HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-1989-05-031 May 3, 1989
COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. May 3, 1989
PRESENT:
Mayor Gutenberger
Alderpersons (10) - Booth, Cummings, Nichols, Johnson, Killeen,
Lytel, Schlather, Romanowski, Hoffman,
Peterson
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Clerk - Paolangeli
City Attorney - Nash
Deputy City Controller - Cafferillo
Director, Planning and Development - Van Cort
Police Lieutenant - David Barnes (attending for Chief McEwen)
Acting Personnel Administrator - Walker
ch Building Commissioner - Datz
�)� Director of Youth Bureau - Cohen
��,) Fire Chief - Olmstead
(j Board of Public Works Commissioner - Reeves
1..1
Preservation /Neighborhood Planner - Chatterton
~I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to
the American flag.
MINUTES:
Approval of Minutes of the April 5, 1989 Common Council Meeting
Alderperson Booth requested that on page 33, under Cable
Industry Deregulations, in regard to the voting, Alderperson
Romanowski's abstention should read "possible conflict of
interest."
Alderperson Booth requested for clarity, that on page 14, under
Amending Resolution (Fall Creek Designation Under the Wild,
Scenic, and Recreational Rivers System Act), the first sentence
of the amending resolution read, "RESOLVED, That the Resolved
clauses read as follows: ....... etc."
Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the minutes of the April 5, 1989 Common Council
meeting be approved as corrected by Alderperson Booth.
Carried Unanimously
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
Budget and Administration Committee
Alderperson Schlather requested the addition of Item 17.17,
appointment of Deputy Fire Chief.
No Council member objected.
Report of Special Committees and council
Alderperson Peterson requested the addition of Item 19.2, a
report on the City /County Youth Bureau meetings that have taken
(4000, place over the last few months.
No Council member objected.
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Citizens to Save Our Parks
Doria Higgins, 2 Hillcrest Drive, representing "Citizens to Save
Our Parks ", addressed Council and stated that the Citizens to
Save Our Parks group is requesting that Council not vote in favor
of the Home Rule Message concerning the alienation of Inlet
Island Park which is on the agenda this evening. She stated that
the group continues to be against the alienation of this park and
they continue to object to the many improprieties involved in the
procedure. Ms. Higgins read the following statement to Council:
r ,
K
May 3, 1989
"As we have told you before, Inlet Island Park had an assessed
value on the City Tax Rolls in 1981 of $350,000. This figure was
based on 1978 to 180 real estate sales in Ithaca and is thus 10
years out of date. We have been told by appraisers that land
values in Ithaca have at least doubled in the last 10 years and
by that gauge, Inlet Island Park should have an assessed value of
at least $700,000. Yet you and the Planning Department continue
to work with the contrived 1985 appraisal figure of $71,000. The
discrepancy between $71,000 and $700,000 is too great for
reasonable people to ignore.
In this Home Rule Message the vagueness of wording of the
boundary descriptions of the 5 substitute parcels is such that
you have no way whatsoever of knowing what is really being
offered as substitute acreage. I am referring to the phrase 'all
or part of which begins the boundary description of each of the
5 substitute parcels. If you vote for this Home Rule Message
with this deliberately vague wording, you are deliberately voting
in blind ignorance of facts you should know and we would consider
this a betrayal of the public trust.
Land outside the City is not considered by us and many others as
acceptable substitute for inner city park land and the National
Park Service agrees with us."
Ms. Higgins referred to the handout that she had presented to the
Council members, entitled 'Land and Water Conservation Fund
Grants Manual' and she read the following:
"Equivalency of location is one of the standards by which they
will ultimately decide whether or not the substitute acreage for
Inlet Island Park is acceptable. Eventually you will have to
meet these standards.
In closing, we hope you will vote against the alienation of Inlet
Island Park but if you continue on the alienation path, we do not
think you can in good conscience vote for a Home Rule Message
until you have done the following:
1. Obtained an up -to -date reasonable appraisal of the fair
market value of the park;
2. Until you have accurate, specific boundary
descriptions of the replacement land so that you know
exactly what it is that you will be voting for; and
3. Until you have made sure that you meet the standards
of the National Park Service by which this alienation
conversion process will eventually be judged and if you
have done these things, you are wasting your time.
Thank you."
United Postal Workers Union
Rob Sullivan, 31 Cemetery Road, Trumansburg, addressed Council
for the Union. He thanked Common Council for last month's
resolution of support that was passed regarding Postal Workers.
He also thanked the Chamber of Commerce for a very timely letter
they sent in support, the Tompkins Cortland Labor Coalition for
their solidarity and technical help, and Congressman Matt McHugh
for allowing the union to have a meeting with him and the
Assistant Post Master General of the United States.
