calculation.
8. The employee expressly waives his/her right to participate in any other New York
State or City of Ithaca retirement incentive.
9. The employee may apply his/her $11,000 incentive of ($ ), which is equivalent to
(hrs) to his/her sick leave bank at the time of his/her retirement to purchase health
insurance during retirement.
10. If the Health Insurance contribution freeze option is selected, the employee may
use up his/her current allotment of sick leave to purchase health insurance prior to using
the five year percentage freeze contribution, it will be valued at the future year health
insurance. (i.e., if the employee, upon retirement has $5,000 in unused sick leave cash,
has a 20% contribution rate and elects to apply all of it toward extended heath
insurance, the percentage freeze would not start until after the $5,000 unused sick
leave cash amount is used up. The health insurance contribution rate of 20% would
then start for a period of 5 years. The 20% rate would be calculated at the future cost of
health insurance at the time the contribution freeze begins.
11. The employee must notify in writing, both the Human Resources Department and
the Controller’s Office of his/her intention to retire and which retirement incentive option
is selected, no later than September 1, 2012.
11.6 City Controller’s Report
City Controller Thayer reported on the following:
• The external auditors will begin work next week
• The 2013 City budget is in the process of being developed:
The 2013 Taxable assessment is $1,536,730,783 (+1.53% increase
over 2012) based on a 52.3% increase in commercial properties
and a 42.9% drop in residential properties.
Exempt property – 2011 exempt property = 60.44%
2012 exempt property = 60.82%
(Cornell University = 83.1% of the tax exempt property)
• Departmental draft budgets are due today
• Capital project requests are under review
• Property Tax Cap – the City needs more information to calculate what the
actual tax increase will be (base + exclusions). He will recommend
another resolution to override of the tax cap to protect from calculation
errors.
14. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS:
14.1 Alderperson Rooker - Resolution in Support of the Public Art
Commission’s Recommendation for the Selection of Artwork for 21 Boxes: “An
Electrical Box Mural Project”
By Alderperson Rooker: Seconded by Alderperson Dotson
July 2, 2012
27
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Public Art Commission (PAC) has been established to,
among other duties, review and advise the Common Council on proposals for the
exhibition and display of public art in the City’s public spaces, and
WHEREAS, in 2010, the PAC created a mural and street art program to beautify blank
walls within the city while providing local artists from all sections of the community an
opportunity to showcase their work, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works approved several locations for future murals and
street art, including municipal electrical boxes throughout the city, by resolution on May
19, 2010, and
WHEREAS, the PAC initiated a project to beautify 21 municipal electrical boxes through
the creation of murals by selected artists, and
WHEREAS, the project will be funded through a grant from the Tompkins Charitable Gift
Fund and will be budget-neutral to the City, and
WHEREAS, the PAC issued a Call for Art in April 2012 and received 45 submissions for
the project, and
WHEREAS, the Public Art Commission reviewed all of the submissions at its meeting
on June 14, 2012 and recommends that the Common Council select the artwork
submitted by 21 individual artists to be installed on 21 pre-approved electrical boxes
throughout the city; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council accepts the Public Art
Commissions recommendation and selects the submissions of the following artists for
the 21 Boxes: “An Electrical Box Mural Project”: Kadie Salfi, Ryan McGuire, Eder Muniz,
Kaleb Hunkele, Dusty Herbig, Kellie Cox, Jackie Richardson, Ryan Curtis, Sean
Chilson, Joshua Sperling, Alice Muhlback, Shira Evergreen, Gerry Walsh, Jay Stooks,
Mara Baldwin, Ann Krajewski, Rob Licht, Kurt Piller, Oona Stern, Phoebe Aceto, and
Jocelyn Lutter; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the selected artists may proceed with the installation of their murals
on their appointed electrical box upon the execution of an agreement with the City (as
reviewed by the City Attorney) consistent with the provisions of the application form
used for this project.
