HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-1981-03-18COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
5:00 P.M.
March 18, 1981
Special Meeting
PRESENT:
Ma— y "= Bordoni Boothroyd, Boronkay, Dennis, Gutenberger,
Aldermen (10) - Holman, Saccucci, Schuler, Slattery
Holman, Nichols,
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Controller - S p a n o
Deputy City Controller - Cafferillo
City Attorney - Shapiro
Building Commissioner - Hoard
Youth Bureau Director - Cutia
Planner II - Sieverding
Director of Planning & Development - Van Cort
City Clerk - Rundle
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
a or Bor oni le all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the
E �_1 M y
American flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: Agenda:
::1:
May Bor onl requeste the addition of three items to the C
y Petitions and Hearings of Persons Before Council; It proposed
Item B, an Building Commissioner; and Item D, ] P
Appointment of Deputy and the funding for that plant.
sewage treatment p
No Council member objected.
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Tsvi Bokaer -
Cate des Amis
Tsvi Bokaer, Cayuga Street, addressed the Council concerning his
intention to open a restaurant on North Aurora tSStreen a restaurant in
t was P
it was unfortunate that he had com�hat theaarea had several establish-
which particular area, not knowing
m
ents selling alcoholic beverages, which establishments have caused
the Ithaca Police Department a lot Ofenrhislrestaurantkbecausel }1ene
that he chose Ithaca as a place to op publicity
wished for a calm and peaceful liTeexpladnednthatwant
theasalethe
ofpbeer and
of the last few weeks. He further p in fact, it is a very
wine in his restaurant is not the main issue;
small part of the intended business. Mr. Bokaer intends to ona�aeeken
until 8:00 p.m. on week nights and
enalizedr heaislhere to offer food
ends. He feels he should not be p
the main item and beer and wine as atoerecommendtthatntheeAlcoholict
the Council reconsider its decision
Beverage Control Board not issue a inthasd beer gicense, taking into
account what Mr. Bokaer has stated at
Mayor Bordoni explained that since sending his letter to the Alcoholi
y application of Bokaer be denie
Beverage Control Board asking that the app
he has talked at length with Mr. and Mrs. Bheaeriand fodndthats the s
of beer and wine is a very minut e p
knowing the actual circumstances involved with ithtthe opening Of-the
e Ca
des Amis, he is not hesitant at all in
referred back to the Planning and Development Committee for further
review.
Resolution Seconded b Alderman Boothroyd
By– Ammerman Slattery: by
RESOLVED, That the matter of the recommendation by
Alcoholic Beverage Control Board that the Cafe des Amis
beer and wine further review ebye that ccommittee Planning andthe
for
Committee
Discussion followed on the floor.
Mayor to the
be denied a
and Devel.opme
Mayor.
228
- 2 -
Alderman Dennis arrived at the meeting at 5:30 p.m.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (9)
Abstention (1) - Dennis
Carried
March 18, 1981
Resolution
By Alderman Boronkay: Seconded by Alderman Schuler
RESOLVED, That the Planning and Development Committee set up a criter
pertaining to all liquor license requests that are going to be brought
in front of that Committee in the future.
Carried Unanimously
RESOLUTION APPROVING APPOINTMENT OF DEPUTY BUILDING COMMISSIONER AND
FIXING STARTING SALARY:
By Al erman Slattery: Seconded by Alderman Boothr.oyd
WHEREAS, the position of Deputy Building Commissioner has been vacant
since June 30, 1979, and
WHEREAS, on February 19, 1981, the Budget and Administration Committee
Of Common Council granted an exception to the hiring freeze, author-
izing the Building Commissioner to hire a Deputy Building Commissioner
and
WHEREAS, on February 26, 1981, the Budget and Administration Committee
gave the Building Commissioner authority to offer the position to the
selected candidate at any step in the salary range based on t}ie
candidate °s qualifications, and
WHEREAS, the Building Commissioner convened an interviewing and
selection panel
Appeals consisting of the Chairman of the Board of Zoning
, the Chairman of the Housing Board of Review and Building
Board of Appeals, the Personnel Administrator and the Building
Commissioner to interview and rank the candidates, and
WHEREAS, the selection panel has
a candidate has been selected by
completed its selection process
the Building Commissioners
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESO
Cod
and
JIVED, That this Common Council does hereby
approve the appointment of Peter Dieterich for an indefinite term to
the office of Deputy Building Commissioner, subject,*.to the proba-
tionary period prescribed by Civil Service regulations d
BE IT F
, an
URTHER RESOLVED, That the starting salary of Peter Dieterich
in the office of Deputy Building Commissioner be fixed at $20,267
commencing April 6, 1981.
