Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2013-11-25BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 4:45 p.m. November 25, 2013 PRESENT: Mayor Myrick Commissioners (4) - Darling, Morache, Goldsmith, Acharya OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney - Lavine Assistant Superintendent of Water and Sewer – Whitney Information Management Specialist - Myers Director of Engineering – West City Chamberlain – Parsons EXCUSED: Commissioner Jenkins Alderperson Fleming Acting Supt. Benjamin DAC Liaison – Roberts ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: There were no additions to or deletions from the agenda. MAYOR’S COMMUNICATIONS: Mayor Myrick announced that he has appointed Michael Thorne to be the next Superintendent of Public Works for the City of Ithaca. He explained Mr. Thorne's background and experience. Mr. Thorne will begin work in mid-January 2014. Mayor Myrick extended his sincere thanks and appreciation to Acting Supt. Benjamin, Director of Engineering West, and Asst. Supt. Whitney for their extra work and support during the search for a new superintendent. They have done a remarkable job while the search for a new superintendent has been underway. COMMUNICATIONS AND HEARINGS FROM PERSONS BEFORE THE BOARD: Mr. Steve Flash and Mr. Bob Haney addressed the Board to voice their concerns regarding two issues - the rental fees for use of the docks/slips near the City’s golf course, and the license fee for use of the former Agway parcel on Taughannock Blvd. They explained their reasons for appealing the license fees assessed for both uses based upon the Pomeroy Appraisal for use of city land. RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC: There was no response to the public REPORTS: Director of Engineering West reported that he, staff, and Commissioner Darling met with mobile vendors a couple of times to discuss proposed locations, rules, and fees for food truck permits in the City of Ithaca They will provide more detailed information on the proposed mobile food vending program for food trucks to the Board at the December 9, 2013 meeting. They then plan to hold a public hearing on the proposed program at the December 23, 2013 board meeting. The final policy then would be brought back to the Board for approval at the January 13, 2014 meeting. That would allow staff time to go through the vetting process with vendors, and assign spots by April 1, which is when the program would begin. Director of Engineering West further reported that the developer for the Harold's Square Project would be at the Planning Board meeting on November 26, 2013. The developers made an informal presentation to Board of Public Works a few months ago regarding the need to modify city facilities under the Green Street Garage. He stated that at that presentation the Board seemed inclined to accept the proposal. The developers will make a formal proposal to the Board for approval. Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes November 25, 2013 2 Asst. Supt. Whitney reported that crews completed the replacement of the water and sewer mains on Esty Street, and put the road back in shape until it will be completely repaved in the Spring. Staff continues work with the water plant rebuild project; however, at this point they are about 3 months behind schedule. The reason is that the project’s main iron supplier for the project went bankrupt. A new supplier has been found so work will be able to continue soon. He will bring photos to share at the next Board meeting. They are starting to get prefab buildings in place as well, with the first one on Water Street delivered last Friday. The other buildings are large and will need coordination with IPD and the City Forester as they are delivered from Ohio to be installed in one piece. That delivery is scheduled for December 18 at 10 a.m.; the buildings are 30’ to 35' long, and 15' high on the truck's trailer. The transport of the buildings will require oversize vehicle travel permits from Ohio to be delivered. After that delivery and installation, crews will move to the wastewater treatment plant to put in a new aeration system in the sludge process. It will cost less for the City to have staff do the work rather than having a contractor come in. He further reported that something toxic came down the pipeline recently and knocked out service at the wastewater treatment plant. Everyone is working to determine what could have caused it. Right now, it appears that a very large amount of carpet cleaner was dumped into the system. Staff informed New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and will need to make a final determination as to the cause and source of the chemicals being in the system. Commissioner Goldsmith noted that the Board received some letters from neighbors about the new road from East State Street to the Water Plant on Water Street regarding the house that would need to be torn down to accommodate it. The neighbor's have expressed opposition to the proposal; and so he was wondering what was happening with it. Asst. Supt. Whitney responded that the proposal has not been approved yet. Staff has scheduled a meeting with residents of the neighborhood for December 5, 2013 to discuss the proposal. He noted that it would be nice to have the alternate driveway on Water Street since there would be less of an elevation drop for tractor trailers off East State Street. The Mayor and several Common Council members are planning to attend that meeting so staff will know more after the meeting about how to proceed. Mayor Myrick noted that this proposal would require approval of the Board of Public Works as well. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of the September 23, 2013 and November 4, 2013 Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes - Resolution By Commissioner Morache: Seconded by Commissioner Darling RESOLVED, That the minutes of the September 23, 2013 and November 4, 2013 Board of Public Works meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously BUILDINGS, PROPERTIES, REFUSE AND TRANSIT: 2014 Trash and Yard Waste Tag Rates - Resolution By Commissioner Acharya: Seconded by Commissioner Darling WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has reviewed and discussed information from the Solid Waste Division and the Chamberlain’s Office regarding trash tags and yard waste tags, and WHEREAS, the Common Council has accepted the recommendation in the Mayor’s 2014 Budget Narrative stating that trash tag rates should increase by $0.25 per tag, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby adjusts the purchase price of the 35 lb. trash disposal tag from $3.50 to $3.75 per tag, effective January 1, 2014, and be it further Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes November 25, 2013 3 RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby retains the purchase price of the yard waste disposal tag at $1.50 for each bag or bundle of not more than 50 lbs. of yard waste, effective January 1, 2014, and that these rates will stand until changed. Carried Unanimously PARKING AND TRAFFIC: A Resolution to Grant a Hardship Request for 202 Ridgedale Road under the RPP System By Commissioner Darling: Seconded by Commissioner Morache WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works (BPW) has promulgated regulations (adopted June 9, 2004) for implementation of the Residential Parking Permit System, which was established by Common Council on May 6, 1998 after an act of the New York State Legislature, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 260-4 of the City Code and in accordance with the BPW regulations, the BPW may grant hardship requests, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has received a written petition for a hardship request from the current owners of a single family home at 202 Ridgedale Road, and WHEREAS, the 200 block of Ridgedale Road is currently Odd/Even Parking and the 90 block of Ithaca Road is currently in the Residential Parking Permit System; and WHEREAS, the property in question is a single family house with a front door and walk to Ithaca Road, but a driveway and street address on Ridgedale Road and is thus not allowed to purchase permits, and WHEREAS, Engineering staff do not have an objection to granting the request, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works recognizes that the hardship is not self-imposed but rather results from personal health issues and the existing layout of the property, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby approves the hardship request for 202 Ridgedale Road, allowing the residents of said property to purchase permits for Residential Parking Permit System block otherwise in accordance with the above- mentioned regulations, and be it further RESOLVED, That the hardship allowance shall continue to be in effect as long as the property owners continue to reside at the dwelling, but shall be extinguished should the owners move to another residence. Commissioner Acharya stated that he would like to see if the Board could move to have these types of requests handled administratively by staff so that only requests that are denied by staff and then are appealed come to the Board for consideration. City Attorney Lavine stated that the Board of Public Works could, by resolution on an annual basis, delegate the authority to review the hardship requests to staff to handle administratively, if it wanted to. He would be happy to review the residential parking permit rules/law to see if this could be done and report back to the Board. Mayor Myrick suggested that Transportation Engineer Logue and Jr. Transportation Engineer Johnson be consulted on the proposal to see if they might have a reason not to have that authority delegated to them. A Vote on the Resolution Resulted as Follows: Carried Unanimously WATER AND SEWER: 2014 Water and Sewer Rates - Resolution By Commissioner Acharya: Seconded by Commissioner Morache WHEREAS, in accordance with City Charter, the Board of Public Works has the authority to set water and sewer rates, and Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes November 25, 2013 4 WHEREAS, staff has provided water and sewer usage projections for 2014, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works adopts the following water and sewer rates and fees starting for bills due on or after January 1, 2014, and the rates are effective until changed: Basic Rates (per 100 cubic feet): Existing 2013 2014 Water $4.73 $5.11 Sewer $5.47 $5.47 Minimum Billing (per quarter year) METER SIZE CU FT ALLOWED WATER SEWER TOTAL Small 1,200 $61.32 $65.64 $126.96 1" 3,200 $163.52 $175.04 $338.56 1.5" 5,500 $281.05 $300.85 $581.90 2" 11,200 $572.32 $612.64 $1,184.96 3" 16,000 $817.60 $875.20 $1,692.80 4" 24,100 $1,231.51$1,318.27 $2,549.78 6" 42,100 $2,151.31 $2,302.87 $4,454.18 Other Services  Unmetered sprinkler service: $12 per inch diameter per quarter  Metered water for circuses, carnivals contractors, etc., through suitable connection at hydrant installed by Water and Sewer: charged by use, with minimum bill of $200 per day for the first 7 days and $50 per day thereafter.  Bulk Water for street sweepers, tank trucks, spray rigs, etc., available at the Water building: $100 per load up to 500 gallons, and $25 per thousand over 500 gallons.  Meter removal, meter resetting, turning water off, or turning water on at curb stop: $40 per event.  Residential Meter Testing: $75 if meter is found to be within industry tolerances; no charge if out of tolerance.  Replacement of frosted or damaged residential meter:  During business hours – cost of the meter plus $50  After hours without a call-in – cost of the meter plus $125  After hours with a call-in – cost of the meter plus $220  Replace damaged AMR meter head, caused by owner/occupant negligence: cost of new meter plus $60.  