Carried Unanimously
14.2 A Resolution Authorizing The Implementation, and Funding in the First
Instance of the State Multi-Modal Program-Aid [and State Administered Federal
Program-Aid] Eligible Costs, of a Capital Project, and Appropriating Funds
Therefor
By Alderperson Proulx: Seconded by Alderperson Clairborne
WHEREAS, a Project for the ‘Old Elmira Road Complete Streets Project’ (the
‘Project’), P.I.N. ___ is eligible for funding under Title 23 U.S. Code, as amended, and
New York State’s Multi-Modal Program administered by the NYS Department of
Transportation (NYSDOT); and
WHEREAS, the Southern Tier Regional Economic Development Corporation has
announced funds available in the Southern Tier Region Community Revitalization
Program (Part B. NYSDOT Multi-Modal #4 Funding), and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca desires to advance the Project by applying for funds from
the Multi-Modal Program and, if successful, by making a commitment of advance
funding of the non-local share and funding of the full local share of the costs of the
Project, and
WHEREAS, the Project is a Type II Action under SEQR and CEQR as a rehabilitation of
an existing roadway and therefore does not require additional environmental review;
July 2, 2012
28
NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Ithaca Common Council, duly convened, does hereby
RESOLVE, That the Common Council hereby approves the above-subject project; and
it is hereby further
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby approves of the Department of Public
Works submitting a grant application for the Multi-Modal #4 Program for the Project, and
RESOLVED, That contingent upon award of the Multi-Modal funds, the Common
Council hereby authorizes the establishment of Capital Project #780 to pay in the first
instance 100% of the federal and non-federal share of the cost of all work for the
Project; and it is further
RESOLVED, That contingent upon award of the Multi-Modal funds, the sum not to
exceed $1,042,000 is hereby appropriated from serial bonds and made available to
cover the cost of participation in the above Project in the first instance, with the balance
of expenditures to come from the 2012 and 2013 City budgets; and it is further
RESOLVED, That the total project cost shall not exceed $1,365,000 with the
understanding that the breakdown of funds to be approximately $675,000 in Multi-Modal
funds (NYSDOT), $192,000 in sidewalk and curb assessment to adjoining property
owners (subject to the conditions of the City Charter), $175,000 in serial bond financing,
and $323,000 in force account labor from the 2012 and 2013 operating budgets 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 it is further
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 it is 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 it is further
RESOLVED, That this Resolution shall take effect immediately.
Carried Unanimously
14.3 Support For The Application of Grant Monies to Incorporate a Motion
Picture Museum into the Wharton Building at Stewart Park as outlined in the
Stewart Park Rehabilitation Action Plan – Resolution
By Alderperson Dotson: Seconded by Alderperson Mohlenhoff
WHEREAS, the 2012 New York State Consolidated Funding Application (CFA) includes
Regional Tourism Marketing Grant Initiative, which has a total of $3 million available
state wide for eligible projects to assist programs that include building renovation
projects that will increase tourism, and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Motion Picture Project (IMPP) is an eligible applicant for the
program, and seeks to submit an application to the New York State Consolidated
Funding Application Regional Tourism program, and
WHEREAS, application for CFA funding requires submission of a formal resolution of
the municipality supporting the grant application, and
July 2, 2012
29
WHEREAS, CFA applications are due by July 16, 2012, and
WHEREAS, funding will allow for renovations on the Wharton Studio Building in Stewart
Park into a regional motion picture museum with cultural and educational programs
related to the film and multi media industry with a permanent exhibit focusing on
Ithaca’s silent film history, and
WHEREAS, the Wharton Studio Building is an important piece of Ithaca’s history, and
WHEREAS, the proposed improvements to the Wharton Studio Building have been
outlined and detailed in the already approved Stewart Park Rehabilitation Action Plan,
and
WHEREAS, no match funding is required from the City of Ithaca for this application,
now, therefore be it,
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby support the 2012
application of the Ithaca Motion Picture Project to the New York State Consolidated
Funding Application Regional Tourism Program and be it further
RESOLVED, That support of this grant application and subsequent improvements to the
Wharton Studio Building in no way ensures the City’s intent to act to extend, reinforce or
expand the expectation of the Ithaca Motion Picture Project, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests that the City Attorney review the laws
governing exclusive private use of city park lands, the legality of a potential lease and
the applicability of Chapter 170 to the Wharton Studio Building.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding the history of this project and the process
going forward. A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
14.4 Support for the Application of Grant Monies to Continue Restoration of the
Cascadilla Boathouse located in Stewart Park as outlined in Stewart Park
Rehabilitation Action Plan – Resolution
By Alderperson Dotson: Seconded by Alderperson Mohlenhoff
WHEREAS, the 2012 New York State Consolidated Funding Application (CFA) includes
Historic Preservation, which has a total of $16 million available state wide for eligible
projects to assist programs that include building renovation projects, and