Discussion followed on the floor.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (9) - Boothroyd, Boronkay, Dennis, Gutenberger, }Tolman
Nichols, Saccucci, Schuler, Slattery
Nay (1) - Banfield
Carried
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Y.M.C.A.
ISTay Bro ordoni -referred to a Memo from Herman Sieverding to the Mayor
and members of Common Council dated February 24, 1981. The Mayor
asked Herman Sieverding, one of the City Planners who has worked very
closely with the YMCA situation over the last 12 months or more, to
review the February 24th Memo.
Planner Sieverding said he would like to pick up from the Common
Council meeting of December 30th. At that meeting there was a reso-
lution passed that asked the Planning and Development Department to
further develop a proposal that had been presented at that meeting
Which was for a joint facility of the Youth Bureau and Y.M.C.A. on
230
March 18, 1981
-3-
as well as develop other alternatives. Planner
the Tin Can Site, 24th summarizes the alternatives that
�s Memo of February put together since the
5ieverding and Development Committee has p the the.
the Planning working with representatives of the Town,
December meeting, explained that the Planning
Attorney Shapiro reg
and the Youth BuCommitteeahadrworkedrwith Cit,-1 the methods available
and Development Committee to Counc the best
the land disposition and he exp Shapiro as being for bid
also mentioned the value of the property
and the one that had been recommended by
alternative. He
purposes . for the Youth
Planner Sieverding explained the alternative proposals
Tin Can is sold. One alternative is a new building
Bureau if the jointly with the Y.M.C•A• with p
the Tin Can site be used J •n the process of being
i it The second alternative . the Youth Bureau a
Town
participation- which property 1 Planner
the G.I.A.C. building, Development funds.
purchased by the City with Community and it on
lained that there are limiti�1ODevelopmentufund! , e
Sieverding exp s urchased with Community prohibited by Federal
placed in building P it will no
appears that the Youth Bureau would a use p
s. native is to place the Youth
tion Because of the draw -backs in this alternat�.Vef ion w
regulations- The third lobby. An addition
be further developed °adjacent to the skating
Bureau at Cass Park, 7
e s ace will be needed i else-
house .
Youth Bureau administTativepoffices and create s
be added to additional storage
storage space. However,
s
where.
Transportation also is a consideration at the Cass Park lternatives Planner Sieves in
't
With reference to all of the above a
gave estimates on the cost to the C Y and the problems relating to
each of the altern.atives� _ mainly
Several of the Aldermen asked questions Planner maintenancce costs,
on the present condition of th structure, e Tin Can st
and transportation. act of the
ordoni asked Youth Director Cutia to analyze the imp
Mayor B e
alternatives pTOPos
Director Cut
is stated that the decision made concerning the Youth
Bureau not being on the same site asesolved. C.A. He nl
referred to the ncerned
difficult problems that have to be r
resolution of. the Youth Bur eau Board wThehBoards would alike cassurance
retol resent site. -going and that
with the move from the p oing Programs
that the move would not have aerograms would be required. Director
no interruption of service of programs out of the
Cutia stated that if the Youth to viewwthe varbousooptions that have
present site and the Board haPlannereSieverding, the Youth Bureau
been reviewed for Council by
in essence, be changing places with the Y.M the It would
would, but would be looking for other facilities i�
have an office facility, on-going ro ram. He pointed out
the community in order to have an on -g g P g
that the present site is an all -in -one facility with everything that
is needed.
