The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMN-CC-1989-01-04m Q Regular Meeting PRESENT: Mayor Gutenberger Alderpersons (10) 1 347 COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK 7:00 P.M. January 4, 1989 - Booth, Cummings, Johnson, Nichols, Hoffman, Killeen, Lytel, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather OTHERS PRESENT• City Attorney - Nash City Controller - Spano Deputy City Controller - Cafferillo City Clerk - Paolangeli Acting Personnel Administrator Police Chief - McEwen Deputy Director, Planning and Superintendent of Public Works City Planner - Jones - Walker Development - Mazzarella - Dougherty Board of Public Works Commissioner - Reeves PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Gutenberger led the American flag. all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of December 7, 1988 Common Council Meeting Alderperson Nichols requested that on page 43, under New Business, Route 96 Public Hearing, it be noted that the conclusion of that discussion was that the subject would be taken up at the meeting of the Planning and Development Committee on January 11, 1989 with the Council meeting as a Committee of the Whole. Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the December 7, 1988 Common Council meeting be approved with the addition as made by Alderperson Nichols. Carried Unanimously SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public Hearing - An Ordinance Amending Article I, Section 30.3, and Article II of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the Citv of Ithaca Municipal Code (Cluster Subdivision ordinance). Resolution to Open Public Hearing By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider an ordinance amending Article I, Section 30.3 and Article II of Chapter 30 entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code (Cluster Subdivision Ordinance) be declared open. Carried Unanimously Alderperson Booth gave background information on the ordinance. No one appeared to address the Public Hearing. Resolution to Close Public Hearing By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider an ordinance amending Article I, Section 30.3 and Article II of Chapter 30 entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code (Cluster Subdivision Ordinance) be declared closed. Carried Unanimously 348 2 ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: Charter and Ordinance Committee Alderperson Booth requested that Item Real Property Tax Exemption provided NYS Real Property Tax Law) be changed Local Law on the Table. He will also a public hearing. No Council member objected. 17.3 (Local Law to remove under Section 485 -b of the from a report to laying the be making a motion to hold Report of City Boards Commissions and Committees Alderperson Hoffman requested the addition of Item 9.2, a report on Hydropower, be added. No Council member objected. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: Youth Bureau One -to -One Program John Bailey, Supervisor of the One -to -One Program at the Youth Bureau read the following statement to Council: "I'm here to speak on behalf of the children, parents, volunteers and staff of the Ithaca Youth Bureau's One -to -One Program. One -to -One is a Big Brother /Big Sister program that currently provides 150 needy children with regular adult companionship. We on the staff of One -to -One support and agree with the decision by the City of Ithaca to require the county, towns and villages of Tompkins County to pay a fair share of the cost of Youth Bureau programs. Not only does this place the cost where it belongs, but we hope that it will ultimately increase youth programming throughout the county by encouraging .the county, towns and villages to invest in their children. We understand why the City has found it necessary to cut off services to communities that are not contributing. We recognize that some towns will choose to run their own youth programs, but for those who are interested in cooperating with us we hope that negotiations will not be summarily closed at the end of 1988. Everyone will benefit in the long run if you in government who have worked hard on these negotiations are willing to persevere. We on staff at One -to -One are eager to support your efforts by making town and county officials more aware of the need and demand for youth development services. While we are hopeful for long term benefits, we now face a crisis. The children, parents and volunteers who are involved in 58 ongoing Big Brother or Big Sister relationships outside our service area are faced with the uncertainty of how to continue without us. There appear to be three options - -to end the Big Brother or Big Sister relationship, to continue without support or guidance, or to seek some other umbrella for the relationship. We on staff need time to help people choose among these options and then follow through, otherwise good matches will end badly and much hurt will be done. The resolution proposed by the Human Services Committee of Common Council will allow us the time we need. I therefore request on behalf of the children, parents, volunteers and staff of One -to -One that Common Council approve this resolution." Hydropower Issue Kate Skelton, 202 East Lincoln Street, spoke to Council regarding the hydropower issue. She stated that she is a member of the group of residents that are against the development of hydropower at Ithaca Falls. She asked Council members to work together with this group in a cooperative spirit on this project. Ms. Skelton stated that there have been 500 signatures collected so far on a petition in which citizens are expressing their concern that the 0 341 3 Ithaca Falls site be preserved from any kind of hydropower development. She urged Common Council to look at the new economic factors and consider the impact on the City. Farmers' Market Issue Thomas Cleveland, 101 Pier Road, representing Johnson Boat Yard, spoke to Council on the issue of the Farmers' Market resolution before Council this evening. He stated that he feels that the Farmers' Market has done an excellent job of cleaning up the Steamboat Landing site that they are now on and that the site is an excellent site for permanent residence for the Ithaca Farmers' Market but he thinks that there may be problems if the Council elects to grant them permanent residence at the site. He said that when Johnson Boat Yard leased their land from the city, they were informed that it had to be a year -to -year lease. He stated that he thinks if the Farmers' Market is granted a long -term lease, then all the other tenants of city -owned property would feel that they would be entitled to a long -term lease also, so LO all the leases may have to be re- negotiated. He also feels that the amount of money for the lease is out of line compared to what Johnson Boat Yard is paying, based on square footage, and that LO all the other tenants would want their leases re- negotiated on this point also. m Mr. Cleveland further stated that Johnson Boat Yard would be very interested in having the waterfront area in front of the Farmers' Market for docks. They would pay whatever rate is necessary but their major problem is that they would have to have a long -term lease for that area. His final point was that if the city is interested in making money, he would think that perhaps that land should go out for bid. He stated that Johnson Boat Yard would be more than happy to pay a great deal more than what is being charged the Farmers' Market for that space, if• it could be leased on a long -term basis. He urged Council to consider these points before they make the decision to grant a 20 or 30 year lease to the Ithaca Farmers' Market. Hydropower Issue_ Stephen R. Singer, 417 East Lincoln Street, spoke to Council on the hydropower issue. He stated that as a representative of "The Citizens Against Hydropower at Ithaca Falls" he believes that citizens of Ithaca want protection for this valuable site. He said that the committee is determined to educate the public on the facts around this issue, they are willing to work with the Planning and Development Committee and the Hydropower Commission to pursue protection and they want the Council's support. He stated that he hopes the committee and the Council can work together on this important issue and not waste any more time and money to pursue a hydropower plant which is economically unfeasible, environmentally damaging and morally wrong. Mr. Singer passed fact sheets out to Council members. Cable Access Channel Bill McCormick, addressed Council on Cable Access and the matter of the one -time only $165,000 purchase of additional equipment and handed out information sheets. He stated that access needs more equipment to meet the needs of local organizations and governmental units as access expands to the potential of nine full channels over the next ten or fifteen years of the franchise. He presented the following proposals to the Council: That Council notify ACC that it approves roughly $100,000 of the purchases recommended by the Cable Commission at its December meeting; that Council inform ACC that disposition of the remaining $65,000 in purchases is subject to further public consideration and ACC -City negotiations; that Council designate as City negotiator the chairperson of the Cable Commission and direct the commission in its public session to gather a list of 350 4 additional equipment needs; and that Council obtain the City Attorney's opinion whether a "purchase value of $165,000" rightly includes, as ACC claims, sales tax and freight costs. RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC: ACC Issue Alderperson Lytel stated that the Cable Commission met on December 13th. The Commission voted in favor of accepting ACC's proposal for the $165,000, the initial one -time capital expense. The Commission is not sure if that expenditure needs Council approval. He stated that the Commission hopes to come up with a resolution specifying the duties and responsibilities under the franchise that the Cable Commission can act on by themselves and those which it needs to bring to Council. Alderperson Nichols stated that at the Cable Commission meeting there was an urgency involved in terms of some of the equipment if access was to get on the air at all in the next month. That was why the Commission felt they had to make some kind of statement. They did state their opinion for the record, and there were supposed to be some minutes provided on this, that the franchise had been violated because steps were being taken to close down the studio without prior consultation. REPORT OF CITY BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS: Planning and Development Board Report on Route 96 Susan Blumenthal, Chairperson, stated that at the last Planning and Development Board meeting, on December 20th, the Board discussed the Route 96 issue and voted to forward a resolution to the NYS Department of Transportation and to the Common Council. This was the first formal statement that the Board has made about Route 96 in many years. The major focus of their discussion was about Alternatives "A" and "B" since "C" did not have much support. She stated that the discussions involved the advantages and disadvantages of the two options and some variations and modifications of Plan "A ". The conclusion of the discussion is that the Board does not enthusiastically support any of the plans; "A" and "B" each have merit but neither option solves all the problems and the Board feels that "B" creates new problems. Ms. Blumenthal further stated that there is strong support for Plan "A" modified because it clearly and directly addresses the congestion problem at the octopus but questions about future traffic volume on Cliff Street, the status of the Cliff Street residential neighborhood and hospital access still remain. Plan "B" has the advantage of bettering these conditions but in turn creating new difficulties; namely, encouraging potential new commercial and residential growth in West Hill areas outside the City, decreasing open space resources within the City, scarring the