Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-1987-11-04387 Regular Meeting PRESENT: Mayor Gutenberger Alderpersons (10) COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK 7:30 P.M. November 4, 1987 - Booth, Cummings, Dennis, Haine, Hoffman, Killeen, Lytel, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney - Nash City Controller - Spano Deputy City Controller - Cafferillo City Clerk - Paolangeli Planning & Development Director - Van Cort Youth Bureau Acting Director - Wilson Personnel Administrator - Baker Building Commissioner - Hoard Purchasing Agent - Clynes Planning & Development Deputy Director - Mazzarella Superintendent of Public Works - Dougherty Board of Public Works Commissioner - Nichols Nq Lo PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: = Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance m to the American flag. Q MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of October 7, 1987 Meeting Alderperson Booth requested that the following paragraph be added to the bottom of page 19: "Alderperson Booth stated he opposed the resolution because it would encourage not holding classes oil the Cornell campus and would therefor be damaging to the fundamental educational purpose of the University. Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 7, 1987 Common Council meeting be approved as amended. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of October 20, 1987 Special Meeting Alderperson Killeen requested that at the top of page 3, the spelling of Mr. Allberg's name be corrected to Ullberg. Alderperson Booth requested that on page 14, fifth paragraph from the top, first line should read: "Thirdly, even absent the gorge question, he would suggest..." Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the Ocotber 20, 1987 special Common Council meeting be approved as corrected. Carried Unanimously ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: Budget and Administratirnz Committee Alderperson Dennis requested a change in the resolution that refers the Mayor's budget to the Budget and Administration Committee. No Council member objected. Alderperson Dennis requested the addition of a resolution for an emergency action to purchase police cars. No Council member objected. 388 -2- November 4, 1987 New Business Alderperson Schlather requested the addition of Item 20.1; Designation of Lead Agency on Ministerial Acts in connection with the issuance of building permits. No Council member objected. Unfinished and Miscellaneous Business Alderperson Schlather requested a discussion regarding a memo from Asst. Supt. Fabbroni concerning the recycling program. No Council member objected. Report of Special Committees and Council Liaisons Alderperson Killeen requested the addition of 18.5; report on the New Fire Stations Committee. No Council member objected. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSO Bikeway Project Atty. F.J. Sc warzer, Syracuse, a petition with 1450 signatures located on the east side rather Inlet. He thanked Alderpersons for their assistance. NS BEFORE COUNCIL: New York, presented to Council supporting the bikeway being than the west side of the Hoffman, Schlather and Romanowski Police Report from Human Services Committee John Petry, President of the PBA, read the following statement to Council: "Although the PBA agrees basically with about 900 of what is written in the report there are three basic areas where we have some serious disagreements with the committee and some of the statements that were made in it. First, we disagree with any group that would put itself in the position of examining its own performance as this group has done. Specifically, the PBA during the public hearing on these issues, leveled some charges of bias toward some members of Council and the treatment of the Ithaca Police Department. In its report, (page 3, item #S) the committee makes a reference to these charges and states that "the Committee does not intend that this report attempt to rebut any of those criticisms ". This is a wise statement since any person should see the obvious conflict of interest in such self - critiquing. However, later in the same report the Committee engages in just such a self serving exercise. We refer to page 2S, item #21, in which the report rebuts that very charge, and further, elaborates on the reasons why it (Council) acted in the fashion that it did, essentially saying "maybe we did, but we had a good reason for doing so ". We take a strong exception to that committee essentially critiquing itself_. Our second major disagreement concerns a so called "public statement" blaming the PBA's action in part for the decline in the morale of the Ithaca Police Department by its negotia- tions for better wages and conditions of employment. First, it is extremely doubtful that this was a statement from the general public. Rather we feel that this was a comment from a member of Council or City government. Second, it is ludicrous to believe that a union, by its successful negotiations efforts, attributed to the decline in the morale of its members. This statement is so preposterous it does not deserve anyplace in the report. J 3819 -3- November 4, 1987 Thirdly, there is an errant reference to compensatory time by the committee on page 1S, paragraph #S, which states that some of the inability to put police officers on the street is attributed to the PBA's negotiation of compensatory time as a benefit for working a holiday. It further states that when an officer works a holiday, that officer then "gets three days off ". This is completely in error, and has never been true. In addition, the clause has been in the collective bargaining agreement for at least twenty years and was mutually agreed to by the PBA and the City of Ithaca. To now throw this up in the faces of the employees of the department is (00", what we consider to be a 'cheap shot'. I think it is an attempt to put some of the blame on the PBA for the City's inability to put officers on the street where they are needed. We also believe that this comment has done much to adversely affect the relationship between Council and the PBA and its members. I would ask you to take this into consideration tonight when you are asked to vote and receive this report. Thank you very much" Northside Rezoning Dennis Wille, 201 Third Street, spoke to Council regarding LD the Northside rezoning issue. He has been impressed by the = process that Mark Finkelstein has been going through in pursuing co the possibility of developing the land behind the P&C. He Q would like to encourage Common Council to support the four month moratorium that Mr. Finkelstein and the Planning Department have proposed which would prevent Mr. Finkelstein from applying for a building permit for four months and prevent Common Council from pursuing a zoning change on the particular parcel for two months in order to let this cooperative dialogue take place between the developer, the city and the neighborhood. Environmental Review Process Ashley Miller, 118 Cascadilla Avenue, representing the Conser- vation Advisory Council of the City of Ithaca, read the following statement to Council: "In August of this year Common Council passed an amendment to the City's Environmental Quality Review Act with the intent of protecting Ithaca's scenic and environmental treasures - our gorges. This ordinance declares that the issuance of "a building permit or any other permit or approval that allows any land alteration, new construction or significant expansion of any existing structure or facility for any project occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any critical area, is not a ministerial act and is therefore subject to environmental review." All the City's gorges, including Six Mile Creek are defined as critical areas. Why no environmental review was called for in the latest Valentine Place development has been called into question. If there is a problem of interpretation, the language can and should be tightened. Ithaca's gorges must be protected. As the City becomes more crowded they become more precious. Our gorges are a powerful attraction and valuable legacy to future generations. Let's not squander them. We call on you to uphold and strengthen., if need be, this ordinance." Youth Bureau Sam Cohen, staff member of the Ithaca Youth Bureau and member of the Youth Bureau Advisory Board, spoke to Council regarding the resolution on tonight's agenda concerning services not being provided for other towns and municipalities in Tompkins County. At the Board meeting it was very clear that the entire Board fully supported the City's position that all the municipalities should pay a fair share -for Youth Bureau services. They 390 -4- November 4, 1937 receive a lot of very high quality services and the Board joins the Council in feeling that they should contribute. The Board and staff all feel that given some time and effort on the part of the City, including the Youth Bureau staff, we can get the towns and villages to see that way of doing business and to come in with the City. The staff offered to help in any way possible, either by going out to the towns and villages to explain what kinds of services the City provides, and the impact of those services on the young people and their families, and also to communicate to the families directly and to urge them to go back to their towns and villages requesting contracts for services. The County Youth Bureau has also offered, along with the Intergovernmental Relations Committee, to help in any way possible to bring about negotiations and because of these things we feel there is some optimism even though the city has had some difficulty in getting at least one or more towns that they have spoken with to agree up to this point. Aside from the optimism that people will join with us, we are also hoping that in the interim the programs the Youth Bureau has can continue with a minimum of difficulty and upheaval. He especially wanted to draw attention to the programs that are not fee programs. Programs run by Youth Development and Recreational Mainstreaming services are programs that almost exclusively serve young people and families who are in grave distress. Whatever the Council decides to do in order to try to get the towns and villages to buy in, the Youth Bureau staff and Board hopes that it will not involve the cutting off of services to those people who need it the most. Northside Watts Lot on Hancock Street Il1ar Finkelstein, 109 College Avenue, stated that he would like to encourage the Council and the neighborhood to see if everyone can work together to keep the process going to develop something positive on the Watt property on Hancock Street. He introduced Peter Flynn from Buffalo. Mr. Flynn is the immediate past Chairman of the New York State Council of the Arts, Architecture Design and Planning Committee avid he is the current Vice- President of the Niagara Frontier Landmark Preservation Society. Peter Flynn, designer from the Cannon firm in Buffalo, New York spoke to Council about the planning and design process. His architectural firm has done projects of this nature with neighborhoods of this type both here in upstate New York as well as in western Massachusetts. He feels that a flexible process involving the community as well as the people from Ithaca and the developer in not only something that is good for the feeling of everyone in the process but that it will add to the quality of the project. The process combines such things as typical planning issues, utilities, zoning, the existing building quality and design and any historic buildings that might be in the neighborhood would also be considered. It really uses this to create a design opportunity. It is a very open process and they look forward to working with everyone involved. Marjorie Olds, President of the Northside /Cascadilla Creek Association, stated to Council that Northside is an area where Ithaca Neighborhood Housing and City Hall have attempted to improve the housing stock and she thinks it has lead to a rebirth of neighborhood feeling and spirit. However, North- side has the lowest ratio of open green space to population. City Planning studies have indicated that Northside needs more green space, in particular, a buffer is needed to keep commercial development from the neighborhood. It 19� I�R._ Iq LD m a -5- November 4, 1987 The Northside Association has asked City Hall to please help them enter into the planning process to see that whatever use is made of the Watts Lot area, that whatever plans are made, that those issues raised by the neighborhood be reflected and be considered. Almost as an aside, the neighborhood learned there were plans afoot for development, that cluster housing was being planned for the Northside area. Again the neighborhood was not brought into negotiations about how they want to see their neighborhood land be used. They would like to work with City Hall, with Planning, with any potential developer to see what mutual interests there are and they are very gratified by Mr. Finkel - stein's approach to bring in the neighborhood. However, they feel that without some density control the neighborhood has no protection in terms of what does develop there. She also wished to point out that in terms of afford- able housing everyone agrees there is a need in the city for afforadable housing but it is extremely important that whatever area the city chooses, the neighborhood be in agreement and welcoming of that development. If Common Council sees fit to pass this moratorium she would ask that the neighborhood be formally recognized as a negotiating party to the process for development, so that if there is housing, that the density, the location of the project, whether there be green space, all of that, as much as possible, reflect the neighborhood's interest also. 391 Ms. Olds wished to point out that after the Farmers' Market decision was made not to come into the Northside site, the Northside /Cascadilla Creek Association approached Common Council with a petition in which approximately 60 people who live right in the area of the Watts Lot requested that Common Council consider a park. She thinks that in terms of planning it is not just housing, it is what will be there in the future for children in the next generation to have some green space to play on which is scarce in the North - side area. The neighborhood really wants to have some park space, some open green land in the Northside, and asks that it not all be developed. James Avery, 318 Lake Avenue, spoke to Council regarding Northside's Watts Lot on Hancock Street. He is against a large scale development project in that area. He feels it will devalue his property. Kevin Luddy, corner of First and Madison Streets, spoke to Council regarding Northside's Watt Lot on Hancock Street. He stated that he is concerned about the i qu antity of occupants that a development in that area would attract. He is against iincreasing the population of the neighborhood. Sarah Adams, 112 West Marshall Street, stated to Council that she thinks that regardless of the design and other things that can be accommodated and may be of a more flexible type of zoning than R -2b, that R -2b zoning in terms of density is the maximum that should go on that site. Handicapped Accessibility - Clinton Hall Barbara Gegg, representing 'Shot in the Dark' spoke to Common Council regarding handicapped accessibility. She stated that accessibility to everything and for everybody is a prime concern of everyone in the disabled community and not being able to get into buildings or get to places threatens their very precious independent lifestyle. 