WHEREAS, Cascadilla Boat Club and the Friends of Stewart Park are eligible
applicants for the program, and seek to submit an application to the New York State
Consolidated Funding Application Historic Preservation Program, and
WHEREAS, application for CFA funding requires submission of a formal resolution of
the municipality supporting the grant application, and
WHEREAS, CFA applications are due by July 16, 2012, and
WHEREAS, funding will allow for the completion of the first stage of renovations to the
Cascadilla Boathouse, located in Stewart Park in the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the Cascadilla Boathouse is an important City historic building and is on the
National Register of Historic Places, and
WHEREAS, the Cascadilla Boat Club and the Friends of Stewart Park, two local
nonprofit organizations, have a very strong interest in helping to coordinate discussions
and planning for the ongoing maintenance and potential improvements of the building
and its grounds, and
WHEREAS, the main outcome of the proposed project is to allow occupancy of the
second floor of the Cascadilla Boathouse for fewer than fifty users, and
WHEREAS, receipt of this grant will allow for the construction of a stairway to the
second floor and for removal of toxic materials in the third floor rafters and attic, and
July 2, 2012
30
WHEREAS, the proposed improvements to the Cascadilla Boathouse have been
outlined and detailed in the already approved Stewart Park Rehabilitation Action Plan,
and
WHEREAS, no match funding is required from the City of Ithaca for this application;
now, therefore be it,
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby support the 2012
application of the Cascadilla Boat Club and the Friends of Stewart Park to the New York
State Consolidated Funding Application Historic Preservation program for a
revitalization program for the construction of a stairway to the second floor gymnasium,
and for removal of toxic materials in the third floor rafters and attic, upper story housing,
exterior building renovations, and possible streetscape improvements on Cayuga
Street, and be it further
RESOLVED, That support of this grant application and subsequent improvements to the
Cascadilla Boat House in now way ensures the City’s intent to act to extend, reinforce
or expand the expectation of the Cascadilla Boat Club in regards to the use of the City’s
Boat House, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests that the City Attorney review the laws
governing exclusive private use of city park lands, the legality of the lease and the
applicability of Chapter 170 to the Cascadilla Boat Club.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Brock: Seconded by Alderperson Proulx
RESOLVED, That the First Resolved clause be amended to read as follows:
“RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby support the 2012
application of the Cascadilla Boat Club and the Friends of Stewart Park to the New York
State Consolidated Funding Application Historic Preservation program for a
revitalization program for the construction of a stairway to the second floor and for
removal of toxic materials in the third floor rafters and attic, and be it further”
Carried Unanimously
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Proulx: Seconded by Alderperson McCollister
RESOLVED, That the Last Resolved clause be removed from the resolution.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding the general desire to support the grant
application and the conflicting message of the last Resolved clause. The City Attorney
will review the laws regarding the exclusive use of parkland and Chapter 170 of the City
of Ithaca Municipal Code as it relates to agenda item 14.3.
A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
Main Motion as Amended:
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS:
15.1 Appointment to Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency – Resolution
By Alderperson Clairborne: Seconded by Alderperson Proulx
RESOLVED, That Karl Graham be appointed to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency
Board to replace Susan Cummings.
Carried Unanimously
REPORT OF COMMON COUNCIL LIAISONS:
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency:
Alderperson Proulx reported that the IURA has questions regarding the resolution that
Common Council approved for the transfer of the Cherry Street parcel. The IURA would
like to consider a mixed use potential for the parcel as they construct the request for
July 2, 2012
31
proposals in the broadest sense, but do not want to contradict the intent of the
resolution.
TCAT:
Alderperson Murtagh announced that TCAT has extended an invitation to Common
Council to attend a meeting regarding their 2013 capital budget. The meeting will be
held on July 25, 2012 at 11:30 a.m. in the Borg Warner room at the Tompkins County
Public Library.
Recreation Partnership:
Alderperson Kerslick reported on the status of the 2013 Recreation Partnership budget,
noting that the reorganization of a day camp has allowed them to add programs and
increase revenue.
REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY:
City Attorney Lavine reported that a landlord on Elmwood Avenue challenged Building
Commissioner Radke and the Board of Zoning Appeals regarding the definition of a
functional family unit. The City prevailed in the case and can proceed with prosecution
of a number of violations at the property.
MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS:
19.1 Approval of the June 4, 2012; June 6, 2012; June 13, 2012 Common Council
Meeting Minutes
Approval of the above minutes was deferred to the August 1, 2012 meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 7:21 p.m.
______________________________ _______________________________
Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC Svante L. Myrick
City Clerk Mayor