hillside and having deleterious noise impacts in Cass Park. In the 3 -3 -1 vote, the Board could not agree to endorse Alternative "A" modified but it went on to recommend that if Alternative "B" is chosen, then certain mitigating measures should be instituted to solve the problems generated by the new road. Ms. Blumenthal read the following resolution that was passed by the Planning and Development Board in a 4 to 3 vote: "That the Planning and Development Board of the City of Ithaca, having studied and discussed the design report draft environmental impact statement and 4(f) evaluation for improvements to Route 96 and other project related information would consider Alternative "B" an acceptable alternative only if given ironclad assurances by the Town of Ithaca that the Town would consider other planning and road use measures to be put into effect to accommodate City concerns. Without these 0 351 k" ironclad assurances, the Board feels that Alternative "A ", Option 2, is the most appropriate for the City." Ms. Blumenthal further stated that the major mitigating measures that the Board talked about included such things as land use controls in areas impacted by the highway and a West Hill bypass to siphon off southbound traffic from the Octopus. She thinks that list could be expanded to include substitution of comparable open space on West Hill and other intermunicipal efforts. She (600" said the Planning and Development Board hopes that this highway can be looked at in its broadest context. West Hill Master Plan Susan Blumenthal reported that there is a West Hill Master Plan working group which is composed of West Hill residents, City staff members, members of the Planning Board, the Board of Public Works, Common Council and the Town of Ithaca staff people. This group has met seven times to work on this plan so far. The last three meetings have dealt with the review of existing conditions, LO LO development trends and identification of planning issues. The major concerns so far appear to be traffic circulation and road design, open space planning, preservation of neighborhood character, future development in the Town, and the impacts on the m City. The working group is about to begin investigating various Q alternatives that may be pursued in the plan. Ms. Blumenthal said that the planning issues from these meetings appear to be more complex than originally thought and the group has agreed by consensus to spend more time on these in the future. At this point it is believed that the plan will be completed by early or mid - April. Hydropower Commission Alderperson Hoffman reported that the City has received word that (two" the negotiations with NYSEG are over at the order of the PSC and that instead we will be subject to the new bidding procedure which is yet to be determined but which we expect will bring down the price that the city would receive for power generated by a hydro - plant. He stated that this probably alters the economics of the situation considerably but we do not yet know to what degree. The next meeting of the Hydropower Commission will be on January 17th and he expects that at that meeting there will be discussions about alternative approaches to pursuing the construction of the scale of the plant that has been talked about so far. There may be recommendations coming to Council at the February meeting. Alderperson Nichols stated that he welcomed the chance to work with the citizens group and he wanted them to know that the city is also having discussions with the PSC and NYSEG regarding the subject of a contract. He stated that there is nothing secret going on, all the discussions are open to the public. He asked that when the citizens group on hydropower quote experts in their fact sheet that they give the sources for their quotes. Board of Public Works Commissioner Reeves reported on the following items for the Board of Public Works: Collector Streets - The Board has received a map from the City Engineer's Office showing the collector streets in the City of Ithaca. Since the traffic flow is critical at this time, and is causing concerns to everyone, the Board is reviewing the collector streets with an eye to seeing that traffic is kept moving in an orderly fashion. She stated that the Board is anxious to get the report of the Downtown Traffic and Parking Study as this will have a great bearing on some other things the Board is looking at. She stated that the maps are available at the City Engineer's Office for anyone wishing to have one. 352 6 4 -Way Stop Signs - The Board is reviewing the 4 -way Stop signs for possible elimination. The three that are currently being studied are Clinton and Geneva Streets, Court and Geneva Streets, and Utica and Lewis Streets. The Board has requested of the Traffic Engineer a thorough investigation and report before making any of these changes. Rate Structures for Dryden Road Parking Garage - The Board has reviewed the rate structures for the Dryden Road Parking Garage. She stated that the rates were set in January 1988, they were reviewed in August 1988 and the rates were kept the same at that time. It was decided at the meeting today not to do anything more with that until completion of the Downtown Parking and Traffic Study. Ms. Reeves further stated that the Board would like to look at and review all of the rates for all of the ramps. Commissioner Reeves answered questions from Council members. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR: Update on Police Investigation Mayor Gutenberger stated that the independent investigation that has been taking placing because of the allegations that were made against the police department have been completed. There will be a report within the next two weeks from the investigator. MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS: Board of Public Works Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the re- appointment of Joseph Daley, 218 South Albany Street, to the Board of Public Works with a term to expire December 31, 1991. Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves the re- appointment of Joseph Daley to the Board of Public Works with a term to expire December 31, 1991. Carried Unanimously Planning and Development Board Mayor Gutenberger reported that he has re- appointed Andrew Yale, 330 Elm Street, to the Planning and Development Board with a term to expire December 31, 1991. Landmarks Preservation Commission Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the re- appointments of Suzanne Lichtenstein, 420 Hook Place and Paul Testa, 325 Elm Street, to the Landmarks Preservation Commission with terms to expire December 31, 1991. Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: RESOLVED, That this Cc Suzanne Lichtenstein and Commission with terms to Seconded by Alderperson Killeen ) uncil approves the re- appointments of Paul Testa to the Landmarks Preservation expire December 31, 1991. Carried Unanimously Housing Board of Review Mayor Gutenberger reported that he has re- appointed Charette Wheelis, 307 Fairmount Avenue and Alvin Nelson, 502 South Albany Street, to the Housing Board of Review with terms to expire December 31, 1991. Examining Board of Electricians Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the re- appointment of Jeffrey Lallas, 218 Utica Street, to the Examining Board of Electricians with a term to expire December 31, 1991. 35:3 7 Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves the re- appointment of Jeffrey Lallas to the Examining Board of Electricians with a term to expire December 31, 1991. Carried Unanimously Affirmative Action Committee Mayor Gutenberger reported that he has re- appointed Jean (400e, McPheeters, Bailor Road, Brooktondale, Douglas Vliet, 3052 North Triphammer Road, Lansing, and Rich Tracy, 48 West Main Street, Dryden, to the Affirmative Action Committee with terms to expire December 31, 1991. Commons Advisory Board Mayor Gutenberger requested approval for the re- appointments of Earl Hayes, 115 East Green Street, Abdul Sheik, 171 The Commons, and John Miller, Iszard's The Commons, to the Commons Advisory LO Board with terms to expire December 31, 1990. Resolution Lo By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves the re- appointments of Earl (o Hayes, Abdul Sheik, and John Miller to the Commons Advisory Board with terms to expire December 31, 1990. Carried Unanimously Conservation Advisory Council Mayor Gutenberger. requested approval of Council for the re- appointments of John Wertis, 111 West York Street, Betsy Darlington, 204 Fairmount Avenue, and Roger Farrell, 120 Eastwood Terrace, to the Conservation Advisory Council with terms to (600" expire December 31, 1990. Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves the re- appointments of John Wertis, Betsy Darlington, and Roger Farrell to the Conservation Advisory Council with terms to expire December 31, 1990. Carried Unanimously Design Review Board Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the re- appointments of Vicki Anagnost, 304 College Avenue, and Ken Vineberg, 141 The Commons to the Design Review Board with terms to expire December 31, 1991. Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves the re- appointments of Vicki Anagnost and Ken Vineberg to the Design Review Board with terms to expire December 31, 1991. Carried Unanimously Youth Bureau Advisory Board Mayor Gutenberger reported that he has re- appointed Irene Kiely, 103 Harvard Place and Pat Lallas, 218 Utica Street to the Youth Bureau Advisory Board with terms to expire December 31, 1991. Board of Zoning Appeals Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the re- appointments of Joan Oakley, 503 South Cayuga Street, and Michael Toml4n, 200 Delaware Avenue to the Board of Zoning Appeals with terms to expire December 31, 1991. 354 Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves the re- appointments of John Oakley and Michael Toml4n to the Board of Zoning Appeals with terms to expire December 31, 1991. Carried Unanimously Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the re- appointment of John Russell, 310 Warren Place to the Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review with a term to expire December 31, 1989. Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves the re- appointment of John Russell to the Local Advisory Board of Assessment Review, with a term to expire December 31, 1989. Carried Unanimously Planning and Development Board Appointments Alderperson Schlather asked City Attorney Nash to look into the procedure for appointing to this Board. He stated that it seems to him that with the Site Development Plan Review Ordinance and the Cluster Housing Ordinance that are about to be passed that we have dramatically altered the responsibilities of the Planning Board and he thinks the appointment process to this Board should be re- examined. Alderperson Schlather stated that at this time the Mayor is authorized to make the appointment without the concurrence of Common Council but maybe this procedure should be changed. Mayor Gutenberger suggested that the matter be referred to New Business at the end of the agenda for discussion of referring this to the Charter and Ordinance Committee for review and report back to Council. Council concurred. Circle Greenway Mayor Gutenberger reported that he has appointed Margaret Fabrizio, 213 King Street and John Ullberg, 106 Dunmore Place to Circle Greenway with indefinite terms, and he asked the Council's concurrence. Resolution By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That this Council approves the appointments of Margaret Fabrizio and John Ullberg to the Circle Greenway with .indefinite terms. Carried Unanimously ACTING MAYOR: Mayor Gutenberger entertained nominations from the floor for the position of Acting Mayor. Alderperson Booth nominated Alderperson Sean Killeen for the position and his nomination was seconded by Alderperson Nichols. The motion carried. ALTERNATE ACTING MAYOR: Mayor Gutenberger entertained nominations from the floor for the position of Alternate Acting Mayor. Alderperson Schlather nominated Alderperson Carolyn