'Shot in the Dark' is asking Common Council to be a mediator between those persons in the disabled community, the tenants of Clinton Hall, and Joseph Ciaschi, owner of Clinton Hall. 392 -6- November 4, 1987 Roger G. Keeney, representing Tompkins County Human Rights Commission, stated to Common Council that the Human Rights Commission will help in any way they possibly can to mediate these accessibility problems. Accessibility in our community is truly a human rights issue. Entering through the back door or being directed to the back of a bus went out long ago for most segments of our society. However, individuals with disabilities, that minority, is the most unrecognized of any. The Human Rights Commission pledge their help and support in any way that they can to overcome these problems. Rezoning of Northside Vicki Romanoff, 112 West Marshall Street, spoke to Council regarding the proposed development project in the Northside. In her opinion, too much density, no matter who builds it, remains the primary concern. Ideally, the Watts Lot should be evaluated as part of a total land use package, including the old sewer site because the parcels combined provide enough land for some creative concepts, relieving density with open green space. The Watts Lot zoned as R -2c seems like spot zoning and could leave the sewer site open to intense commercial growth in combination with residential. She hopes we are not galloping into a 'build now, think later' scenario which has been played in Ithaca too often. Environmental Ordinance Amendment Betsy Darlington, Fairmount Avenue, member of the Conservation Advisory Council, spoke to Council regarding the environmental ordinance amendment from the August Council meeting which was to give greater protection to critical areas and in so doing closed a major loophole in the local Environmental Quality Review Act. She feels that this ordinance must not be rescinded or watered down. Some refinement of it may be called for, however. One problem with it seems to be the definition of contiguous. The intent of the law is to protect sensitive areas and this intent must be kept in mind when interpreting the law. Therefore, she suggests that contiguous simply be defined as close enough to cause harm to a critical area and this will vary in distance depending on the situation. In 1983 Roger Transik prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement and recommended that this particular area that Mr. Novarr proposes to develop be designated as a 'no build area'. She feels that the building permit issued to Mr. Novarr should be revoked pending a thorough environmental review. Another problem with interpretation of the law is what exactly constitutes a project and it seems as though it is a rather narrow definition to call it simply the buildings. She feels that it should also include the pavement, the regrading, and change from the natural state of the site. Watts Lot - Hancock Street Chad Hover, 411 Second Street, spoke to Council regarding the proposed development project on Hancock Street. He favors a moratorium. It seems to him to be the most constructive approach for this particular situation. He thinks it is important to keep in mind that the site as it stands is not an easy one to develop because it is behind the P&C. He stated that a residential use in the area is much better than commercial use. To accommodate a residential area that close to the P&C with unknown status of the other properties around it requires something beyond strictly zoning. It takes a really cooperative effort and that is basically what he is supporting. 19 J -7- November 4, 1987 Collegetown Parking Problem Tom DeVenture, Linden Avenue, spoke to Council regarding the demolition permit that was issued to Jason Fane for 125 -127 Dryden Road in order to provide parking for his new project. He is concerned that there will be more houses and green spaces disappearing to provide parking for new apartment buildings rather than limiting development as was the intent . There is indeed a shortage of night parking in Collegetown. The parking capacity could be practically doubled by repealing the alternate side parking rule and not limiting the number (Wori of cars that can park in the garage at night. Zoning Jane Pederson, 206 Elmwood Avenue, spoke to Council regarding zoning. She stated that we are hearing very common concerns from a number of different areas of the city. She spoke on behalf of the Bryant Park Civic Association in support of the Northside situation, and also in support of the Valentine Place residents. Valentine Place LO Rishi Raj, 919 East State Street, spoke to Common Council =regarding the Valentine Place issue. He spoke of Mary Herron m who has been a resident of Valentine Place for forty years. He has watched her health deteriorate over the past couple Q of years since the last Valentine Place issue. It is his opinion that there is no political body that is protecting the rights of Mrs. Herron. He is concerned because the residents seem to have no voice in the planning process for their neigh- borhood. He stated that he does not think the people are against development, it is the process by which the development has been imposed upon them. He stated that it is time and it is the duty of the city Alderpersons to take hold of this issue and address it; not just Valentine Place but for the entire community. Common Council Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, stated to Council that he thinks there has been a core group of Common Council that hasn't been listening very much to the citizens who speak to Council. He urged new Council members and continuing members to look into matters a little more and to listen more carefully. REPORT OF CITY BOARDS, COMMIT'T'EES AND COMMISSIONS: Board of Public Wor Commissioner Nichols reported on the following items: 393 Conrail - The City Engineer, at the instigation of the Board, is trying to do something about the speed of the trains through the city. A resolution will be forthcoming to the Council from the Board regarding Conrail. It appears that the speed of the trains through the city could be doubled with no problems. Parking fines - The Board feels that the resolution that is on the agenda tonight is precipitous and they see no urgency for it. It appears to just raise the fines for vehicles that overstay time limits. There are a lot of other issues involved in parking enforcement and the Board was hoping to get an overall view of that situation, plus a mechanism for enforcement of other violations other than metered parking. The Board would recommend that Council delay action on that resolution until the Board can look at the whole parking fine structure. 394 Farmers' Market - The Board did not understand the action that was to en on this issue at the last Council meeting. The statement was first made that no action would be taken at that meeting since it was not on the Agenda. Later in the meeting, however, the matter was referred to committee. He was not under the impression that this was being taken away from the Board of Public Works, and that they could take no action. If this was the intention, it seems like a substantive change rather than just a referring to committee. Obviously, of course, if this is what the Council wants the Board will have to live with it but he does not think it is an appropriate way to do things. City Land in Farmers' Market Area - The Board is looking at the whole question of city land in the Farmers' Market area and who uses it and who pays for it. It is true that there are other commercial interests there who are using city land with licenses. In particular, Mr. Ciaschi at the Station Resturant, is using city land with a permit for which he is paying nothing. The reason is that legally, as the Board understands it, he is not required to pay anything because that land is a park land. The only reason the Farmers' Market pays anything is because they make a donation in lieu of that payment. Woodcock Street - Question of Opening - Alderperson Killeen asked Commissioner Nichols if the Board has had any discussion on Valentine Place, specifically the opening up of Woodcock and the traffic increase impact on State and Mitchell Streets. Commissioner Nichols stated that there as to the traffic. The real problem is Street - Mitchell Street intersection. of Woodcock Street, the board has asked to look into this and the board has not from Mr. Nash. has been discussion clearly at the State As to the opening the City Attorney yet received a report City Land Use by Mr. Ciaschi - Alderperson Dennis asked about Mr. Ciaschi being on a permit and not paying anything for the use of the land at the Station Restaurant. He asked if the Board. is going to change that. Commissioner Nichols responded that legally the city can not charge for park land. As he understands it, when Mr. Ciaschi was given the permit, it was negotiated and he paved and improved that area and was told he would be able to use it. When the Board started to adopt the standard procedure for the cost of the permit fee that is used for all city property, he was billed as was the Farmers' Market but legally he is not required to pay and he hasn't. Recycling Memo of Understanding - Alderperson Schlather as Ye--& w y t eBard endorsed the mechanism of eliminating the accumulation of prize money for recycling when Council clearly indicated that was the way they wanted it to go. Commissioner Nichols explained that the Department of Public Works staff had changed the procedure because they felt there were problems with letting the prize money accumulate. Discussion will continue on this subject. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR: Mayor's Proposed 1988 Budget Mayor Guten erger presente his proposed Executive 1988 budget to Council. He stated that if the city still had Federal Revenue Sharing there would be no tax increase needed, based on his recommendations. Because there is no Federal Revenue Sharing there will be loo increase to make up for the loss. MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS Recycling Task Force Mayor Guten erger requested approval of the appointment of Catherine McCarthy, 107 N. quarry Street, to the Recycling Task Force for an indefinite term. D ,J 395 -9- November 4, 1987 Resolution By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the appointment of Catherine McCarthy to the Recycling Task Force for an indefinite term. Carried Unanimously Television Cable Commission Mayor Gutenberger requested approval for the reappointment of Janice Fornwalt, 600 Warren Road, to the Television Cable (4 Commission, for a five year term to expire July 30, 1992. Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the reappointment of Janice Fornwalt, to the Television Cable Commission with a term to expire July 30, 1992. Carried Unanimously CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Building Permits d- Alderperson Dennis asked what the status of the building LDpermit issue is in reference to other building permits outside = of Valentine Place; specifically the Hangar Theatre project. m City Attorney Nash responded that they may have to get a C[ special development permit under the flood plain ordinance. Mr. Nash will contact Tom Neiderkorn on Thursday to clarify the procedure for their project. HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: Police Department Report By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Common Council receives the October 30, 1987 report entitled POLICE DEPARTMENT ISSUES by the Human Services Committee and incorporates by attachment the statement of the PBA and that copies be distributed forthwith to the Mayor, Chief of Police, PBA and the Community Police Board. Alderperson Peterson stated that the 30 page report is 10 -11 months of work. It outlines the hearings, the public comments and the comments from the police department that the committee heard either in public meetings or when individually contacted. This is a summary of the committee's assessments and their recommendations. On page 28, item #S the following needs to be added to the last sentence of that paragraph: "housing units located off campus ". Alderperson Peterson, speaking for the committee, stated that this is a working document. There are a lot of issues presented. It is intended that there be discussion continuously through this year and next with the Police Chief, the Mayor, the Police Commissioners, and with the police officers themselves to resolve the issues and support some of the recommendations in the report. Discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Homeless People in Ithaca Alderperson Peterson reported that representatives from agencies and homeless persons themselves were at the Human Services Committee meeting. The areas of concern are what to do with the homeless people in our community, providing shelter perhaps, 396; -10- November 4, 1987 and the other is the situation of long range planning. The committee appointed Alderperson Killeen to be the liaison to the Homeless Task Force and to immediately start work with the county because many of their funds through the Depart- ment of Social Services go for these kinds of issues. They will also be talking about space, particularly looking at the old jail. Alderperson Killeen stated there have been two meetings in the past couple of weeks on this matter. It is a potentially alarming problem. Specifically, there are two aspects to this because it is an enormously complicated problem in terms of just definition and finding, in fact, the kinds of services and the kinds of people who are in need. The short term solution is to find some sort of emergency shelter that will handle perhaps a dozen or fifteen individuals during the course of this winter. A longer term situation tackles the problem of a more long term basis for probably the greater numbers of people needing permanent facilities. The emergency facilities that the city and county have are anticipating full capacity. The old jail site has been looked at with the assistance of county representatives but it does not look like a viable solution for this winter. Discussion followed on the floor and Alderperson Killeen answered questions from Council members. Recreational Facilities Study The committee is looking at the first draft from the Human Services Coalition on recreational facilities. Handicapped Accessibility Alderperson Peterson reported the committee had asked for a very specific report from the Department of Public Works as to how much work had been done thus far on the projects that were to be done in 1987. There is a significant amount of work that has not been done and the committee sent a letter to the