Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2012-11-05BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 4:45 p.m. November 5, 2012 PRESENT: Mayor Myrick Commissioners (5) - Darling, Morache, Leccese, Goldsmith, Acharya OTHERS PRESENT: Superintendent of Public Works - Gray Assistant Superintendent of Streets and Facilities - Benjamin Assistant Superintendent of Water and Sewer – Whitney Common Council Liaison – Fleming Information Management Specialist - Myers Asst. Engineer – West Youth Bureau Director – Green Youth Bureau Executive Assistant – Hallett-Harris EXCUSED: Commissioner Jenkins DAC Liaison – Roberts ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: There were no additions to or deletions from the agenda. COMMUNICATIONS AND HEARINGS FROM PERSONS BEFORE THE BOARD: Betsy Darlington, City of Ithaca and former City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council Chair, addressed the Board regarding the proposed sale of surplus property at 1105 Giles Street, and the City’s history of acquiring properties near the Six Mile Creek Natural Area, which is the City’s watershed area for its drinking water. RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC: There were no responses to the public comment. REPORTS: Special Committees of the Board: Newman Golf Course: Commissioner Darling reported that he and Commissioner Leccese met recently with representatives from the Friends of Newman Golf Course. He stated that they did not recommend private management of the course at this time. The proposed budget will keep the course on track to meet its budget within the next three years (or break even). He also stated that the Friends of Newman Golf Course would also like to expand the golf course concession to boat slips. He noted that the full report from that meeting should be available for the November 26, 2012 board meeting. Board Liaisons: Planning and Development Board: Commissioner Acharya reported that the Planning and Development Board had a very long meeting recently on the Commons Redesign Project. It is a Type II Action because it is a city street. It will move to site plan review at the regular meeting of the board in November, and then it will be on the board’s December agenda for a vote. He also reported that a new proposed project “Harold Square”, a downtown mixed used building, from David Lubin was discussed that will involve a large tower. He stated that it is still in the sketch stages at this point. Staff Reports: Asst. Supt. Benjamin reported that crews continue clean-up work after Tropical Storm Sandy, as well as preparing for a storm predicted for this area later in the week. Crews are still picking up leaves and yard waste; leaves were being taken to Cornell for their use; however, the City was informed recently that they have enough so now leaves and yard waste will be transported to Cayuga Compost. He also shared a recent staffing problem where a staff member was called for jury duty that then resulted in five other staff having their schedules impacted in order to provide coverage at a parking garage. 2 November 5, 2012 He noted that because of this incident other construction projects were delayed. He explained that since staffing levels are at the bare minimum this is a problem that the department will continue to encounter as time goes by. Asst. Supt. Whitney reported that the annual inspection of three water tanks will take place in the coming weeks, which may impact residents’ water flow for a short period of time, as tanks have to be drained in order for inspection of the interior to occur. He also reported that Johnson Controls will be conducting meter testing, and that seasonal help will be laid off next week. Staff is reviewing final utility plans for the proposed Commons Redesign project and work is scheduled to begin on the next phase of the Collegetown Terrace project soon. Supt. Gray reported that the Engineering Office is busy wrapping up construction projects for the year – including the Seneca Street Parking Garage and the Clinton Street Bridge/Prospect Street Reconstruction. A ribbon-cutting ceremony for the bridge re-opening is being planned at this time. He explained that he would work with Asst. Supt. Whitney and Benjamin, and Asst. Engineer West to develop a plan for his retirement, which will be submitted to the Board for their review and input. Commissioner Goldsmith questioned whether it would be obligatory for all buildings on the Commons during the redesign project to have a fire department connection installed. Asst. Supt. Whitney responded that will be addressed individually with property owners as the project moves forward. He explained that the City usually offers affected property owners an opportunity to do the work in conjunction with the city, which is less expensive than if they were to wait and do it after the project is completed. Supt. Gray also noted that he is not aware of any legislation currently in place that would allow the City to mandate that affected property owners have fire department connections on the Commons. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of the October 15, 2012 Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes - Resolution By Commissioner Leccese: Seconded by Commissioner Morache RESOLVED, That the minutes of the October 15, 2012 Board of Public Works meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously ADMINISTRATION AND COMMUNICATIONS: Commissioner Goldsmith stated that staff shortages in the Department of Public Works will end up costing the city more in the long run than if some positions were filled soon. If infrastructure projects are delayed because of staffing issues it will become more and more expensive to repair them. He encouraged the Board to be aware of this situation and to encourage the Mayor and Common Council to take into account the much greater costs to the City that may result due to lack of staffing in the department. Mayor Myrick responded that he proposed more capital construction projects for 2013 to address some of the infrastructure repair needs. He stated that he and Common Council members are not happy about the current budget situation either. BPW Liaison/Alderperson Fleming stated that Common Council members are very aware of the demands put on staff, because every department head came before them during their budget meeting to make pleas’ for their departments for staffing. Common Council members are very aware of infrastructure needs, fire/police needs and had to make some awful choices because of very bad budget situation the City faces. Mayor Myrick stated that representatives at the State and Federal level need to be aware that municipalities cannot continue to place the burden on taxpayers to fund operations at the local level. 3 November 5, 2012 VOTING ITEMS: Buildings, Properties, Refuse and Transit: Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: Parcel 68.-2-9.2 – 700 East Seneca Street - Resolution By Commissioner Acharya: Seconded by Commissioner Darling WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns parcel 68.-2-9.2 located on the south side of the 700 block of East Seneca Street, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned parcel was obtained by the City as an opportunity to acquire green space, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned parcel has not been developed or maintained or designated as park, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned parcel by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expense for maintenance, without the generation of revenue (e.g., in the form of property taxes) from it, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of parcel 68.-2-9.2 located on the south side of the 700 block of East Seneca Street. Ayes (5) Myrick, Morache, Acharya, Leccese, Darling Nays (0) Abstentions (1) Goldsmith Carried Mayor Myrick proposed to the Board moving all the following resolutions (except for the Giles Street property) as one package. No Board Member Objected. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 344 Elmira Road Frontage – “Garcia's Restaurant” - Resolution By Commissioner Goldsmith: Seconded by Commissioner Darling WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 125-1- 2.32, also known as 344 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Byway Partnership dated 3/23/12, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and 4 November 5, 2012 WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 125-1-2.32 located in the vicinity of 344 Elmira Road. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 340 Elmira Road Frontage – “Burger King Restaurant” - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 125-1- 2.31, also known as 340 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Byway Partnership dated 3/23/12, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 125-1-2.31 located in the vicinity of 340 Elmira Road. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 338 Elmira Road Frontage -“Monroe Muffler” - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-2, also known as 338 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Mary and Reuben Weiner dated 3/23/12, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and 5 November 5, 2012 WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-2 located in the vicinity of 338 Elmira Road. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 334 Elmira Road Frontage – “Jiffy Lube” - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-4, also known as 334 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Mary and Reuben Weiner dated 3/23/12, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-4 located in the vicinity of 334 Elmira Road. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 330 Elmira Road Frontage – Vacant - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-5, also known as 330 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Mary and Reuben Weiner dated 3/23/12, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a sanitary sewer approximately one foot north of the proposed right of way line, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned sanitary sewer requires a maintenance easement of approximately ten feet north of the proposed right of way line, and 6 November 5, 2012 WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca does not benefit the City of Ithaca, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-5 located in the vicinity of 330 Elmira Road with an easement to the City to accommodate maintenance of the existing sanitary sewer. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 328 Elmira Road Frontage – “Arby’s Restaurant” - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-1, also known as 328 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Mary and Reuben Weiner dated 3/23/12, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a sanitary sewer approximately one foot north of the proposed right of way line, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned sanitary sewer requires a maintenance easement of approximately ten feet north of the proposed right of way line, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-1 located in the vicinity of 328 Elmira Road with an easement to the City to accommodate maintenance of the existing sanitary sewer. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 326 Elmira Road Frontage – “Wendy’s Restaurant” - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-3, also known as 326 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Jaygee Realty Company dated 3/23/12, and 7 November 5, 2012 WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, said development by the tenant includes the installation of a sign between the sidewalk and the existing curb, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a sanitary sewer approximately one foot to five feet north of the proposed right of way line, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned sanitary sewer requires a maintenance easement of approximately ten feet from the proposed right of way line, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-1 located in the vicinity of 328 Elmira Road with an easement to accommodate maintenance of the existing sanitary sewer, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works recommends that the Common Council grants a license to the abutting owner for operation and maintenance of the existing sign within the right of way for a period to be determined as outlined in Chapter 170 of the City Code. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 324 Elmira Road Frontage – “Moe’s and Walmart” - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-1.1, also known as 324 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Wil-Ridge Associates, LLC dated 3/23/12, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of the abutting property owner under license with the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a sanitary sewer across a portion of the aforementioned property, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned sanitary sewer requires a maintenance easement of approximately ten feet from the proposed right of way line, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and 8 November 5, 2012 WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned property has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the south side of parcel 121-1-1.1 located in the vicinity of 324 Elmira Road with an easement to the City to accommodate maintenance of the existing sanitary sewer. Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: 323 - 325 Elmira Road Frontage – “Friendly’s Restaurant” - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property abutting the south side of parcel 124-1-3, also known as 323 - 325 Elmira Road, as shown on a map entitled Survey Map Showing lands to be conveyed by the City of Ithaca to Cutting Holding Corporation dated 3/23/12, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned property was obtained by the City as a portion of the right of way of Elmira Road, and WHEREAS, a portion of the aforementioned property has been developed and maintained by the tenant of the abutting property owner, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any such purpose in the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, continued ownership of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca requires that the City incur expenses in time and resources licensing use of the property, with a minimal next generation of revenue from that expenditure of time and resources, and WHEREAS, a portion of public sidewalk has been constructed on property owned by Cutting Holding Corporation, LLC, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the aforementioned City of Ithaca property is not needed for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that it would be in the City’s interest to obtain land upon which a public sidewalk has been constructed, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider purchase of property abutting the south right of way line of Elmira Road for the purpose of public sidewalk, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of property abutting the north side of parcel 124-1-3 located in the vicinity of 323 - 325 Elmira Road. Carried Unanimously 9 November 5, 2012 Recommendation to Divest Unused City Property Resolution: Parcel 111.-9-3 – 1105 Giles Street - Resolution By Commissioner Darling: Seconded by Commissioner Morache WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns property located between the 1000 block of Giles Street and the 1200 block of East State / Martin Luther King Jr. Street, as shown on a drawing prepared by the Office of City Engineer entitled “1105 Giles Street, Old Giles Street and Division Street”, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned properties were obtained by the City by tax sale and as a portion of the rights of way for Giles Street and Division Street, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has constructed a water main across a portion of the aforementioned property, and WHEREAS, there exists a storm sewer pipe across a portion of the aforementioned property, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned water main and storm sewer require a maintenance easement of approximately ten feet on either side of each pipe, and WHEREAS, abutting lands identified as tax parcel 111-9-3 have been designated as Natural Area, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has indicated that this parcel is not currently used in any other way for City public works functions or purposes, and that he does not anticipate a need to use this parcel for any other such purpose in the foreseeable future, and WHEREAS, continued ownership of portions of the aforementioned property by the City of Ithaca does not benefit the City of Ithaca, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the portion of the aforementioned property which has been designated as Natural Area and should continue to be designated as such, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby determines that the remainder of the aforementioned property, comprised of the rights of way of old Giles Street and Division Street, has limited value for City of Ithaca public works purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby recommends that the Common Council consider sale of abandoned right of way with an easement to the City to accommodate maintenance of the existing storm sewer and water main facilities. Supt. Gray explained there is no reason to place restrictions on the deed when the property is sold. He stated that the property proposed for sale was not designated a natural area, and therefore any property owner should be able to get full use out of the land. That way the City gets the highest value for the property and the property owner gets full use of their property. A Vote on the Resolution Resulted as Follows: Carried Unanimously DISCUSSION ITEMS: Appeal of Water Bill for New York State Dept. of Transportation Third Street Office Supt. Gray explained that New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) has made an appeal to the City for the water charges for their location on Third Street that was billed in October 2007. Staff reviewed their account, where it was determined that the water meter for that location was replaced on August 10, 2007. The reading was misread because the meter that was replaced contained separate dials for ones, tens, hundreds, etc. This type of meter is difficult to read. An adjustment was made to the 10 November 5, 2012 “high flow” side but was not made to the “low flow” side. Staff reviewed the consumption amounts for the same quarter going back to 2003, and their recommendation is that the water bill be reduced to the minimum charge for a two inch meter, which would be 112 hcf. In 2007, the water rate was $2.82 per 100 cf, making the total amount due for a minimum bill of $315.84. The Board recommended approval of the appeal, and the adjustment of the bill to $315.84. Supt. Gray will handle the matter administratively since the amount is less than $500.00. Request for Reserved Parking for Persons with Disabilities Parking Space for 522 Dryden Road – Discussion/Resolution Supt. Gray explained that the Board, at its last review of a request for an on-street handicapped parking space in a neighborhood, indicated that they thought these requests should usually be handled by staff. Staff pointed out that the current system requires Board approval of individual requests. Presumably this could be changed, where the Board would hear only appeals of decisions made by staff, based on the adopted policy. It is possible that staff would have to develop a set of rules to implement the policy which will serve as guidelines for applicants. The current request is provided for the Board’s consideration. It appears reasonable due to the installation of the bike lane on Ithaca Road, the removal of on-street parking there, and the residential parking permit system on adjacent streets. Transportation Engineer Logue provided the following information for the Board: “It has come to my attention that at a recent Board meeting, there was sentiment from the Board that you would like to delegate the authority to approve or to deny requests for on-street reserved parking for people with disabilities. There was perhaps even a sense that the Board had already done so. I do not have any problem with staff decisions to approve or deny requests, but I would like to have the formal policy changed to clarify the authority to do so. Currently, we are operating under the policy adopted by the Board of Public Works on March 3, 2010, which is included below.” Power to Act - Approval of Parking Policy for Persons with Disabilities - Resolution (from March 3, 2012 BPW Meeting) By Commissioner Brock: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works adopted a Handicap Parking Policy on January 12, 2000 to act as a guideline for requests received for on-street handicap parking, and WHEREAS, the current Handicap Parking Policy has become outdated, and staff has met with the Disability Advisory Council to review and update the current parking policy, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works has reviewed and hereby adopts the Parking Policy for Persons with Disabilities dated March 3, 2010, as department policy for such parking in order for staff to continue to respond to requests. Carried Unanimously City of Ithaca Parking Policy for Persons with Disabilities March 10, 2010 Purpose: The Cite of Ithaca shrives to provide convenient