Peterson for the position and his nomination was seconded by Alderperson Nichols. The motion carried. D 355 0 REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY: Cable TV Commission Alderperson Lytel asked City Attorney Nash if it is up to Council to decide by resolution what the powers and responsibilities of the Cable TV Commission are. City Attorney Nash responded that he would want to look at whatever resolution or guidelines that Council set up when they established the Commission. He stated that the franchise seemingly gives authority to the Cable Commission to act on behalf of the City to do certain things. Atty. Nash will research this matter and get a written report to Council members next week. Route 96 Alderperson Hoffman asked City Attorney Nash if he has had a chance to see the letter that was received last month from a law firm in Elmira referring to the Route 96 design and possible LO legal liability if the city chooses Plan "A" or "B ". d Atty. Nash replied that he doesn't think a court is going to say that a legislative body has to consider these threats when they are making long -range plans for development of street - highway systems. Q Mayor Gutenberger clarified for the public that a letter has been received from a law firm putting the city on notice that if Plan "C" with the overpass is not built, and if any of their clients are injured or killed as a result, the city will be sued. Mayor Gutenberger further stated that the federal government and the state government have said that Plans "A ", "B" and "C" and the various modifications of those meet the state and federal requirements for that project. Lease Value Alderperson Booth asked City Attorney Nash if there is a method for determining what full value is for leasing city property as opposed to selling it. City Attorney Nash responded that appraisers can give you values. He stated that as he recalls the difference in valuation with the Farmers' Market was the period of use. Mayor Gutenberger explained how the yearly licensing fee is arrived at by the Board of Public Works. Jason Fane Lawsuit Alderperson Killeen asked City Attorney Nash about the status of the City lawsuit against Jason Fane for violations on his East Seneca Street property. City Attorney Nash responded that the lawsuit is still in the 'discovery stage'. He stated that he hopes there will be a hearing date set within the next thirty days. Recess Common Council recessed at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened in regular session at 8:45 p.m. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: County Mental Health Facility - Report Alderperson Cummings reported that at the January 11 Planning and Development Committee meeting there will be a report from the Tompkins County Board of Representatives on the progress of that facility. Mayor Gutenberger asked Council members to be present at 7:00 that evening for the meeting. *15.2 Sixty Foot Dam Hydropower License By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has required that a safety investigation report be prepared for the proposed 356 10 Sixty Foot Dam hydroelectric project, and has indicated that extensive remedial and structural work on the dam might also be required following review of said report, and WHEREAS, it will cost the City of Ithaca upwards of $11,000 to produce the safety study initially, and considerably more if remedial work is required, and WHEREAS, the City recently expended funds to repair and improve the Sixty Foot Dam in order to comply with New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Safety criteria, and WHEREAS, the proposed Sixty Foot Dam hydro project does not appear to be feasible for development by the City, in terms of economics and environmental sensitivity, and the addition of these unforseen expenditures will worsen the project's financial standing, and WHEREAS, the F.E.R.C. has set a deadline of January 9, 1989 for filing the aforementioned safety report, which is at this time impossible to meet; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby direct that the Exemption From Licensing Requirements held for the Sixty Foot Dam hydropower site be surrendered to the F.E.R.C. prior to January 9, 1989. Carried Unanimously *15.3 Ithaca Farmers' Market - Negative Declaration By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the matter of the granting of a long term lease to the Ithaca Farmers' Market for use of the city -owned property known as Steamboat Landing at Third Street is currently under consideration by this Common Council, and WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted, including the preparation of the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) and the Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF) , and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an "unlisted" action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEAR), including the 617 regulations thereunder, and may be a Type I action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act (E.Q.R. Section 36.5(B) (7)), and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the environment; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, does hereby adopt as its own the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Short Environmental Assessment Form and the Long Environmental Assessment Form, and be it further RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency, does determine that the proposed action at issue will not have a significant effect on the environment and that further environmental review is unnecessary under the circumstances, and be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution shall constitute notice of this negative declaration and the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with the attachments, in the City Clerk's Office and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. Alderperson Cummings gave background information on the resolution. 357 11 Discussion followed on the floor. Barbara Blanchard, who prepared the form for the Farmers' Market, answered questions from Council members on the Environmental Assessment Form. Alderperson Schlather commented that he thinks it is extremely important that the City establish a home for the Ithaca Farmers' Market and this site seems to be the best site around. He stated, however, that he does have concerns at this time regarding a long -term lease. He said that the City is in the process of trying to develop a policy for use of public lands, park lands, city lands, etc. and it seemed to him that before the Council decides on a long -term lease with the Farmers' Market or any other entity, some of the policy questions should be resolved. He would like the City to enter into another one year license with the Farmers' Market for 1989. This would give the city more time to work on this policy and it would also give the Farmers' Market an opportunity to complete a full environmental review. It seemed to him in going through the LEAF, Part II, (� there are a number of points that should have been marked 'potential large impact' and if the city is thinking of a long- term lease for this site, an environmental impact statement LO LO should be completed. (o Alderperson Schlather pointed out areas of the LEAF that he is Q concerned about and remarked that he can not support this resolution if it involves a long -term lease. Further discussion followed on the floor. Alderperson Booth stated that he supports the need for a complete Environmental Impact Statement and a one year license at this time. Alderpersons Cummings and Peterson made comments supporting this Qvo" resolution and a long -term lease for the Ithaca Farmers' Market at this site. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (7) - Cummings, Peterson, Nichols, Johnson, Lytel, Hoffman, Killeen Nays (3) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth Carried *15.4 Cass Park - Second Hockey Rink Environmental Review /Lead Agency Designation By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca is the agency charged with primary responsibility for implementation of the city's Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, as provided under Section 36.6D1 of the ordinance, and WHEREAS, it is the nature of certain matters brought before Council for consideration that it is most appropriate for environmental review to be performed under the direct guidance of Council, with Council acting as Lead Agency, and WHEREAS, this Common Council finds that proposed construction of (6000, a second skating rink in Cass Park is a matter which required environmental review and that it would be appropriate for the Common Council to act as Lead Agency therefor; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council act as Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposed construction of a second skating rink in Cass Park, in accordance with the procedures established by Chapter 36 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. Carried Unanimously 358 12 Planning and Development Department Response to Rt. 96 DEIS Alderperson Cummings reported that the Planning and Development Department is in the process of preparing a professional analysis response to the Rt. 96 DEIS. She stated that this will not be a statement of endorsement from Council, it will be only a Planning Department assessment of the DEIS and it will not endorse a specific plan. It is simply a professional evaluation of the assessment. BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: *18.13 Hydropower Consultant By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the City enter into a contract with Veitch Associates of Marcellus, New York, to provide the City of Ithaca with a plan for monitoring minimum stream flow and functional drawings of the fish screen /intake device showing the structure's relative location, plan elevation and typical details of the device to bring the City in compliance with Articles 403, 404 and 406 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission License for the Ithaca Falls Hydropower Project at a cost not to exceed $2,000, and be it further RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $2,000 be provided from existing funds previously approved for the erosion and sediment plan. Discussion followed on the floor. City Planner Jones answered questions from Council members. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (9) - Schlather, Killeen, Booth, Nichols, .Johnson, Lytel, Romanowski, Cummings, Hoffman Nay (1) - Peterson Carried Hydropower Contract with NYSEG - Report Alderperson Schlather presented the following report from Deputy City Controller, Dominick Cafferillo: "Negotiations with NYSEG are continuing to spite the fast approaching inception of the bidding program. As a short update, on December 1, 1988, as required by the PSC, NYSEG filed a proposed bidding program. This procedure would bring an end to the current interim program which permits, in part, the negotiation levelized contracts. Additionally, NYSEG has requested permission to suspend goodfaith negotiations with all power producers not yet under contract during the review process. At our last meeting with NYSEG representatives, we were made aware of a projected six week preliminary review period, followed by a more lengthy examination leading to a possible approval of their bidding proposal. The suspension of negotiations could be approved at any time, with a possible, but unlikely, retroactive effective date of December 1, 1988. At this point in time, Helen Jones, Ralph Nash and I, am attempting to pull together a tentative contract offer for presentation to NYSEG. We have invited input from the Mayor, Common Council, and Hydro Committee members, as to contract wording and financial terms. Any final determination and /or approval of an ultimate agreement would be subject to review and approval by Common Council." City Planner Jones answered questions from Council members. At the request of Council she will put together a list of items that remain to be done and when the City must make a decision on these things. It", 359 13 HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: Aids -Work - Report Alderperson Peterson reported that the Coordinator and Treasurer of Aids -Work came to speak to the Human Services Committee about their organization. There are 16 Board members, 100 volunteers and a one -half time paid Coordinator in this organization. So far they have been funded by small foundations and private contributions and it appears that they will be looking for other governmental assistance toward the end 1989. They informed the committee that by 1998 there will be 450 -900 possible carriers of the Aids virus present in Tompkins County and that it is time to start planning for that now. Homeless Shelter at Southside - Report Alderperson Peterson reported that Audrey Cooper has reported to the Human Services Committee that the shelter had opened on October 17th. She stated that the data that was received was from that time through December 12th. Ms. Cooper reported to the Committee that there were 302 bed nights during that period of d time, which was a marked increase from last year. The operation is proceeding smoothly. The main issue for the Southside Board LO of Directors and for the employees there is to discuss the long- = term needs because this does show there is a problem in the co community. The Board of Directors have also applied to EOC for Q funding for a part -time homeless shelter coordinator for 25 hours a week. The Human Services Committee will be looking into this matter during the next few months. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the long -term needs for the homeless. *16.3 Non - Participating Municipalities and Youth Services By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols WHEREAS, Common Council requested the Human Services Committee to review and report back on a plan for transition for youth enrolled in City youth development services from non- participating municipalities, and WHEREAS, a gradual transition is in the best interest of the youth and staff, and WHEREAS, efforts are ongoing to secure additional financial support from the school district, and several municipalities; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Youth Bureau staff employ the following transition plan for Youth Development Programs: 1. Current enrolles in programs from non - participating municipalities will be terminated from the program in the next 3 -6 months, depending on the individual. 2. No new participants from non - contributing municipalities shall be enrolled. 3. Participants from non - contributing municipalities will be allowed to complete the school year for the 2 in- school programs (outing and work programs). This includes current and new participants. Discussion followed on the floor and Youth Bureau Director Cohen answered questions from Council members. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (7) - Booth, Hoffman, Peterson, Nichols, Johnson, Lytel, Killeen Nays (3) - Cummings, Schlather, Romanowski Carried 360 14 CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE: *17.1 An Ordinance Establishing Chapter 39 Entitled 'Site Development Plan Review' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code - Call for Public Hearing By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That Ordinance Number 88 - entitled "An Ordinance Establishing Chapter 39 Entitled 'Site Development Plan Review' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code" be and it hereby is introduced before the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, 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, Ithaca, New York on Wednesday, February 1, 1989 at 7:00 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 newspaper, 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 ordinance for its report thereon. ORDINANCE NO. 88 - AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CHAPTER 39 ENTITLED 'SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW' OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE. 39.1 Intent It is the intent of this law to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the City of Ithaca by assuring that the development or redevelopment of land is appropriate and compatible with the development of adjacent or neighboring land. It is further intended to ensure the conservation and enhancement of natural and man -made resources within the City of Ithaca through a process of review and approval of site development plans. It is not intended to prohibit development that is otherwise permitted under the applicable zoning regulations. Rather it is intended to improve the design, function, aesthetics and safety of projects and site plans, which are otherwise in conformance with zoning regulations. It is also intended that this site review process be conducted in a timely fashion and that smaller, less complex projects will be reviewed as quickly as possible. 39.2 Applicability A. Except as noted in Subdivision B, all development which requires a building permit, including additions and expansions of existing development, redevelopment of existing uses, modifications to previously approved site plans, or any other activity which alters the physical characteristics or use of property within the City of Ithaca, shall be subject to Site Development Plan Review. For any activity which is subject to Site Development Plan Review, no physical changes may be made to a site until the process of Site Development Plan Review has been completed and an approved site plan has been authorized. B. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to the following exceptions: 361 15 1. Existing uses and development which in their present configuration and use are legally authorized as of the date this law becomes effective. For the purposes of this law only, a use or structure shall be considered to be legally authorized if it has received a valid building permit prior to the date this law becomes effective and is fully completed in accordance with the approved plans within two (2) years of the date of the issuance of the building permit. 2. Any of the following expansions of or additions to existing development, including the addition of accessory uses: a. The total expansion of an existing building that does not exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet; LO b. The total expansion of an existing building that the does not exceed twenty -five (25) percent of Iq total gross floor area of the existing building or LO ten thousand (10,000) square feet, whichever is less; m C. The total expansion to site improvements that do not exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet; d. The total expansion to site improvements that do not exceed twenty -five (25) percent of the area of the existing improved site or ten thousand (10,000) square feet, whichever is less. With respect to sub - paragraphs c and d site improvements include driveways, parking areas, sidewalks, landscaping or any other changes made to the natural condition of the site. 3. Ordinary exterior maintenance or repair to existing structures or uses. 4. Interior alterations to existing structures, including changes in use which do not involve exterior alterations. 5. Signs in connection with existing uses or development that are not otherwise subject to the provisions of Site Development Plan Review. 6. Subdivisions which are subject to regulation under Chapter 31 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code. 7. The development of five (5) or fewer residential dwelling units, including additions thereto which do not result in additional dwelling units, and related accessory structures and land -use activities. 8. The development of any non - residential use totalling less than five thousand (5,000) square feet in area, including the total gross building floor area plus any associated vehicle parking and maneuvering areas, provided that it is located in a non - residential zoning district and is not located on a site which is either contiguous to a residential zoning district or across the street from a residential zoning district. 9. Parking lots or parking facilities containing less than ten (10) vehicle parking spaces. C. This Chapter shall not govern projects undertaken by the City of Ithaca, provided: 362 16 1. All City development projects that cost more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), other than maintenance, repair and reconstruction projects, shall be submitted by the responsible City agency to the Board of Planning and Development for an advisory review to be conducted by the Board pursuant to this Chapter. 2. The Board may make such findings regarding such proposal and recommendations for altering it, as the Board may determine appropriate. The responsible City agency shall utilize the advisory findings and recommendations in making its determinations regarding the project. 3. The Board shall conduct its review of City development projects pursuant to this subdivision as expeditiously as possible. 4. No City agency may undertake a project subject to the advisory review contemplated by this subdivision until the Board of Planning and Development has completed that review, including the issuance of any findings and recommendations the Board determines are appropriate. 5. Common Council may exempt any particular City development project from the advisory review process provided by this subdivision. 39.3 Permits Not To Be Issued No building permit for the use, preparation *for use, or "4j-- development of any property, other than as specified in Section 39.2 (B) above, shall be issued by the Building Commissioner of the City of Ithaca, nor shall any Variance or Special Use Permit for an action requiring Site Development Plan Review be approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals, until a Site Development Plan for the proposed project has first been approved by the Board of Planning and Development. 39.4 Authorization To Review Site Development Plans The Board of Planning and Development of the City of Ithaca is hereby authorized to review and approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove site development plans for the development or use of property within the City of Ithaca, in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. In performing such review, the Board of Planning and Development shall be governed by all applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. These include, but are not limited to, the Zoning Ordinance, Sign Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, and Environmental Quality Review Ordinance of the City of Ithaca; and the State Environmental Quality Review Act. 39.5 Site Development Plan Review Procedures A. Overview 1. Site Development Plan Review is initiated through the Building Department. Whenever an application is made to the City of Ithaca for a building permit for the use or development of property, the Building Commissioner shall review the proposed action for compliance with zoning and shall also determine whether Site Development Plan Review is required. Such determinations of the Building Commissioner may be appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals. 363 17 2. If Site Development Plan Review is required, the Building Commissioner shall refer the matter to the Director of Planning and Development, who acts as the staff to the Board of Planning and Development. The Building Commissioner's referral shall indicate any areas in which the project is deficient with respect to zoning. The Building Commissioner shall also inform the applicant of the referral, stating that no building (4wel permit or zoning approval may be authorized by the Building Commissioner or the Board of Zoning Appeals until an approved site development plan has been authorized by the Board of Planning and Development. 