Director Cutia stated the Cass ark creates e
as problems because addit
as additional program space somewhere else in the community. Bus
service to Cass Park would be another concern. However, Director
Cutia said there would also be some advantages to the Cass Park
alternative in that some of the maintenance program aspects that arc
conducted on a regular basis at Cass Park could be incorporated into
the existing programs that the Youth Bureau has and there would be
the advantage of pulling these things together.
Director Cutia said that the option at G.I.A.C. had been expressed
very well by Planner Sieverding. lie mentioned one other option- -
to move into City Hall. Of all the options that was the least
appealing to Director Cutia for any number of reasons.
Director Cutia feels that a decision has to be made. A number of
-4-
March 18,
19,8I�
programs that he has cannot function, or be planned for,
unless he knows what is going
this time. If the Cass Park o to happen as far as making an move aat
of the lobby is already a few is decided upon, the expansion
no architect yet involved and bids "haveknotebeen� let is no
Bureau needs to know whether it is going to be able to conduct Youthan,
usual programs and utilize its resources. From the information the
presented to Council, it is quite obvious that the Tin Can site
the most appropriate in terms of all the
still has to be made, pluses, but the decisions
site, then Cutia feels thaththeyuneedutoahaveething have the Tin Can
appropriate for them to conduct their programs. ngs that are
a combination of either new construction or existing facility
have to be rehabilitated so that the Youth It is going to take
outh Bureau can functions that
Several of the Aldermen asked Director Cutia questions with
to the rehabilitation of the Tin Can building and the costo reference
rehabilitation. Director Cutia answered the questions os
his present .knowled e f such
g but stated that there were a lot of costseth of
he did not have figures on and wo ld
u not make estimates. at
Noel Desch, Supervisor of the Town of Ithaca, stated that
that the Tin Can's existence is t each day
is made to make. it a permanent buildinuated by the City a. commitment
virtually nothing has been done to the Tin Can in the ears
g. Supervisor Desch said that
City has utilized the building. He stated that the present hat the
$2.00 per square foot to operate and maintain the building figure of
virtually double if natural gas is deregulated and the cost
tation is not going to be a simple, small figure. Su ing would
said that he had not heard of anyone small
trying eehabili-
the value of having the Y. M.C.A. downtown would be Supervisor down Desch
it would be hard to put such value into dollars y ry7ng to pin down what
that it ought to be in the cost analysis i •and cents, but felt
Picture. Finally, he stated that the Town of Ithaca is part f tf the
bit interested in contributing one nickel towards the o erating least
maintenance of the Tin Can. There is no way P ng and
such contribution to the taxpayers of the TownhatFtoemcth defend makin
looking into the City from a planning standpoint, Supervisor Desch
e outside,
feels that it just doesn't make sense to perpetuate the Tin Can as
City operated facility, a
Alderman Nichols requested that the following letter be read into the
Minutes with reference to the Youth Bureau and Y.M.C.A:
"Alderman Ethel Nichols
City of Ithaca
March 18, 1981
Dear. Ethel,
I am anxious to share with you my feelings about the re- location of
the Youth Bureau in advance of this evening's meeting. I am trying
to reorganize my personal commitments so that I can attend the
meeting, but since those commitments involve my younger son's hockey
banquet and since public meetings are not always a perfect opportunity
to share views, this note seemed useful.
The Tin Can is fundamentally an unsatisfactory location for the Youtl~
Bureau because of its enormously high overhead costs and the size anct
design qualities which are the basis for those costs. Because the
Youth Bureau is directly involved with Cass Park, that facility seems
to me the ideal site for housing the Youth Bureau. My understanding
is that the Youth Bureau itself and the Planning Department would
support such a move, realizing that the costs of expanding Cass Park
to accommodate the Youth Bureau would be a long -term investment in
the City's future.
The YMCA is, of course, a critical factor in balancing alternatives.