Mayor and to the Superintendent urging that this should be a top priority. On the Clinton Hall issue, the committee met again with the tenants, Historic Ithaca, and Landmarks Preservation members. They discussed the issue of accessibility and sent a memo of support for the opportunity to work with the Landmarks Preservation Committee, Joseph Ciaschi and the tenants and perhaps looking for another way of accessing the building. Discussion followed on the floor regarding Clinton Hall accessibility for the handicapped. It was suggested that Vicki Romanoff, who was hired by the city to oversee the preservation of the building, be a part of this discussion. Recess Common Council recessed at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened in Regular Session at 10:00 p.m. BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: Bikeway Project By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca and the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation have entered into an agreement to construct a public bikeway along the Cayuga Inlet in the City and Town of Ithaca for the benefit of the general public, and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Budget and Administration Committee of Common Council on August 27, 1987, to inform the public of the proposed bikeway project, its proposed location and condemnation proceedings incident thereto, and 397 -11- November 4, 1987 WHEREAS, an alternative route to the original proposed route westerly of the Cayuga Inlet was proposed at said Public Hearing, and this route, lying generally easterly of the Cayuga Inlet, having been reviewed by staff of the Planning Department of the City of Ithaca and having been found to have certain advantages over the originally proposed route and other possible routes; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca does hereby recommend to the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation adoption of Alternative C as the route for the Cayuga Inlet Bikeway, as such Alternative is described in the attached page 3 of a memo from City Planning Department staff and map also attached hereto with the further modification that said route include a spur on the east side of the Inlet extending from the west end of West Clinton Street southerly to its intersection with the Alternative C route on the east side of the Inlet. (Memo and map attached to Minute Book) Alderperson Hoffman gave background information on the Bikeway project. Discussion followed on the floor. Lo A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: m Carried Unanimously Q Youth Services Mayor Gutenberger stated for clarification that the reason he vetoed the Youth Bureau resolution at the September Common Council meeting was because the Youth Bureau Advisory Board had not been involved. We now have a recommendation from the Youth Bureau Advisory Board. Alderperson Schlather stated that from a procedural standpoia- the Mayor's point was well made. The Mayor's objection was not a substantive veto but in fact a veto premised on procedural grounds. There is no question that the Youth Bureau has now been heard and as a result of that the Council may wish to modify what they have passed in some measure. But to get to that point, he is recommending that the Council vote on the veto over -ride issue first and then the Council can look at the Youth Bureau resolution. Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That in lieu of a Youth Services Contract with outside municipalities, the policy of the Ithaca Youth Bureau for participation by non -city residents shall be as follows: 1. Fees shall be based on total program costs and /or market conditions for similar activities in other local or regional entities. 2. Those programs wherein the collection of fees are either not permissible, or not practicable, would no longer be extended to non -city residents. and be it further RESOLVED, That all municipalities in which current Youth Bureau participants reside be advised accordingly. Additionally, all such municipalities are hereby invited to participate by contract, at their proportionate share of the total Youth Bureau budget based on their percentage of participation in Youth Bureau programs, as determined by the city; the residents of any such municipalities so participating by contract shall be treated as city residents for purposes of participation in Youth Bureau programs and payment of fees. 398 -12- November 4, 1987 Discussion followed on the floor. Alderperson Booth stated that the import of the resolution is that the city would cut off immediately the youth development and mainstreaming programs. Therefore, he can not support this resolution. Alderperson Hoffman asked City a vetoed resolution the Council that was originally adopted. Attorney Nash if in over - riding must vote on the same wording Attorney Nash responded that if Council wants to over -ride the veto on the original resolution, the Council will need to have a two - thirds vote. If Council comes up with a different resolution, or significantly amend the prior resolution, then the Council is back to a simple majority, subject of course to the veto power on that. Mayor Gutenberger stated that there has been some contact by other municipalities that they would like to sit down and talk with the city about this matter. If the resolution has done anything, it has accomplished its intended purpose and got everybody's attention, which hadn't been done before. Passing this resolution now is very short - sighted in the long run. He thinks it is going to be very difficult to go back and talk with those other people who have now expressed the willingness to talk. Further discussion followed on the floor. Alderperson Killeen stated that he does not think the out- lyi:i,; municipalities are going to be immediately responsive to their children's needs and come running in with monies for the youth programs. Enough time has to be provided and enough time has not been provided. The greatest harm that this rash sort of policy shift is going to level is to the Youth Bureau staff and to the kids who are presently participants, residents and non-residents jin the programs. This is a transition period for the Youth Bureau (new building, new leadership, etc.), and this is a massive sort of change. The implications Of it are not very clearly understood. He is uncomfortable with going further than what was done a month ago. We have to negotiate with all these towns one way or another and we have all the opportunities to negotiate as good a deal as possible. Alderperson Booth stated that it is important for Council to understand that the second resolution differentiates between recreation programs and the youth development and mainstreaming programs. In 1988 it would propose that the mainstreaming and youth development programs be offered to city children and outside of city children as they have been prior to this year. For recreation programs it essentially provides that for out of city children the Town of Ithaca will have an opportunity to participate at double fee rates if the town comes forward and pays $88,000. If the town doesn't do that, then the second resolution would also have the effect of saying that all outside of city children would not participate in recreation programs unless they paid fees based on program costs. Alderperson Dennis stated that he supported the first resolution and he would vote to over -ride the veto but given the climate that may have been changed in the Town of Ithaca yesterday, (election of new Town Board members), the city has the opportunity in the next six months, from January to the end of June, to negotiate with the town specifically, and certainly the Village of Lansing. J J 399 -13- November 4, 1987 Alderperson Schlather pointed out to Council what he considered one very telling statistic. In the youth development programs, for example in the one -to -one program, we currently serve 225 youth through the city Youth Bureau; 130.`of which are from the city. We have a waiting list for the youth development program and on that waiting list there are 170 city youth. So we are serving basically an extra 95 children outside of the city to the exclusion of city youth. He thinks that is the kind of statistic that is extremely troublesome. Alderperson Booth stated that the reason that there are city youth on those waiting lists is that the Youth Bureau has had a policy for a number of years of identifying the youth that are most in need of those services, whether they are in the city or outside the city. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (6) - Schlather, Lytel, Cummings, Haine, Dennis, Killeen Nays (4) - Booth, Romanowski, Peterson, Hoffman ri Motion Defeated Iq (seven votes needed to over -ride (O Mayor's veto - veto not over - ridden) Youth Services m By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Booth Q WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau Board fully supports Common Council's efforts to encourage other municipalities to share in the cost of Youth Bureau programs, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau Board and Common Council wants to continue the high quality of Ithaca Youth Bureau programming at the present level, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau Board and Common Council (moo", believes that, as much as possible, municipalities should have time to decide to join in a united effort of Youth Bureau programming, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau Board and Common Council wants to avoid cutting programs to youngsters and families already in distress, thereby creating great hardships for them; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That for 1988 the Youth Bureau utilize the following policies for providing youth services: 1) For recreation programs for which fees are charged: Youth residing in the Town of Ithaca shall pay double the City resident fees, provided that the Town pays $88,050 to the City in 1988 for youth services and provided that the Town enter into good faith negotiations with the City during 1988 for City and /or joint City/ Town provision of youth services in 1989. If that amount is not paid or those negotiations are not begun by February 1, 1988 and completed by July 1, 1988, youth residing in the Town of Ithaca shall pay fees based on program costs and market conditions in 1988. Youth residing outside the City and Town of Ithaca shall pay fees based on program total costs and /or market conditions for similar activity. 2) For recreation programs for which collection of fees is not permissible: Youth residing outside the City of Ithaca shall not be provided these-services, except that youth residing in the Town of Ithaca shall receive those services rw -14- November 4, 1987 if the Town pays $88,OSO to the City for youth services by February 1, 1988, and if the Town enters into good faith negotiations by February 1, 1988 and completes such negotiations by July 1, 1988, with the City for City and /or joint City /Town provision of youth services for 1989. 3) For recreation mainstreaming programs and youth develop- ment programs: Youth residing within or outside the City shall receive services in 1988. These programs shall be terminated in 1989 for youth residing outside the City unless the municipality in which the youth resides contracts with the City for such services, and be it further RESOLVED, That all municipalities in which current Youth Bureau participants reside be advised accordingly. Additionally, all such municipalities are hereby invited to participate by contract, at their proportionate share of the total Youth Bureau budget, based on their percentage of participation in Youth Bureau programs, as determined by the City; the residents of any such municipalities so participating by contract shall be treated as City residents for purposes of participation in Youth Bureau programs and payment of fees. Discussion followed on the floor. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That item #1 shall be changed to read: "For recreation programs for which fees are charged,youth residing outside of the city shall pay fees based on the total program costs and /or market conditions for similar activity; and that item ` #2 read as follows: "For recreation programs for which collection of fees is not permissible youth residing outside the city shall not be provided these services ". A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (2) - Cummings, Schlather Nays (8) - Booth, Killeen, Haine, Hoffman, Peterson, Dennis, Romanowski, Lytel Motion Defeated Main Motion A vote on the main motion resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Cummings, Booth, Romanowski, Lytel, Haine, Hoffman, Peterson, Dennis Nays (2) - Schlather, Killeen Carried PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: Northsi e Rezoning - Alternate 1 (Includes Watts Lot) By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLUTION OF COMMON COUNCIL INTRODUCING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC NOTICE AND PUBLIC HEARING RESOLVED, That Ordinance No. 87 - entitled "An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map of Chapter 30 entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code" be and it hereby is intro- duced before the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, and be it further -15- November 4, 1987 401 RESOLVED, That the Common Council shall hold a public hearing in the matter of the adoption of the aforesaid ordinance to be held at the Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street in the City of Ithaca, New York on Wednesday, December 2, 1987 at 7:30 P.M., and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Clerk give notice of such public hearing by the publication of a notice in the official news- paper, specifying the time when and the place where such public hearing will be held, and in general terms describing the proposed ordinance. Such notice shall be published once at least fifteen days prior to the public hearing, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall transmit forthwith to the Board of Planning and Development and the Tompkins County Planning Board a true and exact copy of the proposed zoning ordinance for their report thereon. ORDINANCE NO. 87 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF CHAPTER 30 ENTITLED LO 'O "ZONING" OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE. SECTION 1. AMENDING ZONING MAP M Q 1. That the "Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca, New York" as last amended, is hereby amended and changed so that all that tract or parcel of land within the following described areas presently located in the R -3a, Residential District are reclassified and changed to the R -2b, Residential District: A. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 50-4 -1, thence easterly a distance of approximately 400 feet alo,ig the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -4 -9, thence southerly a distance of approximately 99 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of North Cayuga Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -4 -11, thence westerly a distance of approximately 198 feet along the southern boundary of tax parcel numbers 50 -4 -11 to the southwest corner of tax parcel number 50-4 -11, thence northerly a distance of approximately 19 feet to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number SO -4 -37, thence westerly a distance of approximately 199 feet along the north boundary of tax parcel SO -4 -37 to the northwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -4 -37, thence northerly a distance of approximately 81 feet along the east boundary of the right -of- way of North Geneva Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 50-4 -1 through 50 -4 -11, inclusive and 50 -4 -38. B. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number SO -3 -1, thence easterly a distance of approximately 198 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number SO -3 -S, thence southerly a distance of approxi- mately S90 feet to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number SO -3 -14, thence westerly a distance of approxi- mately 132 feet along the south boundary of tax parcel number 50 -3 -14 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -3 -14, thence northerly a distance of approximately 24 feet along the west boundary of tax parcel number SO -3 -14 to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number SO -3 -18, thence westerly a distance of approximately 66 feet along the south boundary of tax parcel number 50 -3 -18 to a point at the southwest corner of tax parcel number SO -3 -18, thence northerly a distance of approximately 565 feet along the 402 -16- November 4, 1987 east boundary of the right -of -way of North Albany Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 50 -3 -1 through SO -3 -14, inclusive, and 50 -3 -18 through 50 -3 -31, inclusive. C. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -16, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 142 along the north boundaries of tax parcel numbers 45 -4 -16 and 45 -4 -15 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -15, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 90 feet along the east boundary line of tax parcel number 45 -4 -15 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -10, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 123 feet along the south boundary of tax parcel 45 -4 -10 to a point at the southeast corner of tax parcel 45 -4 -10, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 116 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Lake Avenue to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -12, thence westerly a distance of approximately 298 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -16, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 64 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to the point of beginning. The above description includes all of the following tax parcel numbers: 45 -4 -11, 45 -4 -12, 45 -4 -14, 45 -4 -15, and 45 -4 -16. 2. That the "Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca, New York as last amended, is hereby amended and changed so that all that tract or parcels of land within the following described areas presently located in the R -3b, Residential District are reclassified and changed to the R -2b, Residential District: A. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -1 -1, thence easterly a distance of approximately 528 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -1 -12, thence southerly a distance of approxi- mately 163 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of North Albany Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -1 -15, thence westerly a distance of approximately 528 feet along the southern boundaries of tax parcel numbers 50 -1 -15, 50 -1 -6, 50 -1 -5, SO -1 -4, 50 -1 -3 and 50 -1 -31 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -1 -31, thence northerly a distance of approximately 165 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of North Plain Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcel numbers: 50 -1 -1 through SO -1 -15 inclusive, 50 -1 -31 and 50 -1 -32. B. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 51 -3 -1, thence easterly a distance of approximately 403 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -3 -8, thence southerly a distance of approxi- mately 161 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of North Plain Street to a point on the east boundary of tax parcel number 51 -3 -12, thence westerly in a straight line a distance of approximately 201 feet until it reaches the south boundaries of tax parcel numbers 51 -3- 26, 51 -3 -2 and 51 -3 -3, said line being the easterly extension of the south boundaries of those parcels and continuing approximately 202 feet along said boundaries to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 51 -3 -26, thence northerly a distance of approximately 162 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Park Place to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 50 -3 -1 through 50 -3 -11, inclusive, 50 -3 -26, 50 -3 -27 and 50 -3 -28, and a portion of 51 -3 -12. Irn J -17- November 4, 1987 C. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 51- 2 -1.2, thence easterly a distance of approxi- mately 199 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -2 -S, thence southerly a distance of approximately 163 feet along the west boundary of the right - of -way of Park Place to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -2 -8, thence westerly a distance of approxi- mately 199 feet along the south boundaries of tax parcel numbers S1 -2 -8, 51 -2 -4, S1 -2 -3 and 51 -2 -17 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel S1 -2 -17, thence northerly a distance of approximately 163 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Washington Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 51 -2 -1.1 through 51 -2 -8 and S1 -2 -17. D. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number S1 -1 -3, thence easterly a distance of approxi- mately 334 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -1 -8, thence southerly a distance of approximately 167 feet along the west boundary of the right - LO of -way of Washington Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -1 -10, thence westerly a distance CO of approximately 334 feet along the south boundaries of tax parcel numbers 51 -1 -10, S1 -1 -5, S1 -1 -4, and S1 -1 -3 to a point Q on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 51 -1 -3, thence northerly a distance of approximately 167 feet along the west boundary of tax parcel number 51 -1 -3 to the point of beginning. The above described area includes all of the following tax parcels: 51 -1 -3 through S1 -1 -10, inclusive. E. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 4S -S -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 26S feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -S -3, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 323 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 4S -S -9, thence westerly a distance of approximately 304 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -S -11, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 180 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above decribed area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 45 -5 -1 through 45 -5 -15, inclusive. F. Beginning at a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -6 -1, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 142 feet along the west boundary of the right - of -way of Second Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 4S -6 -2, thence westerly a distance of approximately 300 feet along the north boundary of the right - of way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 4S -6 -6, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Monroe Street to the point of beginning. The above described areas shall include all of the following tax parcels: 45 -6 -1 through 4S -6 -6, inclusive. G. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 132 feet along the south boundary of the right -of- way of Madison Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 223 feet along the east boundaries of tax parcels numbers 34 -9 -2, 34 -9 -16, 34 -9 -15, and 34 -9 -14 to 403 404 -18- November 4, 1987 a point on the north boundary of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11 that is approximately 19 feet from the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11, thence easterly a distance of approximately 19 feet along the north boundary of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 100 feet along the east boundary of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11 to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11, thence westerly a distance of approxi- mately 152 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -13, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 330 feet along the east boundary of the right - of -way of First Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 34 -9 -1, 34 -9 -2, and 34 -9 -11 through 34 -9 -17, inclusive. H. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -2 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 264 feet along the south boundary of the right - of way of Madision Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -2 -4, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 325 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 4S -2 -11, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 267 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 45 -2 -15, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 325 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 45 -2 -1 through 4S -2 -19, inclusive. I. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -1 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 264 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Madison Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -1 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 320 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -1 -9, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 264 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 45 -1 -14, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 320 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Third Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 45 -1 -1 through 45 -1 -14, inclusive. J. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -6 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 268 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Madison Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -6 -3, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 344 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Third Street to a point at the southeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -6 -8, thence westerly a distance of approximately 300 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point at the southwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -6 -14, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 202 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Fourth Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 44 -6 -1 through 44 -6 -16, inclusive. K. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 34 -1 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 13S feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Hancock Street- to a point on the northeast corner it, -19- November 4, 1987 405 of tax parcel number 34 -1 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 70 feet to the point of intersection of the north boundary of tax parcel number 34 -1 -4, thence south- westerly a distance of approximately 17 feet along the north boundary line of tax parcel number 34 -1 -4 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -1 -17, thence south- easterly a distance of approximately 2SS feet along the east boundaries of tax parcel numbers 34 -1 -17, 34 -1 -16, 34 -1 -1S, 34 -1 -14, 34 -1 -13, and the southeasterly extension of that line to the intersection of the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street, thence southwesterly a distance of approxi- mately 120 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to a point at the southwest corner of tax parcel number 34 -1 -12, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 328 feet along the east boundary of the right - of -way of First Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 34 -1 -1, 34 -1 -2, 34 -1 -11 through 34 -1 -18, inclusive, and a portion of 34 -1 -10. L. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -4 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of � approximately 266 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the northeast corner = of tax parcel number 3S -4 -3, thence southeasterly a distance CO of approximately 327 feet along the west boundary of the Q right -of -way of First Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 3S -4 -8, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 270 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 35 -4 -14, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 327 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 3S -4 -1 through 3S -4 -18, inclusive. M. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -S -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 263 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 3S -S -6, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 32S feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -S -11 thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 26S feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 35 -5 -1S, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 32S feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Third Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 35 -S -1 through 35 -5 -20, inclusive. N. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -5 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 269 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Morris Avenue to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -S -6, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 149 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Third Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -5 -8, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 269 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 44 -5 -13, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 150 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Fourth Street to the point of beginning. The above decribed area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 44 -S -1- through 44 -S -13, inclusive. 4061 -20- November 4, 1987 0. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -9 -2, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 328 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -9 -6, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 330 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Fifth Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -9 -13, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 83 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to its intersection with the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street, thence westerly a distance of approximately 275 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point at the southwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -9 -20, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 200 feet along the west boundaries of tax parcel numbers 44 -9 -20 and 44 -9 -2 to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 44 -9 -2 through 44 -9 -20, inclusive. P. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -2 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 26S feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Adams Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -2 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 330 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -2 -7, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 26S feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 35 -2 -12, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 328 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 35 -2 -1 through 35 -2 -16, inclusive. Q. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -1 -3, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 100 feet to the northeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -1 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 100 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -1 -2, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 100 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -1 -3, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 100 feet along the west boundary of tax parcel number 35 -1 -3 to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 35 -1 -2 and 35 -1 -3. R. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -2 -9, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the north boundaries of tax parcel numbers 44 -2 -9 and 44 -2 -2 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -2 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 165 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Fourth Street to a point on the south- east corner of tax parcel number 44 -2 -3, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 44 -2 -8, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 165 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Fifth Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 44 -2 -2 through 44 -2 -9, inclusive. S. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -4, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 132 feet along the north boundary lines of tax parcel numbers 25 -4 -4 and 25 -4 -3 to a point on the northeast J -21- November 4, 1987 corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -3, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 50 feet to a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -2, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 133 feet along the north boundary line of tax parcel number 25 -4 -2 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -2, thence southeasterly along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street a distance of approximately 40 feet to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -2, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the north boundary - of the right -of -way of Adams Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -4, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 90 feet along the east boundary of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 25 -4 -2 through 25 -4 -4, inclusive. T. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 118 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the northeast corner �. of tax parcel number 45 -4 -3, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 230 feet along the east boundaries of tax LO parcel numbers 45 -4 -3, 45 -4 -20, 45 -4 -19 and 45 -4 -18 to a = point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -6, m thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 18 feet Q to a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel 45 -4 -8, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 66 feet to a point on the north boundary of tax parcel 45 -4 -15 that is approximately 10 feet southwest of the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -15, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 133 feet along the south boundary of tax parcel number 45 -4 -17, to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel 45 -4 -17, thence northwest a distance of approxi- mately 295 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way f of First Street to the point of beginning. The above described area includes all of the following tax parcels: 45 -4 -1 through 45 -4 -3, inclusive and 45 -4 -17 through 45 -4 -21, inclusive. 3. That the "Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca, New York ", as last amended, is hereby amended and changed so that all that tract or parcels of land within the following described areas presently located in the B -2a, Business District are reclassified and changed to the R -2b, Residential District. A. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 25 -3 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 264 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Franklin Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 25 -3 -1, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 325 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Lake Avenue to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 25 -3 -1, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 269 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Adams Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 25 -3 -1, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 330 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to the point of beginning. The above described area includes all of tax parcel number 25 -3 -1. 4. That in accordance herewith the City Clerk is hereby directed to make or cause to be made the necessary changes on said zoning map. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect with law upon publication of a notice 3.11 (B) of the Ithaca City Charter. 407 immediately and in accordance as provided in Section Carried Unanimously -22- November 4, 1987 Alderperson Cummings stated that this resolution includes the Watts site zoning designation to R -2b and gave background information on rezoning of this area. Discussion followed on the floor. Deputy Planning and Development Director Mazzarella, responded to questions from Council. Alderperson Schlather thanked the Planning Department staff as well as the City Attorney and Assistant City Attorney and the Building Commissioner for putting together the infor- mation for this rezoning. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Northside Rezoning - Alternate 2 (Excludes Watts Lot) By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLUTION OF COMMON COUNCIL INTRODUCING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC NOTICE AND PUBLIC HEARING RESOLVED, That Ordinance No. 87 - entitled "An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map of Chapter 30 entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code" be and it hereby is intro- duced before the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council shall hold a public hearing in the matter of the adoption of the aforesaid ordinance to be held at the Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street in the City of Ithaca, New York on Wednesday, December 2, 1987 at 7:30 P.M., and be it further Ij RESOLVED, That the City Clerk give notice of such public hearing by the publication of a notice in the official news- paper, specifying the time when and the place where such public hearing will be held, and in general terms describing the proposed ordinance. Such notice shall be published once at least fifteen days prior to the public hearing, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall transmit forthwith to the Board of Planning and Development and the Tompkins County Planning Board a true and exact copy of the proposed zoning ordinance for their report thereon. ORDINANCE NO. 87 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF CHAPTER 30 ENTITLED "ZONING" OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE. SECTION 1. AMENDING ZONING MAP 1. That the "Official Zoning New York" as last amended so that all that tract or described areas presently District are reclassified District: Map of the City of Ithaca, is hereby amended and changed parcel of land within the following located in the R -3a, Residential and changed to the R -2b, Residential A. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number SO -4 -1, thence easterly a distance of approximately 400 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number SO -4 -9, thence southerly a distance of approximately -23- November 4, 1987 99 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of North Cayuga Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -4 -11, thence westerly a distance of approximately 198 feet along the southern boundary of tax parcel numbers 50 -4 -11 to the southwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -4 -11, thence northerly a distance of approximately 19 feet to a point oil the northeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -4 -37, thence westerly a distance of approximately 199 feet along the north boundary of tax parcel SO -4 -37 to the northwest corner of tax parcel number SO -4 -37, thence northerly a distance of approximately 81 feet along the east boundary of the right -of- way of North Geneva Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 50 -4 -1 through 50 -4 -11, inclusive and 50 -4 -38. B. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -3 -1, thence easterly a distance of approximately 198 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -3 -5, thence southerly a distance of approxi- mately 590 feet to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -3 -14, thence westerly a distance of approxi- Iq mately 132 feet along the south boundary of tax parcel number jD 50 -3 -14 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel = number 50 -3 -14, thence northerly a distance of approximately m24 feet along the west boundary of tax parcel number 50 -3 -14 Q to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -3 -18, thence westerly a distance of approximately 66 feet along the south boundary of tax parcel number SO -3 -18 to a point at the southwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -3 -18, thence northerly a distance of approximately 565 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of North Albany Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 50 -3 -1 through SO -3 -14, inclusive, and 50 -3 -18 through SO -3 -31, inclusive. C. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel ;lumber 45 -4 -16, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 142 along the north boundaries of tax parcel numbers 45 -4 -16 and 45 -4 -15 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -15, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 90 feet along the east boundary line of tax parcel number 45 -4 -15 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -10, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 123 feet along the south boundary of tax parcel 45 -4 -10 to a point at the southeast corner of tax parcel 45 -4 -10, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 116 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Lake Avenue to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -12, thence westerly a distance of approximately 298 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -16, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 64 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to the point of beginning. The above description includes all of the following tax parcel numbers: 45 -4 -11, 45 -4 -12, 45 -4 -14, 45 -4 -15, and 45 -4 -16. 2. That the "Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca, New York as last amended, is hereby amended and changed so that all that tract or parcels of land within the following described areas presently located in the R -3b, Residential District are reclassified and changed to the R -2b, Residential District: 401.) A. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -1 -1, thence easterly a distance of approximately 528 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a poi-lit on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -1 -12, thence southerly a distance of approxi- mately 163 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way 410 -24- November 4, 1987 of North Albany Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 50 -1 -15, thence westerly a distance of approximately 528 feet along the southern boundaries of tax parcel numbers 50 -1 -15, 50 -1 -6, SO -1 -S, 50 -1 -4, 50 -1 -3 and 50 -1 -31 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 50 -1 -31, thence northerly a distance of approximately 165 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of North Plain Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcel numbers: 50 -1 -1 through 50 -1 -15 inclusive, 50 -1 -31 and 50 -1 -32. B. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 51 -3 -1, thence easterly a distance of approximately 403 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -3 -8, thence southerly a distance of approxi- mately 161 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of North Plain Street to a point on the east boundary of tax parcel number 51 -3 -12, thence westerly in a straight line a distance of approximately 201 feet until it reaches the south boundaries of tax parcel numbers 51 -3- 26, S1 -3 -2 and 51 -3 -3, said line being the easterly extension of the south boundaries of those parcels and continuing approximately 202 feet along said boundaries to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 51 -3 -26, thence northerly a distance of approximately 162 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Park Place to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: SO -3 -1 through SO -3 -11, inclusive, 50 -3 -26, 50 -3 -27 and 50 -3 -28, and a portion of S1 -3 -12. C. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 51- 2 -1.2, thence easterly a distance of approxi- mately 199 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -2 -5, thence southerly a distance of approximately 163 feet along the west boundary of the right - of -way of Park Place to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -2 -8, thence westerly a distance of approxi- mately 199 feet along the south boundaries of tax parcel numbers 51 -2 -8, 51 -2 -4, 51 -2 -3 and 51 -2 -17 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel 51 -2 -17, thence northerly a distance of approximately 163 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Washington Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: S1 -2 -1.1 through 51 -2 -8 and 51 -2 -17. D. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 51 -1 -3, thence easterly a distance of approxi- mately 334 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -1 -8, thence southerly a distance of approximately 167 feet along the west boundary of the right - of -way of Washington Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 51 -1 -10, thence westerly a distance of approximately 334 feet along the south boundaries of tax parcel numbers 51 -1 -10, 51 -1 -S, 51 -1 -4, and 51 -1 -3 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 51 -1 -3, thence northerly a distance of approximately 167 feet along the west boundary of tax parcel number 51 -1 -3 to the point of beginning. The above described area includes all of the following tax parcels: 51 -1 -3 through 51 -1 -10, inclusive. E. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -S -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 26S feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Monroe Stree-t to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 4S -5 -3, thence southeasterly a distance -2S- November 4, 1987 of approximately 323 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 4S -5 -9, thence westerly a distance of approximately 304 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -5 -11, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 180 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above decribed area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 45 -5 -1 through 45 -5 -1S, inclusive. F. Beginning at a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 4S -6 -1, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 142 feet along the west boundary of the right - of -way of Second Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -6 -2, thence westerly a distance of approximately 300 feet along the north boundary of the right - of way of Cascadilla Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 4S -6 -6, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the south boundary of the right -of -way of Monroe Street to the point of beginning. The above described areas shall include all of the following �- tax parcels: 4S -6 -1 through 45 -6 -6, inclusive. LO G. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax = parcel number 34 -9 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of CO approximately 132 feet along the south boundary of the right -of- Q way of Madison Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 223 feet along the east boundaries of tax parcels numbers 34 -9 -2, 34 -9 -16, 34 -9 -1S, and 34 -9 -14 to a point on the north boundary of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11 that is approximately 19 feet from the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11, thence easterly a distance of approximately 19 feet along the north boundary of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 100 feet along the east boundary of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11 to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -11, thence westerly a distance of approximately 152 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 34 -9 -13, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 330 feet along the east boundary of the rightof -way of First Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 34 -9 -1, 34 -9 -2, and 34 -9 -11 through 34 -9 -17, inclusive. H. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -2 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 264 feet along the south boundary of the right - of way of Madision Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -2 -4, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 325 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -2 -11, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 267 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 4S -2 -1S, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 32S feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 4S -2 -1 through 45 -2 -19, inclusive. I. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -1 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 264 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Madison Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -1 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 320 feet along the west boundary of the 411 412 -26- November 4, 1987 right -of -way of Second Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -1 -9, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 264 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 45 -1 -14, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 320 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Third Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 45 -1 -1 through 45 -1 -14, inclusive. J. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -6 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 268 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Madison Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -6 -3, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 344 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Third Street to a point at the southeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -6 -8, thence westerly a distance of approximately 300 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point at the southwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -6 -14, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 202 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Fourth Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 44 -6 -1 through 44 -6 -16, inclusive. K. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 34 -1 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 135 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -1 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 70 feet to the point of intersection of the north boundary of tax parcel number 34 -1 -4, thence south- westerly a distance of approximately 17 feet along the north boundary line of tax parcel number 34 -1 -4 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 34 -1 -17, thence south- easterly a distance of approximately 255 feet along the east boundaries of tax parcel numbers 34 -1 -17, 34 -1 -15, 34 -1 -14, 34 -1 -16. 34 -1 -13, and the southeasterly extension of that line to the intersection of the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street, thence southwesterly a distance of approxi- mately 120 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to a point at the southwest corner of tax parcel number 34 -1 -12, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 328 feet along the east boundary of the right - of -way of First Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 34 -1 -1, 34 -1 -2, 34 -1 -11 through 34 -1 -18, inclusive, and a portion of 34 -1 -10. L. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -4 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 266 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -4 -3, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 327 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -4 -8, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 270 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 35 -4 -14, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 327 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 35 -4 -1 through 35 -4 -18, inclusive. J -27- November 4, 1987 M. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -5 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 263 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -5 -6, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 325 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 3S -S -11 thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 35 -5 -15, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 32S feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Third Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 35 -5 -1 through 35 -5 -20, inclusive. N. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -5 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 269 feet along the south boundary of the right - rd of -way of Morris Avenue to a point on the northeast corner Iq of tax parcel number 44 -5 -6, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 149 feet along the west boundary of the LO right -of -way of Third Street to a point on the southeast = corner of tax parcel number 44 -5 -8, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 269 feet along the north boundary Q of the right -of -way of Madison Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 44 -5 -13, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 1S0 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Fourth Street to the point of beginning. The above decribed area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 44 -S -1- through 44 -5 -13, inclusive. 0. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -9 -2, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 328 feet along the south boundary of the right - of way of Hancocx Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -9 -6, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 330 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Fifth street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -9 -13, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 83 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Madison Street to its intersection with the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street, thence westerly a distance of approxmiately 27S feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Cascadilla Street to a point at the southwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -9 -20, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 200 feet along the west boundaries of tax parcel numbers 44 -9 -20 and 44 -9 -2 to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 44 -9 -2 through 44 -9 -20, inclusive. P. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -2 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Adams Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -2 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 330 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -2 -7, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 35 -2 -12, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 328 feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 35 -2 -1 through 35 -2 -16, inclusive. 413 414 -28- November 4, 1987 Q. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -1 -3, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 100 feet to the northeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -1 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 100 feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Second Street to a point on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 35 -1 -2, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 100 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 35 -1 -3, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 100 feet along the west boundary of tax parcel number 3S -1 -3 to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 3S -1 -2 and 35 -1 -3. R. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 44 -2 -9, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 26S feet along the north boundaries of tax parcel numbers 44 -2 -9 and 44 -2 -2 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 44 -2 -2, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 16S feet along the west boundary of the right -of -way of Fourth Street to a point on the south- east corner of tax parcel number 44 -2 -3, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Hancock Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 44 -2 -8, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 16S feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of Fifth Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 44 -2 -2 through 44 -2 -9, inclusive. S. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 2S -4 -4, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 132 feet along the north boundary lines of tax parcel numbers 25 -4 -4 and 2S -4 -3 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -3, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 50 feet to a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -2, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 133 feet along the north boundary line of tax parcel number 25 -4 -2 to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 2S -4 -2, thence southeasterly along the west boundary of the right -of -way of First Street a distance of approximately 40 feet to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 25 -4 -2, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 265 feet along the north boundary of the right -of -way of Adams Street to a point on the south- west corner of tax parcel number 2S -4 -4, thence northwesterly a distance of approximately 90 feet along the east boundary of Second Street to the point of beginning. The above described area shall include all of the following tax parcels: 25 -4 -2 through 2S -4 -4, inclusive. T. Beginning at a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel number 4S -4 -1, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 118 feet along the south boundary of the right - of -way of Monroe Street to a point on the northeast corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -3, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 230 feet along the east boundaries of tax parcel numbers 45 -4 -3, 45 -4 -20, 4S -4 -19 and 45 -4 -18 to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel number 45 -4 -6, thence northeasterly a distance of approximately 18 feet to a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel 45 -4 -8, thence southeasterly a distance of approximately 66 feet to a point on the north boundary of tax parcel 45 -4 -15 that is approximately 10 feet southwest of the northeast corner of tax parcel number 4S -4 -15, thence southwesterly a distance of approximately 133 feet along the south boundary of tax parcel number 45 -4 -17, to a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel 45 -4 -17, thence northwest a distance of approxi- mately 29S feet along the east boundary of the right -of -way of First Street to the point of beginning. The above described I W_ � 191, -29- November 4, 1987 area includes all of the following tax parcels: 4S -4 -1 through 4S -4 -3, inclusive and 4S -4 -17 through 4S -4 -21, inclusive. 3. That in accordance herewith the City Clerk is hereby directed to make or cause to be made the necessary changes on said Zoning Map. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11 (B) of the Ithaca City Charter. Carried Unanimously Proposal for New Zoning Category - Development of the R -2c District By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Dennis WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has been working to promote the development of affordable housing, improve the quality of residential projects and ensure that new residential develop - ment is compatible with the scale and character of the surrounding neighborhoods, and rLD WHEREAS, the Board of Planning and Development has recommended the adoption of a series of zoning changes that would provide = alternate methods and types of residential development in the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, the Department of Planning and Development has proposed the development of a new zoning district entitled R -2c, which is intended to provide for alternate types of development in medium density residential areas in the City of Ithaca; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca hereby concurs with the Board of Planning and Development that zoning proposals for alternate types and methods of residential development are needed in the City of Ithaca which combine compatible amounts of housing and green space in medium density residential neighborhoods, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby directs the Department of Planning and Development to pursue the development of the R -2c zoning district and make recommendations to the Common Council concerning where such district should be placed on the zoning map. Alderpersons Cummings and Schlather gave background information on the resolution. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Killeen: RESOLVED, That in the fi following be added after of the P -1 district into example P -1, a, b, c, .. Seconded by Alderperson Schlather aal RESOLVED,in the third line the the word district: "and the delineation appropriate sub - categories, for Discussion on the amendment followed on the floor. A vote on the amendment resulted as follows: Ayes (1) - Killeen Nays (9) - Schlather, Romanowski, Lytel, Cummings, Dennis, Haine, Booth, Hoffman, Peterson Motion Defeated Main Motion A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously 415 -30- November 4, 1987 Demolition Ordinance - Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the matter of the demolition ordinance has been referred to the City Attorney for examination and input on whether or not the City has the authority to set up an ordinance which would prevent demolition of substan- tially sound housing stock. Sale of Fire Station #5 and City Hall Annex Alderperson Cummings reported that a memorandum and the agenda for the IURA meeting has been sent to all Council members. If there are any concerns Council members should contact Mr. Van Cort. City -wide Moratorium on Large Scale ConstructionProjects Alderperson Cummings reported that the Planning and Development Board had taken Alderperson Booth's referral dealing with city -wide moratorium under consideration and recommended moving ahead with that moratorium. They passed it on to the Planning and Development Committee to define large scale development. The P&D Committee has asked staff to get back to the Committee in December, drafting a moratorium ordinance which would in some way define what we mean by large scale, what area of the City would be covered and the length of such a moratorium. Site Plan Review Alderperson Cummings reported that the Planning and Development Board has asked staff to start work on this matter. There will be a rough draft for the next meeting of the Planning Board and the PFD Committee. Solid Waste Disposal Alderperson Cummings reported that the county has indicated to the city their desire to move forward with examining the concept of a central recycling transfer, bailing facility located in the city. They have considered, for example, a site such as Southwest Park and they would like now to move into the area of real planning and setting up an ad -hoc committee to work on this. BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: Personnel Associate By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Common Council does herewith create the position of Personnel Associate in the Personnel Department, and be it further RESOLVED, That Valerie Walker be provisionally appointed to the position of Personnel Associate, with an annual salary of $22,387, that being Step 8 of the 1987 Compensation Plan for employees not covered by a union, effective October 26, 1987 and be it further RESOLVED, That the Civil Service Commission be requested to hold an examination for this position. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Booth, Dennis, Hoffman, Haine, Peterson, Lytel, Cummings, Killeen Nays (2) - Schlather, Romanowski Sj Carried Assistant Activities Center Coordinator By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Linda Sterk be provisionally promoted to the title of Assistant Activities Center Coordinator at G.I.A.C, with an annual salary of $16,853, that being Step 3 of the 1987 C.S.E.A.- Administrative Unit Compensation Plan, effective November 9, 1987, and be it further m a 14 -31- November 4, 1987 RESOLVED, That the Civil Service Commission be requested to call for a promotional examination. Carried Unanimously D.P.W. Engineering Section Personnel Roster By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That the 1987 Authorized Personnel Roster of the Department of Public Works - Engineering Section, be amended as follows: Add - 1 Engineering Technician Position Delete - 1 Junior Engineer Position Carried Unanimously D.P.W. Engineering � Utilities Division Personnel Roster By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That the 1987 Authorized Personnel Roster of the Department of Public Works - Engineering and Utilities Division, be amended to include the addition of a Laboratory Manager/ Director position, and be it further RESOLVED, That the salary range for this position be established at $18,796 - $26,753. Carried Unanimously D.P.W. Authorized Equipment List By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the 1987 Authorized Equipment List of the Department of Public Works be amended to include the purchase of a welder, at a cost not to exceed $4,990, and be it further RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $4,990 be transferred within the Bridge Account from A5120 -483, Construction Materials and Supplies, to A5120 -225, Other Equipment. Carried Unanimously Audit By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract #20/1987, in the total amount of $23,505.33, be approved for payment. Discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Mayor's Budget for 1988 By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Mayor's Budget for 1988, as presented, be received by the Council and referred to the Budget and Administration Committee for review. Carried Unanimously Public Hearing on Proposed 1988 Budget By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the City Clerk be authorized and directed to advertise for a Public Hearing on the proposed 1988 City Budget, to be held by the Budget and Administration Committee, on November 23, 1987, at 7:30 p.m., in the Common Council Chambers, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. Carried Unanimously Police Package - Automobiles By Alderperson Dennis: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, orders for police package automobiles have been placed both under State contract and with a local vendor and 41'7 -418 -32- November 4, 1987 WHEREAS, no delivery date is assured for the immediate future; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That an equipment emergency does exist, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Purchasing Agent is directed to negotiate with one or more of the three bidders on police package cars for sedans that are not equipped with the police package. Discussion followed on the floor. Purchasing Agent Clynes answered questions from Council members. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE: An Ordinance Amending Section 60.59 of the Municipal Code (Overtime Meter Violations Penalty) By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 60.59 OF CHAPTER 60 ENTITLED "TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES" OF THE ITHACA CITY MUNICIPAL CODE. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York as follows: Section 1. That Section 60.59 of Chapter 60 entitled "Traffic and Vehicles" of the Ithaca City Municipal Code be and it is hereby amended to read as follows: Nothwithstanding the provisions of §60.100 and in full acquittance of any violation for parking for a longer period of time than is permitted, a civil penalty in the sum of (Two Dollars ($2.00)] Three Dollars ($3.00) may be paid within twenty -four (24) hours of such violation. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in §3.11 (B) of the Ithaca City Charter. Alderperson Schlather gave background information on the ordinance. Discussion followed on the floor. Alderperson Cummings asked if the Commons Advisory Board and the Downtown Ithaca Business Association were present at the meeting when this matter was discussed. Alderperson Schlather responded that this issue has been in the press for at least two months and no one has come to the meetings to discuss this issue. Further discussion followed on the floor. Tabling Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That the matter of the ordinance amending Section 60.59 of Chapter 60 of the Municipal Code (Overtime Meter Ij Violations Penalty) be tabled to allow for public input. Ayes (6) - Lytel, Cummings, Dennis, Killeen, Hoffman, Peterson Nays (4) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth, Haine Carried Iq LD m Q -33- November 4, 1987 Alderperson Schlather directed the City Clerk to notify the DIBA of the Charter and Ordinance Committee meeting on November 18 and to place a display ad in the Journal informing the public that parking fines would be discussed at this meeting. Southwest Park and Related Lands (Proposed Acquisition by Eminent Domain) - Call for Public Notice and Public Hearing By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, Chapter 757 of the Laws of New York State, 1985 authorized the City of Ithaca to alienate lands at Southwest Park and Cayuga Inlet Island, and WHEREAS, in exchange for the lands to be removed from recreation, the City must acquire an equal amount of land for park use, and WHEREAS, the lands identified and approved for substitution are privately held, and WHEREAS, efforts to negotiate acquisitions of said privately held lands have proven unsuccessful, and it appears necessary to condemn said interests pursuant to the Eminent Domain Procedure Law of the State of New York in order to acquire them for the land exchange project; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Budget and Administration Committee of the Common Council of the City of Ithaca shall hold a public hearing on November 23, 1987 at 7:30 P.M., in the Common Council Chambers at City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York in order to inform the public and to review the public use to be served by the proposed land exchange project, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Clerk is directed to give notice to the public of the purpose, time and location of said public hearing setting forth the proposed location of the public project, at least ten but no more than thirty days prior to such public hearing by causing such notice to be published in at least five successive issues of the Ithaca Journal. Discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (6) - Schlather, Romanowski, Lytel, Cummings, Killeen, Dennis Nays (4) - Booth, Peterson, Hoffman, Haine Carried Laid on Table - Local Law Amending Ithaca City Charter_ Sections of Article 6 (Board of Fire Commissioners) Alderperson Schlather laid on the table a Local Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of Article 6 of the Ithaca increasing the number of Fire Commissioners. LOCAL LAW NO. OF 1987 6.2 and 6.3 Law amending City Charter BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York as follows: Section 1. That Section 6.2 of Article 6 of the Ithaca City Charter be and it is hereby amended to read as follows: "There shall be a Board of Fire Commissioners, consisting of [three] five Commissioners appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Common Council. At least three of these Commissioners shall be residents of the City of Ithaca. The remaining Fire Commissioners may be residents of either the City of Ithaca or the Town of Ithaca in Tompkins County, New York. The term of office of a Fire Commissioner shall 419 420 -34- November 4, 1987 be three years commencing on the first day of July, [one Commissioner shall be appointed each year] two Commissioners to be appointed in each of two successive years, and one Commissioner to be appointed in the third year. Such [appoint- ment ] appointments shall be made at a meeting of the Common Council held in June each year. A Commissioner shall hold office until [his] the Commissioner's successor shall have been chosen and qualified. A vacancy for an unexpired term may be filled in the manner provided in this Chapter. Permanent removal from [the City] the municipality of appointment, or other cause to be determined by the Common Council, rendering impossible the proper discharge of [his] the Commissioner's duties as a Commissioner, shall create a vacancy. The Commissioners now in office shall continue until the expiration of the term for which they were respectively appointed. The two new Commissioners shall be appointed after January 1, 1988 to modified terms as follows: one to a term to expire June 30, 1989; the other to a term to expire June 30, 1990. The Fire Commissioner Commissioners shall serve without salary or compensation." Section 2. That Section 6.3 of Article 6 of the Ithaca City Charter be and it is hereby amended to read as follows: "At their first meeting in July [said] the Fire Commissioners shall organize as a Board by electing one of their number as [Chairman] Chairperson, and another as Vice - Chairperson, and the appointment of a clerk, and such other officers and employees as authorized for the ensuing year. [Said] The Board shall hold such stated and special meetings at such time as [they] the Board may determine but at least once in each month. Two Three members of [said] the Board shall constitute a quorum." Section 3. Effective Date. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing in the office of the Secretary of State. REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS: Conservation Advisory Council Alderperson Peterson presented the following resolutions on behalf of the Conservation Advisory Council: I. WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca revised its Environmental Quality Review ordinance in 1985 to protect critical areas, of which Six Mile Creek Gorge is one, and WHEREAS, on August 5, 1987 Common Council amended the City's EQR ordinance to read that the issuance of "a building permit or any other permit or approval that allows any land alteration, new construction or signifi- cant expansion of any existing structure or facility for any project occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any critical area" is not a ministerial act, and is therefore subject to environmental review; therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the building permit issued for construction of the recent Valentine Place project be revoked immediately. II. WHEREAS, many environmentally sensitive areas in the City of Ithaca have not been specifically identified and mapped; therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council direct the Planning Depart- ment to undertake such identification and mapping with the goal of incorporation in the City's EQRA. lv� J -3S- III. RESOLVED, That a weekly listing of all applications for City of permits be routinely sent to all November 4, and description Ithaca building alderpersons. IV. RESOLVED, That during review of critical environmental areas and ministerial actions, the Common Council consider that all projects falling under Type I action designation come under environmental review through filling out the Environmental Assessment form. Motion to Refer By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That resolutions II and III be referred to the Planning and Development Committee and resolution IV be referred to the Charter and Ordinance Committee for review. Discussion followed on the floor A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: NH Carried Unanimously Iq LO Lead Agency Resolution = By Alderperson Sc lat er: Seconded by Alderperson Booth m RESOLVED, That unless otherwise specified, the Ithaca Q City Building Commissioner is herewith designated as the lead agency for conducting any environmental review in connection with the issuance of a building permit. Carried 11nnnimniisly Discussion followed regarding the Valentine Place project. Attorney Nash responded to questions from Council members regarding what constitutes a public hearing. In his opinion, a legal public hearing was not held at the August Council meeting prior to the adoption of the amendment to the City's Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, as no prior notice of the public hearing was given. Alderperson Schlather stated that he did not believe Council had the authority to tell the Building Commissioner to revoke the building permit for this project. Discussion continued on the use of the right -of -way of Woodcock Street and whether this development represents a sub - division. Building Commissioner Hoard responded to questions from Council and pointed out that the zoning on this project had not been changed since the last Valentine Place battle and as Building Commissioner he had no choice but to issue a building permit for the Novarr project. 198421 Attorney Nash restated his opinion that the Building Commissioner can not legally revoke the Novarr permit. New Fire Stations Committee Alderperson Killeen stated that the committee is continuing to meet. He referred to a document that recommends an expenditure of approximately $3 million and indicated he will send copies to Council members. He thinks the City would be better served if the Planning and Development Committee and Human Services Committee were better informed on this development project. 198421 422 November 4, 1987 -36- Recycling Incentive Program Al erperson Schlather stated that the Department of Public Works has taken upon itself to unilaterally change our incentive program for recycling. The $25.00 a day prize is given away every day so there is no accumulation. He stated that one of the hallmarks of this program was that there would be an accumulation of money and therefore there there would be heightened interest in the recycling program. He asked Council to reaffirm its commitment to the program as was originally proposed and passed and to send that message back to the Board of Public Works. Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Dennis RESOLVED, That this Common Council reaffirms its Recycling Incentive Program and directs that the prize money for recycling be accumulated as specified in the Common Council resolution of October 7. 1987. Ayes (6) — Dennis, Schlather, Hoffman, Haine, Cummings, Killeen Nays (4) - Romanowski, Booth, Peterson, Lytel ADJOURNMENT: On a motion the meeting adjourned at 1:10 A.M. Callista Paolangeli City Clerk Carried n C. Guten erger a y o r J DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT H. MATTHYS VAN CORT, DIRECTOR CITY OF ITHACA 10B EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14650 MEMORANDUM To: Budget and Administration Committee From: Jon Meigs VeAlternatives Re: Bikeway Date: October 28, 1987 CK- ) TELEPHONE. 272 -1713 CODE 607 Several suggestions have been made for alternatives to the original route proposed to be built by the Finger Lakes State Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Commission. The following information is provided for your use in discussing the budgetary considerations of the City's involvement in the project, particularly as regards the costs of acquiring a right -of -way easement by condemnation of private lands on the original route within the City. The attached map shows the various alinements; more detailed design, which is Finger Lakes' responsibility, is not complete. As I understand their description of it, it's basically the same as the path we have through Cass Park: hard - surfaced, wide enough for two bikes, set 8 -10 feet from the edge of the channel where it runs next to it, and then picking up the bed of the abandoned railroad either near the fish ladder (for West side alternatives) or near the place that it used to cross the Inlet south of there (for East side alternates), continuing around and crossing over Elmira Rd. on a new light bridge to get to Buttermilk. Recently the Parks officials took a field, as I describe be segments: from the Tre path, under the Octopus Inlet at the southerly described above. Mayor, Andy Mazzella and other City and look at the possible alinements in the low. All routes have the same end man Marina on the existing Cass Park via the City's underpass; and from the crossing of the abandoned rail line as "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative AChon Program Memo to B &A Committee Re: Bikeway Route Alternatives -2- The original alinement (A on map) runs beside the channel's west bank from the Octopus to the point where it intersects the abandoned rail line (dashed line next to 'Conrail' line); then follows the old rail line southwesterly to and across the Inlet. From about where the letter 'D' in 'Flood' shows on the map, to where the south City line crosses the Flood Channel, this route crosses private properties, requiring the easement acquisition by the City which is the purpose of the condemnation. The Town of Ithaca would be responsible for acquiring similar easements between the City line and railroad; all land crossed other than these stretches is publicly- owned. City expense for Alternate A is thus the cost of acquiring the easement: between $20,000 for a 25 -ft. wide easement only, and perhaps $35,000 for fee title to the land itself (30 ft. wide, preferred by Parks), plus any legal expense involved. Alternate B would run from the Octopus to the end of City -owned property at the 'D', then jog out to Floral Av.; follow Floral within the road r.o.w. on what would be effectively a wide sidewalk to a point close to the City line at which the abutting private property owners have indicated some willingness to identify an agreeable crossing of their land, going back east to the channel to pick up the original alinement A, and continue along the channel as above. This alinement, along the road, is less desirable for safety reasons. Cost to City: acquisition of a shorter length of easement (perhaps in fee), from Floral to the channel and then south; probably no extra legal costs. Conceivably the land between Floral and the channel, being developable, might be valued higher than that next to the channel, and thus the easement would be valued about the same total as Alt. A. Perhaps the owners, in return for relief from being impacted by A, would be willing to settle for less. Another unknown cost, which the City might be asked to bear in whole or part, is the necessary relocation of utility poles along the east side of Floral. A NYSEG official accompanying the tour was asked to provide this information, but I am not aware whether it has been received by Finger Lakes, the Mayor or Supt. Dougherty. A subalternate, B -1, was identified on the tour. It would follow A a bit further along the channel, crossing land owned by Dr. Weiner, then jog to Floral and follow B as described. Costs would be similar to B, less the cost of moving a couple of poles, plus the costs of easement across Dr. Weiner's land and out to Floral (roughly $5- 10,000). J Memo to B &A Committee Re: Bikeway Route Alternatives -3- Another subalternate, B -2, was mentioned but does not seem to be in active consideration. It would follow B or B -1 along Floral, then continue along Floral /13A as shown on the map. Costs to the City would be reduced by any cost of easement to return from Floral to the channel. Alternate C would follow the channel from the Octopus to some point between the 'C' in 'Channel' and the 'D' in 'Flood', then cross the channel on a separate new bike bridge to the east side; then turn south along the channel bank, first on the City's Cherry St. Industrial Park land and then on lands of Dr. Weiner, primarily, to and across the City line; around the bend in the Flood Channel; up onto and along the levee; 1 d now in the Cost to City: Easements across private lands abutting the channel between the old Inlet intersection and W. Clinton St., plus appraisal and any extra legal costs if brought to condemnation; plus any City participation in costs of either bridge or dike at old Inlet; plus costs of easements south of Cherry St. Industrial Park. down off the levee south of the Inlet, cross "Al of being acquired by the City as substitute for process 'Southwest Park' and other lands to be alienated from park o designation; and rejoin the original alinement 'A' south of the point it recrosses the Inlet, as described earlier. A modification of this would have it rejoin alinement 'A' via a bridge next to the railroad bridge at the Fish Ladder. C� Cost to the City: Cost (unknown) of easement across Dr. Weiner's lands and others (a small portion has reportedly `v been offered as donation to the City by owner Bernard YCarpenter) in the stretch above the south City line, plus appraisal and condemnation expense. Possible sharing in cost of bridge: Parks has indicated it may be too expensive if I designed to their standards, which I think means no supports in the channel, and strong enough to carry a maintenance vehicle. A bike -only bridge, or piers spaced to accommodate crew races (like the Octopus) might cost about $30,000 compared to the $110,000 Parks' design could cost, according to the manufacturer of prefab bridges Parks and I contacted. Alternate D would cross the Octopus bridge, preferably on a separate structure supported off its south side, rather than on the south sidewalk; then follow the east bank of the channel, crossing the old Inlet's intersection either on a bike bridge or on a dike (suggested by Supt. Dougherty as cheaper and desirable to force the flow of 6 Creek to scour the section of Inlet used by recreational boats, above Buffalo St.), continuing along the channel to where it merges with Alt. 'C'. Cost to City: Easements across private lands abutting the channel between the old Inlet intersection and W. Clinton St., plus appraisal and any extra legal costs if brought to condemnation; plus any City participation in costs of either bridge or dike at old Inlet; plus costs of easements south of Cherry St. Industrial Park. Memo to B &A Committee -4- Re: Bikeway Route Alternatives Subalternate D -1: Cross Octopus as in 'D', continue along W. State to Brindley to Taber to Flood Channel, then south as in 'D'. Brindley crossing of old Inlet could be on another separate bridge utilizing the abandoned railroad bridge on the East side of Brindley, as suggested by Mr. Lower (opponent of 'A' because that alinement crosses his lands), who has offered to share the costs of such a bridge. This alternate is least favored because it involves so many potential safety hazards; in my view it is not viable. Costs to City: Possible share of new Brindley St. bridge over Inlet, in addition to easements and related costs described for 'D'. Concluding Comments: By the terms of the City -Town- State agreement on the bikeway, the City's direct costs are only those to acquire the necessary easements across private lands in the City; the State agreed to foot the construction. However, this agreement contemplated only Alt. 'A', which was identified as conceptually the most direct and physically uncomplicated alinement. In fact, there are a couple of points (notably where the abandoned rail line crossed the Inlet where some fairly hefty added construction is needed; and the bridge over Elmira Rd. will be longer than Parks anticipated because the old railroad abutments will be removed for traffic safety, at DoT's initiative, supported by the Mayor. Obviously, any further construction expense occasioned by any alternate will constrain Parks' budget, and may jeopardize the bikeway; thus it is logical that Parks would seek to have as much of those costs borne by others as possible. In cost of easements /r.o.w. only, of all alternates 'A' - 'D -1' subalternate 'B -2' would cost the City nothing, since it would cross no private land. Of the other alternative alinements, it is my opinion that Alt. 'C' would be least expensive to the City. This is based on the assumption that the private land east of the channel would be valued substantially lower than that on the west side, due to its current use, accessibility and potential for further development; and on the implied or expressed intent of Mr. Lower and Dr. Weiner, at least, to contest condemnation of their lands west of the channel. In roughly ascending order from there, I would estimate the easement costs as 'B', 'B -11, 'D -1' and 'D -2'. An unknown variable that might substantially reduce this cost for 'B' is the possibility that Mr. Lower would gift the necessary easement, in acknowledgment of the abandonment of the original route across his flood channel frontage. Many variables apply to the possibility that the City could be asked to share some of the other costs associated with any of the alternates, in exchange for the State's agreeing to J Memo to B &A Committee Re: Bikeway Route Alternatives -5- accept an alternate preferred by the City. These costs could be justified, to an extent, by benefits to the City. For example, Alternates B, B -1 and B -2 would avoid all or much of the costs associated with condemnation. Alternates C, D -1 and D -2 would afford easier, safer access to recreational opportunities for a large proportion of the City population who would not have to negotiate the Octopus to get to the bikeway. Alt. D -1 could improve the old Inlet's navigability and appearance. Since Finger Lakes State Parks seriously consider alternatives, and has any of these out on cost, nor identified of alternates in which the City would be that these comments and information will the cost considerations in context. seems willing to not absolutely ruled any construction costs asked to share, I hope assist you in putting Please let me know if you have further questions on this. JM /mc�A) Enclosure cc: Mayor John C. Gutenberger H. Matthys Van Cort (disk #6) F-1�J �� ❑` „ to �r G� G - / `- Q,tTNwE6T cw r �• S�0 rr W �° QI.1t4amf. � Z � m Qo nx lblKeWAY L/ OT^TE M.ILR i� ��!.� • .RJ :1HL•���ii F-1�J �� ❑` „ to �r G� G - / `- Q,tTNwE6T cw r �• S�0 rr W �° QI.1t4amf. � Z � m Qo nx lblKeWAY L/ OT^TE M.ILR