1. An informal sketch plan conference may be held between the applicant or a designated agent and the Director of Planning and Development prior to the preparation and submission of a formal application and site plan. The function of a sketch plan conference is to inform the Director about the proposal, before the applicant has invested substantial time and effort in the preparation of plans. The Director may also advise the applicant about potential problems and concerns that may arise during the review and generally determine the level of information that will need to be submitted to the Board with an application for Preliminary Site Development Plan Review. 3. During the period when the Board of Planning and Development is considering the proposed site development plan, the Building Department may proceed with the code and plan compliance review normally LO required prior to issuance of a building permit. d 4. The Site Development Plan Review process involves up to LD three steps. These steps are as follows: r Review, in which the Board makes a final M a. The Sketch Plan Conference is an optional informal conference between the applicant or a designated Q agent and the Director of Planning and Development. The purpose of the conference is to review the project to determine the extent of information that will need to be submitted as part of the formal application and to discuss potential site development issues that are likely to arise during the review. 1. An informal sketch plan conference may be held between the applicant or a designated agent and the Director of Planning and Development prior to the preparation and submission of a formal application and site plan. The function of a sketch plan conference is to inform the Director about the proposal, before the applicant has invested substantial time and effort in the preparation of plans. The Director may also advise the applicant about potential problems and concerns that may arise during the review and generally determine the level of information that will need to be submitted to the Board with an application for Preliminary Site Development Plan Review. b. The second step is the Preliminary Site Plan Review, which involves a formal Development application to the Board of Planning and Development, including a complete environmental review, a public hearing on the project, and a review of the project by the Board. C. The third step is the Final Site Development Plan Review, in which the Board makes a final determination on the application, as revised. d. The Board may combine the second and third steps and give final approval to the application at the Preliminary Site Development Plan step, if the application and site plan is found to be acceptable by the Board. The Board will make every effort to expedite the Site Development Plan Review process by combining the second and third steps when appropriate and by providing for a timely review of each project. B. Sketch Plan Conference 1. An informal sketch plan conference may be held between the applicant or a designated agent and the Director of Planning and Development prior to the preparation and submission of a formal application and site plan. The function of a sketch plan conference is to inform the Director about the proposal, before the applicant has invested substantial time and effort in the preparation of plans. The Director may also advise the applicant about potential problems and concerns that may arise during the review and generally determine the level of information that will need to be submitted to the Board with an application for Preliminary Site Development Plan Review. 364 M M. 2. To aid in accomplishing these objectives, the applicant should provide as much information about the project as possible, including a sketch plan of the proposed layout of buildings, driveways, parking areas, landscaped areas, signs and other project elements; proposed changes to the natural features of the land; and the relationship of the project to adjacent or nearby existing land uses. 3. Based on the level of information about the project that is available at the Sketch Plan Conference, the Director may recommend that some of the information required for a Preliminary Site Development Plan Review application be waived. Waivers of the submission requirements shall be based on the scale and complexity of the project and the site plan issues relevant to the project. Environmental Review An environmental review of the impacts of the proposed project shall be required for each project subject to Site Development Plan Review. The Board of Planning and Development, as the City's lead reviewing agency, shall determine the appropriate level of environmental review and shall judge the completeness of each environmental review. An application for Site Development Plan Review must contain a complete environmental review, including an Environmental Impact Statement if determined to be necessary, in order for it to be considered by the Board of Planning and Development. Preliminary Site Development Plan Review 1. An application for Preliminary Site Development Plan Review shall be made in writing to the Board of Planning and Development and shall be accompanied by information drawn from the following checklist, as determined necessary by the Director of Planning and Development or the Board. a. Site plans, at a scale not less than 1" = 201 (one inch equals twenty feet), including where applicable: i. Title of project, name and address of applicant, and name of person preparing such drawings. ii. North arrow, graphic scale, and date of drawing. iii. Boundaries of the property, with dimensions, plotted to scale. iv. Existing buildings and paved areas. V. Proposed buildings and paved areas, with exterior dimensions and ground floor elevations of buildings (e.g., U.S.G.S. data). vi. Grading and drainage plan, showing existing and proposed contours and other topographical features. vii. Provisions for pedestrian circulation to and within the site. viii. Location of outdoor storage and refuse areas. 0 365 19 ix. Location and construction materials of all existing and proposed site improvements, including walls, fences, drains and culverts, water supply and sewers. X. Location of fire hydrants. xi. Location of all energy collection and (400., distribution facilities, including gas, electricity, wind and solar energy. xii. Location and type of existing and proposed signs. xiii. Location and type of outdoor lighting facilities. xiv. Designation of the location and amount of LO building area for each type of use on the N" site. LO xv. Type and location of existing vegetation on the site. M Q xvi. General landscaping plan and planting schedule. xvii. Measures, devices or structures for erosion and runoff control during and after construction. xviii. Other elements integral to the proposed site (4000, development, including any so indicated by the Director of Planning and Development or the Board. b. Schematic designs of the principal facades of proposed structures, and of any existing principal facade which is to be altered, including signs, at a scale determined appropriate by the Director of Planning and Development or the Board. C. An area map showing the entire property under consideration for development, all streets, rights -of -way and easements, and the general land - use and significant features of all property within one hundred (100) feet of the development site, including the mass and height of existing buildings. d. Any other information as may be considered necessary by the Director of Planning and Development or the Board. 2. For ease of preparation and presentation of complete site plans, separate drawings may be prepared to show the different elements of the project, such as separate grading, planting and site improvement plans, provided that each drawing also shows the shapes and locations of major proposed features, such as buildings, for reference. 3. Following timely receipt of a complete application for Preliminary Site Development Plan Review, including the completion of an environmental review at the level determined to be necessary, the Board of Planning and Development shall schedule consideration of the application at its earliest possible scheduled meeting. 36()' 20 E. Coordination and Consultation 1. On receipt of an application for Site Development Plan Review, the Director of Planning and Development shall refer appropriate materials to other officials and agencies of the City of Ithaca for comment and necessary action, and where appropriate, to officials of other jurisdictions where required by law or as the Board deems desirable. 2. The Board of Planning and Development may consult with, and request reports from, agencies of the Federal, State or local governments, or any individuals or organizations that may be affected by the proposed project. F. Public Hearing Prior to rendering any decision on a Preliminary Site Development Plan application, the Board of Planning and Development shall first hold a public hearing on the proposed site development plan in order to allow interested persons an opportunity to comment on the plan. The public hearing shall. be held within forty - five (45) days of the date a complete application for Preliminary Site Development Plan Review is made to the Board including the completion of the appropriate level of environmental review as determined by the Board. Legal notice of the hearing shall be published in the city's official newspaper once at least five (5) days before the date of the public hearing. The notice of public hearing shall specify the time and place where the hearing will be held, a brief description of the proposed project and the place where the proposed site development plan may be reviewed. The applicant shall also place a notice in the form prescribed by the Board of Planning and Development at the project site. The public hearing shall be held in accordance with rules adopted by the Board of Planning and Development. The right to speak at a public hearing shall always be reserved for any city resident or property owner. G. Action on Preliminary Site Development Plan Review 1. Following the completion of a public hearing on the proposed site development plan, the Board of Planning and Development shall review the site development plan in accordance with the review criteria contained in Section 39.6 of this ordinance. The Board shall then make one of the following determinations: a. That the Preliminary Site Development Plan is approved as submitted, and that it shall be considered to be the Final Site Development Plan Review and approved as such. Every effort will be made to combine the Preliminary and Final reviews, when appropriate. b. That the Preliminary Site Development Plan is approved with modifications in the form of conditions, and that it shall be considered to be the Final Site Development Plan and approved as such. C. That the Preliminary Site Development Plan is approved in concept with modifications in the form of conditions, and that the applicant must submit a Final Site Development Plan which incorporates changes that will address the conditions specified by the Board of Planning and Development. 367 21 I. Action on the Final Site Development Plan (400v The Board shall act on the Final Site Development Plan within forty -five (45) days of the submission of a complete plan, and shall render one of the following decisions: 1. That the Final Site Development Plan is approved as submitted. 2. That the Final Site Development Plan is approved with modifications in the form of conditions. 3. That the Final Site Development Plan is not approved, for specific reasons that are stated in the Board's written decision. The Board shall transmit its decision in writing to the applicant and shall file a copy of its decision with the Building Commissioner and City Clerk as soon as practicable but in no case more than five (5) days after the date of the decision. d. That the Preliminary Site Development Plan is not approved. 