Special meter reading with corresponding bill: $45 per special read.  Data Logs: the first obtainable data log is free, delivered electronically in a PDF format. Paper copies will be printed upon request at the cost of duplication. All additional data logs shall be charged at $45 each delivered electronically. If a City issue is found as a result of a data log, there shall be no charge.  All other special services: To be billed at cost (including overhead) with supporting bill documentation. Carried Unanimously Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes November 25, 2013 5 DISCUSSION ITEMS: Appeal of License Fees for the Agway Parcel and the Golf Course Property: City Chamberlain Parsons joined the Board for discussion of these items. City Chamberlain Parsons explained the history behind the City’s Use of City Land Code and processes. It began when New York State auditors found that the City was not charging enough for use of city land. The City hired Pomeroy Appraisers to come in and conduct an appraisal for all the various uses of City land and determine the appropriate license fees. She stated that when the appraisers looked at the Agway parcel they determined it should be appraised comparable to other properties for a marine/commercial use. She further noted that coming up with appraisals at a fair rental market value was not easy. Mayor Myrick noted that this parcel also contains some contamination from its former use so it can’t actually be used for anything, without remediation, except for parking. City Attorney Lavine responded to counter that point, and noted that while this parcel is undoubtedly contaminated, and brings the market value to sell it to maybe zero; the traditional license fee for use of city land was based upon its use for parking or other uses that could occur on a contaminated parcel. The Board should consider that as this appeal moves forward. He further noted that former Superintendent Gray’s view on the parcel after the appraisal was that he felt a recommendation to lower the license fee for the parcel should be considered by the Board. City Attorney Lavine stated that there was also mention of a $200/month lease for this parcel that had expired. The Board should consider the value for the parcel as it is now and not the amount charged in the expired lease from 1998. The last point he would like to make concerns the Pomeroy appraisal process that was done to value city property, and that happened at the same time that Chapter 170 of the City Code to create a new uniform process to make sure the City receives fair value for private use of city land. That process does provide for an appeal process which is to the Board of Public Works. Adjustments should be the rule, not the goal, and made only when the license fee is deemed not to be fair. Mayor Myrick asked what the City Attorney would recommend if the Board decides to adjust the license fee for the Agway parcel. Would it be beneficial to have a new assessment of the property? City Attorney Lavine responded that there is a process in place that was done through the appraisal of city land by Pomeroy Associates, as well as the creation of the new Chapter 170 of the City of Ithaca Municipal code regarding use of city land. He further stated that since the parcel is contaminated it may reduce its value so the license fee should be adjusted as well. He feels that some reduction would be okay; he is not sure what percentage would be appropriate. In any case, by operation of law, the former lease in the amount of $200.00 per month from 1998 continues – unless ended and the rate increased. There is a good argument that the old lease is already terminated – or could be done tomorrow. If the Board wanted to leave the appraised value in place as per Chapter 170 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, it could deny the appeal or propose some sort of reduction. One option is to wait until a new round of appraisals is done (new appraisals are required every five years, and the City is nearing the end of the current five year appraisal) so for the next couple of years the Board could recommend that the current fee remain in place; or, conduct another appraisal; or find some staff member in the Department of Public Works who is capable of conducting an appraisal. City Chamberlain Parsons stated that the bill in question was billed in 2013 for the period of 4/1/12 - 3/31/13, at a rate of .47 per square foot. She needs direction from the Board on how her office should proceed with the billing for this parcel. There currently is a $10,000 bill for a period that expired this previous Spring, and should the bill for 2013- 2014 be done following that same rate or at the expired lease rate of $200/month. She further noted that the other license fee being appealed for use of the dock/boat slips is over $10,000.00 as well. Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes November 25, 2013 6 Mayor Myrick wondered whether the City and the appellants should hire an appraiser for both parcels to determine the value and then abide by that determination since there are conflicting opinions about the value of properties. Is that something the City could do? City Attorney Lavine responded that under Chapter 170 the Board could adjust the license fees as it sees fit. Commissioner Goldsmith stated that the Board has had endless discussions regarding the license fees for use of the boat slips. In fact, for the first year, the Board inadvisably cut the license fee in half since the bill with the new license fees was sent after rental contracts were signed and issued for the boat slips for that year, and the appellants could not recoup their costs. Further, the Board already went through this technical stuff at great length about how the appraisals were done. There were also a lot of discussions by the Board with the appraiser regarding Inlet Island, and the boat slips. He further stated that before the Board decides how to