Mr. Sullivan stated that meeting went very well. The Post
Master General was quite impressed with the support of the
community. He made a promise in that meeting not to affect 'next
day' Ithaca mail delivery. The results of the study which is
being done right now will be shared with the Union and with the
public. The concerns of the Ithaca community would be weighed in
any future decision. Mr. Sullivan further stated that there was
a letter that came from the Buffalo office that said they would
be moving as a certainty. They rescinded that letter and they
sent a letter to our regional APWU coordinator to say that it was
3
May 3, 1989
intended to be an advance notice of an AMP study which was
scheduled to begin on February 25th. He again thanked Council
for their support.
Demolition of Historic Property
Suzanne Lichtenstein, Vice -chair of the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission, addressed Council on the issue that
came before the Landmarks Commission concerning the requested
demolition of the property at 132 North Quarry Street, which the
Commission denied. She stated that the property is a local
landmark. It is in a local landmark district and it is also in
the East Hill Historic District and on the National Register of
Historic Places. Ms. Lichtenstein stated that the reasons for
the denial are substantial and she wished to run through them.
She said that the application was denied because the applicant
did not meet the criteria by which demolition can be approved
under the guidelines and regulations of the ILPC. When the
applicant was questioned as to why demolition of a historic
�)1 property was requested, no reason was given. It seemed to the
ILPC that this was something that had no basis in the better
interest of the historic district and the neighborhood.
Ms. Lichtenstein explained that the Landmarks Preservation
IAA Commission recommended a negative decision on this because
demolition will result in the irreversible loss of a contributing
element of the East Hill Historic District. An environmental
impact statement would reveal the negative impact on this
demolition, on the visual character of the street, on the
historic fabric of the district itself and actually there would
be negative physical results if the building itself is removed.
She said that according to national registers criteria,
structures are either contributing or non - contributing to a
historic district. When the ILPC originally promoted the
district, both at the national register and the local level, they
had determined that the structure met those requirements and they
have found no reason to change that determination. At the public
hearing, representatives from the neighborhood came and spoke
against demolition and it was very obvious that there was a
continued useful life for this building. She stated that she
hopes the Council will uphold the decision of the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission.
Puck Wullenweber, 111 Stewart Avenue, President of the East Hill
School Co -op, also addressed Council on the matter of the
demolition of the structure at 132 Quarry Street, which is known
as the Electric Garage. She stated that this matter has been
tied up in litigation for the last four years and the final
Appeals Court ruled that the land belonged to the Co -op and the
applicant who made the application to destroy the garage would
have a period of up to 60 days to take the garage away at which
point in time it would revert back to the Co -op. She explained
that it was continued to be tied up in appeals and eventually a
permit was applied for to destroy the garage. The ILPC ruled
that the garage did have landmark merit and a compromise was
sought. If the East Hill School Co -op was willing to rent or sell
the garage to this applicant, then he had no desire to destroy
the garage; if on the other hand, they were not willing to do so
and wanted to keep it for themselves, then he wanted to go ahead
and destroy the garage. She wished to point out to Council that
it is a perfectly sound structure; it is a brick building with
parking spaces for 2 cars. The Co -op has use for it. They
could either continue to use it themselves, rent it or sell it.
If it is destroyed they lose 2 parking spaces in Collegetown and
of course, as everyone knows, that is very important to keep.
She urged Common Council to deny the appeal to the Landmarks
Commission that ruled that this gentleman could not destroy the
garage.
4
May 3, 1989
Route 96 /Octopus
The following persons spoke to Council regarding the Route
96 /Octopus issue and voiced their opinions on the various
options:
Douglas Reid
- 105 Sheldon Road
Rueben Weiner
- 1021 Hector Street
Arthur Pivirotto
- 422 Taylor Place
Ted Day
- Interlaken, New York
Dave Cutting
- Forest Home
Wayles Browne
- 206 Eddy Street
Guy Gerard
- 140 College Avenue
Jeanne Fudala
- 615 North Aurora Street
Nancy Brown
- 324 Richard Place
Will Burbank
- 222 Utica Street
Vincent Fuchs
- Willseyville, New York
Krys Cail
- 337 DuBois Road
John Schroeder
- 618 Stewart Avenue
Tom Myers
- 337 DuBois Road
Barabra French
- 702 Cliff Street
Kris Gunsalus
- Ithaca, New York
Rich Berg
- 806 N. Tioga Street
Wendy Wollett
- Ithaca, New York
Rosalie Fontana
- Lansing, New York
Miller Street Re- zoning
Linda Caughey, 125 Pearl Street, addressed Council regarding the
change in zoning in the Miller Street area to R -2b which is on
the agenda this evening. She wished to remind Council that most
everyone in the neighborhood is very much in favor of that re-
zoning because of traffic, congestion and parking. She urged
Council to support the re- zoning of the Miller Street area.
Helen Engst, 211 Cobb Street, also urged Council to vote for R -2b
zoning for the Miller Street area.