2. The Board's decision on the Preliminary Site Development Plan shall be made after the completion of the public hearing or at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board where site plan reviews are to be considered. Any decision of the Board shall be communicated in writing to the applicant. A copy of (woo,, the minutes of the meeting at which the action was taken may serve as such notice. In the case where a site development plan has received final approval by the Board, the Board shall file a copy of its decision with the Building Commissioner and the City Clerk as soon as practicable, but in any case no more than five (5) days after the date of the Board's decision. The approved site development plan shall be binding on all further permits and approvals for the project. LO IT H. Final Site Development Plan Review LO Following a decision by the Board of Planning and Development that a Final Site Development Plan shall be m required, the applicant shall prepare such plan and Q submit it to the Board for its consideration. The Final Site Development Plan shall contain all of the information required to be submitted for a Preliminary Site Development Plan and shall incorporate changes that address the conditions imposed by the Board during its review of the Preliminary Site Development Plan. I. Action on the Final Site Development Plan (400v The Board shall act on the Final Site Development Plan within forty -five (45) days of the submission of a complete plan, and shall render one of the following decisions: 1. That the Final Site Development Plan is approved as submitted. 2. That the Final Site Development Plan is approved with modifications in the form of conditions. 3. That the Final Site Development Plan is not approved, for specific reasons that are stated in the Board's written decision. The Board shall transmit its decision in writing to the applicant and shall file a copy of its decision with the Building Commissioner and City Clerk as soon as practicable but in no case more than five (5) days after the date of the decision. J. Submission of Application Materials The Board may develop, as it determines necessary, rules regarding the submission of application materials to be considered at scheduled meetings of the Board. The Board may also develop forms or check lists to provide guidance to applicants. All materials submitted by applicants should be complete, legible, and, in the case of drawings, sufficiently accurate and detailed to enable the Board and other reviewing officials to evaluate the adequacy of improvements as proposed and installed, as well as to obtain a clear understanding of the proposal as a whole. 368 22 K. Modification of Approved Site Development Plan Modifications to approved site development plans must be submitted to the Board for review and approval as a new site development plan, unless the modification is exempted under Section 39.2 of this Ordinance. L. Extension of Time Deadlines All time deadlines for decisions on a Site Development Plan Application may be extended upon mutual agreement by the Board of Planning and Development and the applicant. M. Other Permits An approved site development plan shall be binding on all further permits and approvals needed for the project. The Board's decision to approve a site development plan does not excuse an applicant from complying with all other permits and approvals that may be needed. 39.6 Review Criteria Review of Preliminary and Final Site Development Plans by the Board of Planning and Development shall include, as appropriate, but is not limited to, consideration of the following criteria. These criteria shall apply to activities that occur both during the construction of the project, and after the project has been completed. The approved site development plan shall provide for satisfaction of each of the following criteria.. A. The project shall avoid or mitigate any negative environmental impacts identified during the environmental review conducted in connection with the Site Development Plan Review process. B. The project shall provide adequate vehicular access and circulation. C. The project shall provide adequate pedestrian access and circulation. D. The location, arrangement, appearance and number of off - street parking and loading spaces shall be adequate to meet the demands created by the project. E. The project shall provide adequate stormwater retention and drainage facilities both during and after construction, including special attention to the adequacy and impact of structures, paving and landscaping in areas with susceptibility to flooding, ponding or erosion. F. The project shall provide adequate fire and emergency vehicle access. G. The project shall provide for adequate types and arrangements of landscaping, both to enhance the site and to complement the architectural components of the development, and to screen or buffer adjacent uses and public ways. H. The project shall provide an adequate arrangement, design and general compatibility of structures, buildings and signs. I Wn 369 23 I. In the case of an apartment complex, townhouse development, or other multiple residence, the project shall provide adequate open space for play areas and informal recreation, as appropriate. J. The project shall provide adequate protection of solar access for existing development or uses on adjacent or nearby properties. (4000, K. The project shall provide for adequate protection of significant natural features and areas, including, but not limited to, trees, views, watercourses or bodies of water, and landforms, on or near the site. L. The project shall provide for adequate protection of, or compatibility with, other nearby features and areas of importance to the community, including but not limited to parks, landmarks, and historic districts. LO M. The overall impact of the project on the surrounding area, including compatibility of m design, shall be minimized. d N. The project shall comply with all other regulations applicable to the development of, or development on, the subject site. 39.7 Application Fee An application fee shall be charged to each applicant for each site development plan that is reviewed by -the Board of Planning and Development. Fees shall be charged in accordance with the following schedule, and shall be payable to the City of Ithaca upon the submission of a Preliminary Site Development Plan. Value of Site Improvements Application Fee As Stated on Building Permit Application --------------------------- - - - - -- ---------------- - - - - -- Less than $10,000 $10,000 to $100,000 More than $100,000 $50.00 $100.00 $l per $1,000 in value of site improvements. 39.8 Performance of Required_ Improvements, Performance Bond A. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued until all improvements required as a condition of Final Site Development Plan approval are installed, or until a sufficient performance bond has been posted to guarantee the completion of improvements not yet made. The sufficiency, form, surety and manner of execution of such bond shall be approved by the City Attorney. The amount and term of such bond shall be set by the Board of Planning and Development after consultation with the City Attorney, City Engineer and other appropriate City officials. B. If the Board shall decide at any time during the term of the performance bond that certain improvements are no longer warranted, or that some improvements have been installed, or that additional improvements are necessary, the bond may be reduced or increased by an amount equal to the estimated cost of improvements not 3'70 24 needed or needed in addition, or reduced by the actual costs of improvements completed, which actual cost shall be certified by applicant, provided that the remaining bond is sufficient to cover the remaining needed improvements. C. In the event that required improvements have not been installed within the term of the performance bond, the Board may thereupon recommend to the Common Council that such bond be declared in default in the estimated amount necessary to install or complete such improvements, and that such amount shall be due the City. Upon receipt of such amount, the City shall install or cause to be installed the improvements to the extent commensurate with the extent of the development of the subject site plan that has taken place, but not exceeding in cost the amount received. D. If the Board or an appropriate City official shall find upon inspection that any of the required improvements has not been constructed in accordance with the site plan or conditions specified by the Board, then the applicant and the bonding agency if any/ shall be severally and jointly liable for the costs of completing or reconstructing said improvements as specified by the Board. E. Such performance bonds or portions thereof shall be released to the applicant only upon certification by applicant to the Board, and after an inspection report by an appropriate City official, that all required improvements or portions thereof have been satisfactorily completed. The Building .Commissioner shall be responsible for the overall inspection of site improvements, including coordination with the Superintendent of Public Works, City Engineer and other officials and agencies, as appropriate. F. In lieu of requiring a performance bond to guarantee that required improvements are properly completed, the Board of Planning and Development shall have authority to require the applicant to incorporate appropriate deed restrictions in any deeds subsequently issued with respect to the subject property, or to require the applicant to provide for other recorded instruments to be filed respecting the subject property, that will guarantee that the required improvements are properly completed and maintained. 39.9 Expiration of Approval, Extension of Approval A. If construction of a development, for which a Site Development Plan has been approved, has not commenced within two years of the date of issuance of a building permit following final Site Development Plan approval, such approval shall expire. In such case, any other current permit for the project shall be suspended, revoked or otherwise held in abeyance as determined appropriate by the authority issuing such permit. B. Extensions of Site Development Plan approval may be granted by the Board of Planning and Development provided that a written request and explanations of theJ need and duration of extension are received not less than ten days before a regular meeting of the Board. C. In the event of approval expiry, including extension if granted, the applicant shall repair any site preparation earthwork, including rough grading and foundation excavation, to return the site to a neat 3'71 25 appearance and safe condition, as directed by the Building Commissioner. 39.10 Enforcement Any person, corporation, or other legal entity who shall violate any provision of this law, or any conditions imposed by a permit issued pursuant to final Site Development Plan approval as provided herein, shall be guilty of an offense (Mve and subject to a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000). Every such person or entity shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each day such violation shall continue. 39.11 Appeal Any person aggrieved by any decision of the Board of Planning and Development or of any officer or agency of the LD L, City may apply to the Supreme Court for a review by a proceeding under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and If) Rules. Such proceedings shall be initiated within thirty (30) days after the filing of a decision in the office of m the City Clerk. Q 39.12 Severability If any section, paragraph or provision of this local law shall be determined to be invalid, such invalidity shall apply only to the section, paragraph or provision adjudged invalid, and the rest of this local law shall remain valid and effective. Alderperson Booth thanked the Planning Board and the-Planning and (600" Development staff for all their work that was done on this ordinance. He stated that although there is not a legal need for a public hearing on this ordinance the Charter and Ordinance Committee felt that with all the time that has gone by it would be desirable to hold a public hearing, although this was not an unanimous decision by the Charter and Ordinance Committee. Alderperson Booth then reported on sections of the ordinance that had been agreed to in principle and that he had been asked to write the language for. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Site Development Plan Review Ordinance - Environmental Review- Report Alderperson Booth reported that the environmental review for the Site Development Plan Review Ordinance is in preparation. *17.3 Local Law to Remove Real Property Tax Exemption Provided Under Section 485 -b of the NYS Real Property Tax Law Alderperson Booth reported that state law provides a tax exemption for ert��n commercial development. That tax exemption has been a- i '-the City of Ithaca because the city has not (400'� taken action to change that tax exemption. The County has recently acted to eventually remove that exemption at the County level. Alderperson Booth stated that the Council has to act by March 1 to have this effective for this year. Resolution By Alderperson RESOLVED, That that the City to be held on Common Council Booth: Seconded Local Law No. 1 �lerk be directed Wednesday, Febri Chambers in City by Alderperson Schlather of 1989 be laid on the table and to advertise for a Public Hearing iary 1, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. in the Hall. Carried Unanimously 3'72 26 LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1989 A LOCAL LAW REDUCING THE PER CENTUM EXEMPTION PROVIDED PURSUANT TO NEW YORK STATE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW SECTION 485 -b. BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: SECTION 1. REDUCING THE PER CENTUM EXEMPTION PROVIDED PURSUANT TO NEW YORK STATE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW SECTION 485 -b. The per centum exemption from taxation and special ad valorem levies provided pursuant to New York State Real Property Tax Law Section 485 -b is hereby reduced to zero for all years; provided, however, that any project in course of construction and exemptions existing prior in time to passage of this Local Law shall not be subject to such reduction. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Local Law shall take effect immediately after filing in the Office of the Secretary of State. Carried Unanimously Environmental Review with Respect to Cluster Zoning Amendment to City Zoning Ordinance - Report Alderperson Booth reported that this has been discussed at the Charter and Ordinance Committee. He reported that there is disagreement among committee members as to whether a negative declaration is proper and members and Development Deputy Director is preparing an expanded Long Environmental Assessment Form. It will be acted on at the January Charter and Ordinance Committee meeting. *17.5 An Ordinance Amending Article I of Section 30.3 and Article II of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code (Cluster Zoning) By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen ORDINANCE NO. 88 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I, SECTION 30.3 AND ARTICLE II OF CHAPTER 30 ENTITLED "ZONING" OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDING ARTICLE I, SECTION 30.3 OF CHAPTER 30. That Article I, Section 30.3 is hereby amended to add the following new definition: "104. 'Cluster Subdivision' shall mean a subdivision in which limited deviations from the regulations of a zoning district in which it is built are permitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 30.28 of the Municipal Code." SECTION 2. AMENDING ARTICLE II OF CHAPTER 30. That Article II of Chapter 30 is hereby amended to add the following new section: "Section 30.28 Cluster Subdivision Development A. Intent This section authorizes the Board of Planning and Development, during the process of subdivision plat approval pursuant to Chapter 31 of the Municipal Code, to make reasonable wn 3 27 changes in the existing zoning regulations for the property affected so as to enable the development of a cluster subdivision. This authorization permits deviations in the district regulations applicable to the affected property, subject to the limitations contained in this section. Cluster subdivisions may be approved in order to promote the following purposes: (400.1 1. The preservation and enhancement of open spaces, water courses, wetlands and areas designated as critical environmental areas. 2. The development of active and passive recreation areas. 3. The development of residential dwelling units in forms which are consistent with the public welfare and which provide reasonable safeguards to the appropriate use of LD adjoining land. Iq 4. Efficient and cost - effective development of roads, LO sidewalks, utilities, water and sewer lines and other F forms of public and private infrastructure. M 5. The development of housing that is more affordable than Q that normally developed under conventional zoning regulations. B. Authorization and Minimum Requirements for Cluster Subdivisions. The Board of Planning and Development is authorized, upon petition by an applicant for subdivision approval, to approve a cluster subdivision that includes reasonable deviations from the existing regulations of the zoning district in which the subdivision is located, in accordance with the following limitations: 1. Cluster subdivisions may only be permitted in the R -la, R -1b, R -2a, R -2b, R -3a and R -3b zoning districts. 2. Cluster subdivisions shall contain only those primary uses and accessory uses which are permitted in the zoning district in which the cluster subdivision is proposed, except as permitted by Paragraph B.3. 3. The following types of deviations from the zoning regulations of the district in which the cluster subdivision is proposed is permitted: a. Building type for residential uses; provided that in the R -la and R -lb districts, only one - family detached dwellings are permitted as primary uses; and in the R -2a and R -2b districts, no more than two dwelling units may be attached to form a single building, provided that each dwelling unit shall have a separate ground -level entrance. b. Lot area. C. Lot width at street line. d. Maximum percentage of land coverage by buildings on any individual lot within the cluster subdivision; provided that the total percentage of land coverage by all buildings in the cluster subdivision shall not exceed the following percentages for the zoning district in which the cluster subdivision is located: 3'74 i i. R -la 20% ii. R -lb 25% R -2a 30% iv. R -2b 35% v. R -3a 35% vi. R -3b 40% e. Front, side and rear yard dimensions, provided that all buildings in a cluster subdivision shall have a front yard of at least twenty -five (25) feet in the R -la, R -lb, and R -2a zones and ten (10) feet in the R -2b, R -3a and R -3b zones; and further provided that all buildings in a cluster subdivision shall be at least the following number of feet from the boundary of a cluster subdivision where it abuts land (other than a public right -of- way) that is not part of the cluster subdivision: in the R -1 districts, forty (40) feet; in the R -2 and R -3 districts, twenty (20) feet. 4. The maximum number of dwelling units permitted in a cluster subdivision shall not exceed the number of dwelling units that would be permitted on the site in a conventional subdivision under the conventional zoning regulations for the zoning district in which the cluster subdivision is proposed, subject to all applicable development regulations applying to the property in question, plus any other restriction which the Board of Planning and Development has the authority to impose pursuant to Chapter 31 of the Municipal Code. 5. Any reduction in the lot area for buildings in a cluster subdivision beyond the minimum allowed in the zoning district in which the subdivision is located shall require the reservation of an equivalent amount of land as open space, passive recreation area or active recreation area. Wetlands, flood plains, steep slopes or other areas not normally appropriate for building construction shall not account for more than fifty (50) percent of the land area reserved. 6. All open space or recreation areas reserved in accordance with Paragraph 5 of this subdivision shall be dedicated as common land for the benefit of the members of the subdivision. The development, operation and maintenance of this property shall be in accordance with the approved site development plan and in a manner that is consistent with the public welfare. C. Approval of Cluster Subdivisions 1. The Board of Planning and Development may consider a developer's request for approval of a cluster subdivision or may require that a developer prepare and submit plans for a cluster subdivision that contains no greater number of dwelling units than that proposed by the developer. The Board shall adopt rules and regulations setting forth the criteria pursuant to which such an application may be required. The approval of a cluster subdivision shall follow the rules and procedures contained in Chapter 31 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Subdivision Regulation. 2. Developers submitting a cluster subdivision plan shall submit two subdivision plans, one showing the land developed under the conventional zoning regulations and the other showing development under the cluster option. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 31 of the Municipal Code, D 375 Me the developer shall submit the following information on or with the cluster subdivision plan. a. An area plan showing the proposed cluster subdivision and all existing land use and major natural features of the land within five hundred (500) feet of the project site. b. A site development plan showing the location, size, use and physical features of all proposed buildings and accessory uses; the location and design of vehicular and pedestrian access and the location of proposed parking areas. c. A landscaping plan showing the type and LD location of all existing trees, Iq vegetation and natural features on the LD site; the identification of all existing vegetation to be preserved; the M identification of all new vegetation to be added; and the location and type of fences, berms or buffer areas. d. A plan showing the boundaries of common areas to be reserved, and the proposed use, development and maintenance of those spaces. e. Elevations of typical dwelling units to be constructed in the cluster subdivision. f. Environmental review of the project at a level deemed appropriate by the Board of b. That the development will not place an unreasonable burden on the public roads or utilities that will service the project. C. That the development will promote the preservation of open space and natural resources within the neighborhood to a Planning and Development. g. Any other information that the Board of Planning and Development may reasonably require. 3. The approval of a cluster subdivision shall constitute the approval of a site development plan for the affected area. No development shall occur on the site that is not in strict conformance with the elements of the approved site development plan, nor shall the plan be modified without the approval of the Board of Planning and Development. 4. A cluster subdivision shall not be approved unless the Board of Planning and Development makes the following affirmative findings, and states in writing the facts that support those findings: a. That the development is found to be compatible in terms of appearance, character and overall density with both the existing and potential development in the surrounding area. b. That the development will not place an unreasonable burden on the public roads or utilities that will service the project. C. That the development will promote the preservation of open space and natural resources within the neighborhood to a 3'7 f; 30 greater degree than would conventional development. d. That the development is consistent with the public welfare and that the appropriate use of adjoining land is reasonably safeguarded. e. That the development will not have an undue adverse impact on any critical area listed in Section 36.5(B)(1)(1) of the Municipal Code. f. That the development complies with the approved street plan and master plan, if any, for the area." SECTION 3. 