The construction of a YMCA facility on the Tin Can site would bring
to the City of Ithaca the benefits of a major recreational center
_ 5 _ March 18, tNff
whose costs would be born by the private sector. It would catalyze
a novel cooperative effort involving the City, the Town of Ithaca
and area community residents. I am confident that a YMCA at the edge
of Stewart Park would be visible, accessible and enormously successful
in developing the recreational resources of the community.
I am also convinced that the YMCA needs a facility soon. If they
cannot now proceed with the site which would be best for the Y and
best for Ithaca, they will find an alternative site and proceed
elsewhere. A unique opportunity for the City of Ithaca to catalyze
an activity center for its young people and also its adults and senior
citizens will have been lost.
I urge your support for moving the Youth Bureau to Cass Park an devery
offering the Tin Can site to the YMCA immediately.
effort to attend tonight 'Iecannotand
attendeciate your reading through
this note in the event that Cordially,
Andrea Clardy"
Discussion followed on the floor.
�j Tom Kick President of the Y.M.C.A., wanted to make comments on the
�i
l) February 24th memo written by Planner Herman Sieverding. There were
two items that should be corrected, the first on page 4, under the
heading "Timing." He called attention to the sentence which reads
"The YMCA has decided not to attempt a fund - raising campaign this
year." Kick said that statement is false. In fact, a statement had
been previously made by Kick that the Y.M.C.A. would have a fund-
raising campaign in Marcli. The timetable is now April, as soon as
permission has been granted to the Y.M.C.A. by the United Way, and he
has no doubt that permission will be granted assuming that the campaign
is run according to the United Way's Constitution.
Tom Kick also reminded the Council that it was Athe CCit o foIthacaawho
proposed the sale of the Tin Can to the Y.M.C.A., not the
around. He wanted no hard feelings between the Youth Bureau and the
Y.M.C.A. with the Youth Bureau thinking that it was being pushed out
of a home by the Y.M.C.A.
Discussion continued with reference to the length of time the property
could be leased as apparently there were misunderstandings about the
conversations had on the subject of leasing.
The other item contained in Planner Sieverding's memo that needed
correcting was under the heading "Conclusion." That paragraph contain=
the sentence: "Both YMCA and City staff feel that at this point these
issues are too complex to work into a bid procedure." Tom Kick felt
that the complexity is on the part of the City, not the Y.M.C.A.
Discussion continued with the aldermen asking questions of Mr. Kick.
Several aldermen spoke with reference to how they
the Tin Can site or keeping it and rehabilitating
use, and requested more information before making
Resolution
By Alderman Gutenberger: Seconded by Alderman Bo
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca move forward as
with selling the Tin Can site at public auction.
Discussion followed on the floor.
felt about selling
it for Youth Bureau
a decision.
othroyd
quickly as possible
The question of the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly put
to a vote on roll call, which resulted as follows:
X32 -6-
March 18, 1981
Dennis
Holman
Nay
Nay
Nichols
Schuler
Nay
Boothroyd
Aye
Boronkay
Nay
Nay
Gutenberger
Saccucci
Aye
Nay
Banfield
Slattery
Aye
Aye
Ayes (4)
Nays (6)
Motion Defeated.
Aldermen Banfield and Boothroyd left the meeting at 7:07 p.m.
Alderman Dennis left the meeting at 7:12 p.m.
City Attorney Shapiro commented that perhaps those who voted against
the above resolution because of questions in their mind about certain
areas involving the sale of the Tin Can and reasons why it should not be
sold, would bring those questions to Council, then the staff would
ahead and investigate and bring answers.back at a future meeting. go P
down in writing the specific things that Council wants investigated, ut
staff would get answers, and the resolution would be brought back for
further consideration.
On questioning, Tom Kick,Y.M.C.A. President, felt that time has run out
as far as waiting for an answer on the Tin Can site; it has been six
months already and still no decision was made here tonight. That
means that the Y.M.C.A. will not be able to go forward with a fund
drive in 1981 as it has no site in hand for a campaign. There will be
no consideration of a Y.M.C.A. in 1981 under the circumstances.
ADJOURNMENT:
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
J
ho eph A. Run
le, City Clerk ,.Raymond Bordoni, Mayor