proceed, he would like to review the Board of Public Works minutes for 2010 when discussions on this topic took place. Mr. Flash stated that their concern is not the appraisal it's what the license fee is being based upon. The fee is based upon the docks that he owns. The Agway parcel was not part of any appraisal process; it appears to be an appraisal that applies to all marine commercial property. He would say they did not pay those fees because he understood from the Board that former Superintendent Gray told them the terms and fees of the expired lease should continue. If, now, the City is going to charge $10,000 for use of the parcel, they're not sure what they would do. Commissioner Acharya questioned whether Mr. Flash had been paying $200 per month since 1998 for the parcel. Mr. Flash responded yes, and noted that it was only this past year that the new license fee was imposed. City Attorney Lavine questioned whether the Board of Public Works voted on former Supt. Gray’s recommendation? Mr. Flash responded that he was not sure; he understood from this Board that they did not have to pay the new license fee because they were paying the monthly lease fee. City Chamberlain Parsons stated that there have been lots of conversations about the process the City should follow to create bills for the property. There was recognition that the parcel is contaminated and to what effect that should have on the lease. Her office was getting mixed messages such as bill, don't bill, bill, etc. Unless directed otherwise, she is going to collect the bill as she does with all license fees as directed under Chapter 170. Mr. Haney stated the fair market value of the land needs to be determined in order to assess taxes, and determine license fees. What could the City sell either property for? That is the number they're looking for because they want it to be fair assessment. Commissioner Acharya stated that given there are two issues being discussed here. One is Chapter 170 of the City Code regarding use of City land and a legitimate way for the City to bill. The other is the verbal promise made by former Supt. Gray which he remembers hearing but he doesn't know if the Board took action on. Given that, it would be helpful to see the Board meeting minutes to see what Supt. Gray said. Mayor Myrick stated that the Tompkins County Assessor, Jay Franklin, could do an assessment of the properties in question. City Chamberlain Parsons responded that she suspects this parcel has been assessed – although she does not know it is. Mr. Flash stated that the Agway parcel has been assessed; however, that appraisal does not take into account the environmental condition of the property - it assumes it to be clean. Commissioner Morache stated that there are two ways to determine the value of the land. He further stated that there is value of land and all rights that go with it, and there is an assessment of licensed value which conveys a limited set of rights - like parking, and storage. Is the license value derived directly from assessed value of land for sale? Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes November 25, 2013 7 City Chamberlain Parsons stated that Pomeroy Appraisers looked at the land from two or three different directions - market rate, sales rate, what could be made from he sale of the property, what kind of improvements could be done etc. She does not want to over simplify it because it was much more complicated. City Attorney Lavine noted that the other factor here is that contamination of the parcel is a double edged sword in that the land is worth less when going to sell it, but use of land is not affected i.e. for parking/storage. He stated that he would recommend the Pomeroy study and appraisal the default position that the City should consider. Commissioner Acharya stated that in the absence of any other sort of information, the Pomeroy appraisal seems fairly reasonable. He hasn't really heard any reason not to go with it; however, he could be convinced otherwise. Commissioner Goldsmith stated that he feels the same way in both instances. Commissioner Morache stated that he feels that way as well for the Agway parcel, but for the marina there is the whole issue of who owns, and how that was factored into the appraisal that bothers him. City Chamberlain Parsons stated that the appraiser knew that the City did not own the docks. Her recollection is that the appraisers were verbally told that City did not own the docks that it only owned the land. When the City talks about leases for land it is talking about the docks. Commissioner Darling stated that there is a license fee for use of city land at the Agway parcel, the contamination there is not a compelling reason to reduce the license fee. He feels that the Board should follow Pomeroy’s assessment and noted that’s why there is an appeal process. Further discussion followed on the floor with a lot of the same issues raised above being discussed again, as well as how the square footage of the parcels in question were calculated and the formulas used in determining the appropriate license fees. The Board requested the minutes from 2010-2013 of their meetings be forwarded to them for review before their next meeting, and for staff to make a recommendation for their consideration. Request for an Encroachment Agreement for 126-128 South Cayuga Street Director of Engineer West reported that the property owner wants to maintain this underground access point to the building for continuation of current uses. Staff supports the request so the City needs to establish a formal agreement with the property owner. Staff will work with the attorney’s office to develop a recommendation for the Board to approve regarding the continued access and use of the underground vault at this location. ADJOURNMENT: On a motion the meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Sarah L. Myers Svante L. Myrick Information Management Specialist Mayor