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. Motion to Table By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, Common Council has not completed the environmental review required regarding the proposed amendment of the City Zoning Ordinance with respect to Cluster Zoning; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That this proposed zoning amendment is TABLED until that review has been completed. Ayes (8) - Booth, Schlather, Nichols, Johnson, Romanowski, Peterson, Hoffman, Lytel Nays (2) - Killeen, Cummings Carried BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: *18.1 Designation of Official Depositories By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That pursuant to Section 3.7 of the City Charter, the Tompkins County Trust Company and the Norstar Bank, be and they are, hereby designated as the Official Depositories of all City Funds, for the year 1989, as follows: TOMPKINS COUNTY TRUST COMPANY ACCOUNT NAME City of Ithaca General Fund Employees Group Insurance Deductions City of Ithaca Payroll Fund Guaranty and Bid Deposits City Tax Sale Redemption Health Facility Agreement Deposits on Water Meters Sale of Unclaimed Property Circle Greenway Conference on College and Community Center for Expressive Arts Liens on Employees Building and Fire Code Aid Employee Garnishees Peter DeWysocki Memorial Fund Cemetery Fund Fire Department Recognition Banquet Commons Cultural Tourism West End Trees Employees Withholding for Social Security Employees N.Y.S. Withholding Tax Employees U.S.Savings Bonds ACCOUNT NUMBER 01- 201 - 001004 03 -201- 001004 04 -201- 001004 05- 201 - 001004 05 -201- 001004 05- 201 - 001004 05 -201- 001004 05 -201- 001004 05- 201 - 001004 05- 201 - 001004 05 -201- 001004 05- 201 - 001004 05- 201 - 001004 05 -201- 001004 05 -201- 001004 05- 201 - 001004 05- 201 - 001004 05 -201- 001004 05- 201 - 001004 07- 201 - 001004 08 -201- 001004 09- 201 - 001004 31 377 NORSTAR BANK ACCOUNT NAME ACCOUNT NUMBER Firemen's Relief Fund 267- 010001 City of Ithaca Water and Sewer Fund 267- 010109 (6wo-11 City of Ithaca Construction Fund 267- 010842 Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant - Phase II 267- 012276 Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant - Phase III 267- 365187 Carried Unanimously *18.2 Designation of Official Newspaper By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That pursuant to Section 7 -16 of the City Charter, the Ithaca Journal be, and it is, hereby designated as the official Newspaper of the City of Ithaca for the year 1989. Discussion followed on the floor. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That the Cornell Daily Sun be added to the resolution as a second official newspaper for the City of Ithaca. Discussion followed on the floor on the amendment. A vote on the amendment resulted as follows: Ayes (5) - Lytel, Cummings, Booth, Johnson, Killeen Nays (5) - Peterson, Hoffman, Nichols, Schlather, Romanowski Mayor Gutenberger voted Nay, breaking the tie. Motion Defeated Main Motion A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Schlather, Booth, Nichols, Peterson, Nays (2) - Cummings, Killeen Romanowski, Johnson, Lytel, Hoffman Carried N.Y.S. Policemen's and Firemen's Retirement System 11- 201 - 001004 N.Y.S. Employees Retirement System 12- 201 - 001004 Ithaca Centennial Inc. O1- 101 - 096437 Capital Reserve Fund #4 - Bridges 01- 201 - 001055 Capital Reserve Fund #11 - Parks and Recreation Areas 02- 201 - 001055 Capital Reserve Fund #14 - Parking Areas 03- 201 - 001055 (awoo, Capital Reserve Fund #15 - Fire Engine Replacement 04- 201 - 001055 Capital Reserve Fund #16 - Development of Water Sources 05 -201- 001055 Capital Reserve Fund #17 - Sewer Construction 06- 201 - 001055 Capital Reserve Fund #17A - Mandatory Reserve for Sewer Plant Construction 06- 201 - 001055 Capital Reserve Fund #20 - West Hill Water and Sewer Replacement 08- 201 - 001055 Capital Reserve Fund #22 - Bus Replacement 09- 201 - 001055 LO Capital Reserve Fund #23 - Public Works Equipment 12 -201- 001055 ,� Reserve Fund #24 - Energy Conservation 01- 101 - 082703 Lo Capital Capital Reserve Fund #25 - Capital Improvements 02- 101 - 082703 (o Capital Reserve Fund - Joint Activity Fund 01- 101 - 099762 Q Capital Reserve Fund - Mandatory Reserve for Capital Debt 01 -101- 098561 NORSTAR BANK ACCOUNT NAME ACCOUNT NUMBER Firemen's Relief Fund 267- 010001 City of Ithaca Water and Sewer Fund 267- 010109 (6wo-11 City of Ithaca Construction Fund 267- 010842 Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant - Phase II 267- 012276 Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant - Phase III 267- 365187 Carried Unanimously *18.2 Designation of Official Newspaper By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That pursuant to Section 7 -16 of the City Charter, the Ithaca Journal be, and it is, hereby designated as the official Newspaper of the City of Ithaca for the year 1989. Discussion followed on the floor. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That the Cornell Daily Sun be added to the resolution as a second official newspaper for the City of Ithaca. Discussion followed on the floor on the amendment. A vote on the amendment resulted as follows: Ayes (5) - Lytel, Cummings, Booth, Johnson, Killeen Nays (5) - Peterson, Hoffman, Nichols, Schlather, Romanowski Mayor Gutenberger voted Nay, breaking the tie. Motion Defeated Main Motion A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Schlather, Booth, Nichols, Peterson, Nays (2) - Cummings, Killeen Romanowski, Johnson, Lytel, Hoffman Carried 37S 3i *18.3 Collateral to Secure Deposits By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the collateral deposited by the Tompkins County Trust Company and the Norstar Bank as reported, be approved as to form and sufficiency. Carried Unanimously *18.4 Public Employees Blanket Bond By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That pursuant to Section II of the Public Officers Law, the following bond, which is on file on the Office of the City Clerk, be, and is hereby approved in all respects for the year 1989. Insuring Agreement No. 3 Faithful Performance Blanket $250,000 Royal Globe Bond coverage Insurance Co. Carried Unanimously *18.5 Designation of Common Council Meetings By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the regular meetings of the Common Council, for the year 1989, be held at 7:00 P.M., on the first Wednesday of each month, in the Common Council Chambers, at City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. Carried Unanimously It was noted for the record that the rule of Council regarding a continuation of Council meetings on Thursday evening, if necessary, remains in effect. *18.6 Tompkins County S.P.C.A. Agreement By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with the Tompkins County S.P.C.A. for the period January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1989, in an amount not to exceed $47,244, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Tompkins County S.P.C.A. be, and.it is, hereby designated the Animal Control Agency for the City of Ithaca for the year 1989, and be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council does herewith give notice to the S.P.C.A. that any contract for 1990 and thereafter must more accurately reflect the City's proportionate share of the S.P.C.A. County -wide budget when compared to the other participating municipalities in the County. Carried Unanimously *18.7 Finger Lakes Association Agreement By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with the Finger Lakes Association, Inc., for the period January 1, 1989 to December 21, 1989, in an amount not to exceed $1,207, for rendering Promotional Publicity Services. Carried Unanimously *18.8 Tompkins County Area Development Corp. Aareement By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with Tompkins County Area Development, Corp., for the period January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1989, in an amount not to exceed $7,800, to be used toward the costs and expenses of the Authority in encouraging and affecting the location and expansion of industrial research and manufacturing facilities, the creation of new and improved job opportunities, the reduction of unemployment and the betterment 379 33 of individual and community prosperity within the City of Ithaca and the County of Tompkins. Ayes (8) - Schlather, Romanowski, Johnson, Lytel, Hoffman, Peterson, Cummings, Killeen Nays (2) - Booth, Nichols Carried *18.9 Human Services Coalition Agreement By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with the Human Services Coalition of Tompkins County, for the period January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1989, in an amount not to exceed $11,750, for the furnishing of Human Services Planning and Coordination. Carried Unanimously 1-0 *18.10 Police Department Confidential Secretary By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That Roberta Komaromi be appointed to the position of Lo Confidential Secretary to the Police Chief, at a salary of $18,559, that being Step 4 of the 1989 Compensation Plan for co confidential employees not covered by a Union, effective January 11, 1989. Q Carried Unanimously *18.11 Police Department Personnel Roster By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the 1989 Authorized Personnel Roster of the Police Department be amended as follows: D Add - One temporary Sergeant position until 3/15/89 Carried-Unanimously *18.12 D.P.W. Personnel Roster By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the 1989 Authorized Personnel Roster of the Department of Public Works be amended for the Water and Sewer Division as follows: Add - One Meter Servicer position Delete- One Working Supervisor position Carried Unanimously *18.15 Management Compensation By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That Management Employees not covered by a formal contract, including the City Attorney, Assistant City Attorney, and City Prosecutor, be granted a 5 1/2o increase across the board over their 1988 salary for the year 1989, effective with the first pay period of 1989, and be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council reaffirms its policy of comprehensive performance evaluations for all Department Heads and directs that such evaluations include the use of the Department Head Performance Evaluation form. Discussion followed on the floor on the Department Head Evaluation Form. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (9) - Schlather, Cummings, Lytel, Booth, Nichols, Johnson, Hoffman, Peterson, Romanowski Nay (1) - Killeen Carried 330 34 REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS: Rental Housing Task Force Alderperson Killeen reported that the Rental Housing Task Force met on December 19, 1988. All 11 members present offered their views on how best to function in meeting the charge of the task force within 6 months. He stated that the next session is set for January 23 at 7:00 p.m. The agenda will be the impact of Cornell upon rental housing throughout the community. Housing, budgeting and financial, investment and real estate officials will be present at that meeting from Cornell to better clarify Task Force understanding of various aspects of rental housing in regards to Cornell University. He also reported that a February meeting is tentatively set with Assemblyman Marty Luster regarding financial resources available from the state. NEW BUSINESS: Planning and Development Board Appointments Motion to Refer to Committee By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That the question of the make -up and the method by which persons are appointed to the Planning and Development Board be referred to the Charter and Ordinance Committee for review and report back to Common Council. Carried Unanimously The Mayor requested that the Charter and Ordinance Committee look into changing the Charter to read, "Deputy" Mayor instead of "Acting" Mayor. ADJOURNMENT: On a motion the meeting of Common Council was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. X-S Callista . Paolangeli 61 ohn C. Gutenberger City Clerk Mayor 19-1