parking options for persons with disabilities while balancing the exclusive use of such parking spaces with the needs of the general public to guide the provision of such parking options, the following policy has been developed and adopted by the Board of Public Works. Legal Requirements: The federal rules and regulations enacted for the implementation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the New York State Building Code contain accessibility requirements for places of public accommodation and commercial facilities, including accessible parking spaces in parking lots and parking garages. For parking areas of 1 to 25 spaces, at least one (1) accessible space is required. The 11 November 5, 2012 required number of accessible spaces increases as the size of the parking area increases, representing approximately two percent of the spaces. There are no requirements to provide accessible spaces where no other parking spaces are provided or required. Where is no requirement to provide accessible spaces “on street." City of Ithaca Provision for Off-Street Accessible Parking: The Citv's parking lots and parking garages shall meet at least the minimum standards set by law in all cases. Whether accessible spaces beyond the minimum required are provided shall be based on reasonable accommodations considering demand, cost, physical constraints, and utilization rates and other, relevant factors. Accessible spaces may be relocated, added or reduced, based on these factors and applicable laws and regulations. City of Ithaca Provision for On-Street Reserved Parking for Persons with Disabilities (RPPI)): The use of on-street, reserved parking for persons with disabilities is considered a partial accommodation, because the spaces generally do not meet the requirements for accessible spaces (e.g., they do not have access aisles or they may not be proximate to a curb ramp). The Central Business District (and to a lesser extent other business districts, such as Collegetown and the West End) contains a concentration of commercial and public facilities which are not required to provide off street parking, or, consequently, accessible parking. Municipal parking garages and lots do provide accessible parking spaces and are reasonably distributed. However, the use of on-street, reserved parking spaces for persons with disabilities within the areas of high parking demand in business districts can provide a greater level of accommodation and convenience for some persons with disabilities who do not require fully accessible parking spaces. For the purposes of this policy, any area in a business district with metered parking shall be assumed to be a high parking demand area. Since there is no requirement for on- street, accessible parking spaces in these areas, no minimum required number of such spaces has been established. The City of Ithaca is committed to reserving a reasonable number of on Street spaces, in business districts, for persons with disabilities. The designation and actual number of such spaces shall be based on Staff Study, public requests, reasonable accommodation and factors considered for off-street accessible spaces. Spaces may be relocated, added or reduced based on these factors. Consideration will be given to issues of safety and practicality associated with the particular location, especially if the reserved spaces will not be fully accessible. Requests for On-Street, Reserved Parking for Persons with Disabilities (RPPI)) Spaces in Residential Areas: The City of Ithaca provides on-street, RPPD in residential areas on a very limited basis. Such spaces are intended to serve a dual purpose, namely, providing; at least partial accommodation to one of more nearby residents with disabilities, as well as utility to other persons with disabilities who may need such parking in that vicinity. The following; criteria must be met to consider an on- street parking space for RPPD designation: 1. The request must be accompanied by valid proof of permanent disability status for parking purposes (as recognized by New York State in accordance with Sec. 1203 (a-d) of NYS Vehicle and Traffic Law') of one or more persons residing (through rental or ownership) within 250 feet of the requested, reserved space. 2. If the place of residence of the person(s) on whose behalf the reserved space is requested is capable of having off-street parking; under zoning codes, the request must include a statement concerning the duration of the request and why a curb cut for off-street parking is not being requested instead. If the residence currently has off-street parking available, the request must include a statement concerning why the applicant's accessibility needs cannot be met through use or modification of the existing parking area. The Superintendent of Public Works shall create an application form for requests for on- street, reserved parking for people with disabilities. Upon application, staff shall evaluate the request. If the request meets the above criteria and if it poses no traffic 12 November 5, 2012 safety problem in the opinion of the City of Ithaca Transportation Engineer, then the City Transportation Engineer shall forward the request to the Board of Public Works for consideration and may include a recommendation. If the request does not meet the above criteria or it poses a traffic safety problem in the opinion of the City Transportation Engineer, then the City Transportation Engineer shall deny the request. The applicant shall have the right to appeal this decision, in writing, to the Board of Public Works. If the request is granted by the Board, a sign designating the RPPD space shall be installed and maintained for five (5) years (except as provided for below). Prior to the end of said five-year period, the City shall notify the initial applicant that the sign will be removed unless the request is renewed. If the City finds that the applicant no longer resides within 250 feet of the designated space, the City may remove the sign. It should be noted that an on-street, RPPD parking space is not reserved for the applicant or any specific person, but is available to any person with a valid parking permit for a person with disabilities. The current policy has staff processing the applications, and either denying the application or bringing it to the BPW for approval. This system seems to work fine, and if the BPW has no concerns, the request can be approved very easily with a short resolution. If the BPW would prefer to not see resolutions to approve these on-street spaces, assuming that it is legal to further delegate this authority, the policy should be amended to clarify that the decisions shall be made by a specific person (e.g., the Superintendent or the Transportation Engineer), and that the BPW would only act as an appeal board if applications are denied or if neighborhood concerns/complaints arise. Until the policy has been changed, we are also including a resolution for the most recent request for the 500 block of Dryden Road. Discussion followed on the floor regarding requiring property owners to create curb cuts rather than designating on street parking spaces. Further discussion followed on the floor regarding the long-term tenant who becomes disabled and requests a designated parking space versus someone moving into a residence knowing there is no designated parking space and then requesting one be created. The Board would like staff to revise the current policy regarding the creation of designated parking spaces for persons with disabilities on the street, and a resolution to go with it for their consideration and approval. Approval of Request for a Reserved Parking Space for Persons with Disabilities at 522 Dryden Road – Resolution By Commissioner Goldsmith: Seconded by Commissioner Morache RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works approve the request for a reserved parking space for persons with disabilities at 522 Dryden Road. Carried Unanimously Request for Reimbursement of Pavilion Fee from Ithaca Motion Picture Project and Friends of Stewart Park - Discussion Supt. Gray explained that the Ithaca Motion Picture Project would like to have the City waive the pavilion fee and refund it to them following their event on October 13, 2012. Over the years requests have routinely turned down to waive fees for special events in our parks. The City feels that the fees are already token fees that don't begin to reflect the actual cost of providing the facilities being used. In addition, he is not willing to try to distinguish between the large number of worthy, nonprofit, community-oriented events that all think it would be good to waive their fees. He further stated that he has been overruled by the Board in a few instances – one of them being the Pud's Run event. He stated that he does not recommend waiving the fee. 13 November 5, 2012 Discussion followed on the floor regarding the Board not wanting staff to have to differentiate between “worthy” and “unworthy” events as far requests to waive the fee are concerned. They noted that the fee was not waived for the Dragon Boat Festival as had been requested since it does become tricky to differentiate between groups, so the Board feels it is better to not create any exceptions to the payment of the required use fee for City parks. Commissioner Leccese disclosed that she works with the Ithaca Motion Picture Project (IMPP) and Friends of Stewart Park. She stated that IMPP is hoping to create a “presence” at Stewart Park. They feel very much vested in Stewart Park, and that their efforts and “presence” help to support the continuation of Stewart Park, so the fee should be waived. Mayor Myrick stated that he was not in favor of waiving the fee at this time. Commissioner Morache indicated that it is difficult for staff to determine “worthy” groups when there is no established criterion to do so. At the same time, how does the City respect the time and commitment that groups like IMPP and Friends of Stewart Park are making to the park – perhaps the development of a memorandum of understanding with such groups? This then could be applied to any group or organization taking on long term support projects for any city park, but especially for Stewart Park. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the need for staff to have direction or a policy to follow in order to be consistent in its coordination of various events on city property with various groups and organizations. It was noted that no matter what size group there are real costs involved for the City that need to be paid for. The following resolution to deny the request was proposed: Resolution: By Commissioner Goldsmith: Seconded by Commissioner Morache RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works denies the request for reimbursement of the pavilion fee from Ithaca Motion Picture Project and Friends of Stewart Park. Ayes (5) Myrick, Goldsmith, Darling, Morache, Acharya, Darling Nays (0) Abstentions (1) Leccese Carried Request to Increase Pavilion Rental Fees from Ithaca Youth Bureau - Discussion Supt. Gray explained the request from the Youth Bureau to adjust the pavilion rental fees for Cass and Stewart Parks. Staff was still feeling the impact of the 2013 budget preparation, with staff cuts, unfilled positions, work load shifting, and a general sentiment that revenues were preferable to cuts. There is a long history of discussions about these two parks and the fact that they are supported by the city's budget, but serve a much larger population. The loose suggestions are that there should be a city resident schedule and an "other" schedule because of the non-taxable property and the outside users. He stated that the Youth Bureau used a similar structure for their own programs until some of the outside participants started paying subsidies to the Youth Bureau so their residents could access the programs at the preferred rate. He is not sure they want to go through that again. Youth Bureau Director Allen Green, and Executive Assistant Jody Hallett-Harris joined the Board for the discussion of this topic, and provided the following background information regarding the proposal to increase rates for rental of the pavilions at Stewart Park and Cass Park: 1) Pavilion Fees: During the course of developing the Youth Bureau budget, the City Controller asked staff to take a look at pavilion fees at Cass and Stewart Parks. (The Ithaca Youth Bureau handles the pavilion reservations for both parks.) 14 November 5, 2012 It has been quite a while since the fees were raised and they are currently investing a good deal of money on the rebuilding of the small pavilion (A/K/A Tea Pavilion) in Stewart Park and would like to recoup some of that investment. We checked with seven area parks and found that our current pavilion fees are in line with other area fees, but since some parks also charge a parking/entrance fee and the city does not; a strong case can be built for increasing these fees at this time. We also surveyed all staff that makes reservations for the pavilions, to obtain their input with regard to fees and the system in general. Youth Bureau staff proposes a 20% increase in the fees. The proposed change should be reviewed by the Parks Commission and would need to be approved by the Board of Public Works. Ithaca Youth Bureau staff also took a look at the possibility of switching to an hourly rental fee and to potential changes in the group size system, but they are not recommending either of these changes at this time. There seem to be a relatively small number of communities in New York State that utilize an hourly fee structure for pavilions and with current staffing levels at the parks, this sort of system would be difficult to administer and police, particularly on weekends when the parks and pavilions are utilized heavily, but staffing levels are bare bones. Based on the recommended adjustments, they are proposing a change to the Mayor’s proposed 2013 Ithaca Youth Bureau budget as follows: Increase projected revenues: Account # A 7310-2410-1400 $4000.00 Staff are hopeful that the small (Tea) pavilion will be completed by the end of the year so that they can accept reservations for this facility in 2013 and meet the above increased revenue projections. It does appear that DPW personnel are on the home stretch with this work, but it would be helpful if staff could confirm that the pavilion will be available for the full upcoming season and that they have a “green light” to go ahead with accepting 2013 reservations beginning on January 2, 2013. Our current fees Proposed new fees Cass Park Up to 24 people $30.00 $36.00 25 – 74 people $60.00 $72.00 75 + people or Exclusive Use $75.00 $90.00 Stewart Park Small Pavilion Up to 24 people $30.00 $36.00 25 – 74 people $60.00 $72.00 75 + people or Exclusive Use $100.00 $120.00 Stewart Park Large Pavilion Up to 24 people $30.00 $36.00 25 – 74 people $60.00 $72.00 75 – 99 people $100.00 $120.00 100 – 149 people $125.00 $150.00 150 + people or Exclusive Use $150.00 $180.00 Youth Bureau Director Green explained that since they begin to take 2013 reservations on January 2, 2013 it would be most helpful if a decision could be made soon, so that staff can revise the reservation forms and offer consistent pricing to all groups during the entire 2013 season. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the value and attraction that Stewart Park offers to everyone who visits, many of whom do not necessarily pay city taxes. Mayor Myrick noted that at a recent visit to Myers Park in Lansing, there was a fee charged because he was not a resident of Lansing. He asked whether that is something that the 15 November 5, 2012 city should consider as well. It was noted that considering the rates that State Parks charge to park, the city is almost giving away the use of the pavilions with the current low rates. Youth Bureau Director Green explained that the proposed increase for 2013 is small. It is an effort to see whether it affects the rental of the pavilions at both parks or not. If not, perhaps the rates could be raised again in 2014. He is very hesitant to raise them more than the proposed 20% because of the fear that the City may lose revenue because people will go elsewhere for their special events rather than pay the increased rates. Discussion also focused on the fact that no matter what size group that rents the pavilions, that staff still need to come in to unlock the bathrooms, provide cleaning and maintenance to them, and then lock the bathrooms up at night. The cost for staff does not change for smaller groups versus larger groups. Commissioner Darling expressed support for the proposed increase in pavilion rental rates. He also suggested that the City discuss with Friends of Stewart Park how they might be able to work towards increasing donations for the park in an effort to support the maintenance and upkeep of the pavilions, as well costs related to that (staffing). Asst. Supt. Benjamin stated that the large pavilion is reserved and used by the public very heavily, and as a result has become somewhat run down. It needs maintenance attention and does require staff to unlock and lock the bathrooms in an effort to preserve it as much as can be from misuse by the public. He also noted that it is difficult to find staff that are willing to work late (10 p.m. closing time of the park, could the park closing time be changed to earlier?), and weekends (especially during the summer). Mayor Myrick stated that it sounds like the Board would like to discuss revenue generating ideas for Stewart Park, and asked that this topic be placed on a future agenda. Request to Increase Pavilion Rental Fees from Ithaca Youth Bureau – Resolution By Commissioner Leccese: Seconded by Commissioner Morache RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works approves the request to increase pavilion rental fees from the Ithaca Youth Bureau, effective January 1, 2013, as outlined below: Our current fees Proposed new fees Cass Park Up to 24 people $30.00 $36.00 25 – 74 people $60.00 $72.00 75 + people or Exclusive Use $75.00 $90.00 Stewart Park Small Pavilion Up to 24 people $30.00 $36.00 25 – 74 people $60.00 $72.00 75 + people or Exclusive Use $100.00 $120.00 Stewart Park Large Pavilion Up to 24 people $30.00 $36.00 25 – 74 people $60.00 $72.00 75 – 99 people $100.00 $120.00 100 – 149 people $125.00 $150.00 150 + people or Exclusive Use $150.00 $180.00 Carried Unanimously Request to Move Water Service from City to Bolton Point from Beta Theta Pi Fraternity - Resolution By Commissioner Goldsmith: Seconded by Commissioner Acharya RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works approves the request to move the water service from the City of Ithaca to Bolton Point from Beta Theta Pi Fraternity 16 November 5, 2012 Supt. Gray explained that the City received a request to allow a city property to disconnect from the city's water system and reconnect to the Bolton Point system adjacent to their property. The property is a fraternity at the dead end of a six inch main, at the far end of our distribution system, on Ridgewood Road. They are trying to respond to a mandate from Cornell University to sprinkler their property and have found they can not comply using the city water main as a source of supply. He stated that he requested that Asst. Supt. Whitney review the calculations that bring them to this conclusion, which has been done and it is felt by him that this old main will not meet their needs, following a set of flow tests done on the mains to collect data. He further explained that the Board should agree to allow the transfer, subject to requiring them to return to the city's system once it is adequate to meet the minimum requirements for the sprinkler system. The City does serve small portions of the Bolton Point system where it makes more sense for it to provide service. He further noted that the City would work with the fraternity and Bolton Point regarding the billing for the sewer services that will still be provided by the City of Ithaca. A Vote on the Resolution Resulted as Follows: Carried Unanimously Mayor Myrick noted that this fraternity is located on the 4th Ward of the City, is a wooden structure, and there are many other wooden structures in the area, so the requirement to install sprinkler systems will make these buildings so much safer for the residents, who are mainly students. Sidewalk Program Proposed Policy - Discussion This item was not discussed. Commissioner Morache stated that he and Commissioner Goldsmith (sidewalk sub-committee members) would be meeting with the City of Ithaca Historic Planner, Lynn Truame, on November 9, 2012 to discuss slate sidewalks. He said that they would incorporate information from that meeting into the future discussion of this topic. The Board requested that this item be placed first on a future agenda in the near future. NEW BUSINESS: Commissioner Goldsmith questioned whether sprinkler systems could be required in all residential multiple housing units in coordination with Cornell University’s requirement for them. Mayor Myrick explained that residential buildings built prior to 1970 are “grandfathered” and sprinkler systems are not required since costs can be very high. All new construction requires that sprinkler systems be installed. He stated that the City is promoting the replacement of old, run-down, wooden structure student housing with new buildings, which will help to insure safety of the residents in case of fire. ADJOURNMENT: On a motion the meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Sarah L. Myers Svante L. Myrick Information Management Specialist Mayor