Nomination of State Theater for Local Landmark Status
Barbara Ebert, Executive Director of Historic Ithaca, addressed
Council regarding the State Theater nomination for Local Landmark
Status which is on the agenda this evening. She gave background
on the history of the State Theater. She urged Council to
designate that theater for local landmark status.
Farmers' Market Lease /Garbage Baling Station
Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, stated to Council that he thinks it
is unfair to the Market to make them put in the capital
improvement of permanent restrooms on land that belongs to the
city which will be used by the public on other days of the week
that the Farmers' Market is not in operation. At the same time
the Farmers' Market will be building a roof over an open air
structure which will be available for picnickers and anybody that
wants to go there at any time. Mr. Sayvetz said that he had
taken a tour of Southwest Park and he saw a lot of red bricks
there and he thinks the Farmers' Market should be allowed to use
as many of those bricks as they need to make a walking floor in
their proposed structure. He suggested that the Council donate
them to the Farmers' Market.
In regard to the garbage baling station, Mr. Sayvetz does not
think the Council should be quite so quiet about letting the
County put their garbage baling station next to Southwest Park.
Mr. Sayvetz also stated that he is in favor of Plan "A" for Route
96.
2% Monies
Daniel Rhoads, 201 West Lincoln Street, Captain of Ithaca
Volunteer Company #1 and Chairman of the Ithaca Volunteer Fire
Fighters, addressed Council regarding the 2% monies. He stated
that the volunteer fire companies operate on 2% monies, which is
Ot
5 May 3, 1989
money that has been received from the State from fire insurance
that is sold in the State. At the beginning of 1989, the State
passed a new law regarding the 2% monies. The new law meant that
the City would have to re- evaluate how the money was distributed.
Mr. Rhoads said that they have tried since October 1988 to get a
reading on how that money should be distributed and they have not
been able to do so. Because of this and because of the fact that
the volunteer fire companies are reaching a critical state as far
as their financial situation is concerned, there are really just
(600", two choices to make. They have already made one choice; Council
will be receiving from the Board of Fire Commissioners a request
for $3,000 per company to administer the volunteer fire
companies. The other decision that could be made would be to do
nothing and if that happens, the companies in the very short
future will literally go broke. Without the volunteer companies,
the City of Ithaca is going to lose a lot of excellent fire
fighters. He asked Council to make a decision and to get the 2%
monies distributed.
Mr. Rhoads stated that if this problem cannot be resolved, they
will have to ask the taxpayers and they don't want to have to do
that. Taxpayers should not have to pay for this; this is
something that the State gives to all volunteer companies in the
State.
RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC:
Use of Bricks
Alderperson Cummings stated that she would like to second Mr.
Sayvetz's suggestion that the City donate the bricks that are
being stored at Southwest Park to the Ithaca Farmers' Market for
the flooring in their proposed structure.
Restrooms at the Ithaca Farmers' Market Site
(N� Alderperson Nichols wished to correct Mr. Sayvetz in regard to
the use of the restrooms at the Farmers' Market. He stated that
if the Farmers' Market builds the restrooms, they will only be
open when the Market is operating.
Federal Tax Dollars for Route 96
Alderperson Nichols stated that in regard to the issue that was
raised regarding federal tax dollars for Route 96, it should not
be put in the same terms as affordable housing. It seems
incredible to him to talk about that when over the past 8 years,
the federal money for housing has been cut by 80% by the Reagan
administration. He stated that the money has gone into nuclear
weapons and nuclear waste dumps and he does not want federal tax
dollars for a nuclear waste dump or for an elevated highway.
Appreciation to Ken Hughes, Channel 7 News Reporter
Alderperson Romanowski stated that Ken Hughes, the Channel 7 News
Reporter is leaving for a new job and he wished to thank him for
all his work and the good job that he has done for the community.
Route 96
Alderperson Booth said that he wished to state strongly that he
doesn't think Council has been at all wishy -washy on the issue of
Route 96. The stakes for the City of Ithaca are much higher than
(400", they are for any of the other groups that have taken a position
and he thinks that Council has an obligation to take a look at
all the things that many people have had to say.
REPORT OF CITY BOARDS COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS
Rental Housing Task Force
Steve Jackson, Chair of the Rental Housing Task Force, reported
that the Task Force is now in the process, having divided into 12
working groups, of hearing reports to the full Task Force from
each of those working groups. To facilitate that, the Rental
Housing Task Force has decided to meet every Monday through June
19th. At the meeting on May 8, they are going to hear from the
working group on the possibility of rent control, rent regulation
M
May 3, 1989
or rental registry as one of the options being considered by the
Rental Housing Task Force to address the issue, among others, of
affordability in rental housing. He wished to invite members of
Council and the public to attend that session.
Board of Public Works
Commissioner Reeves reported on the following items:
Street Light Conversions - The final stages of the negotiations
with NYSEG regarding the City wide conversion of street lights is
almost completed. A map has been drawn up and after some minor
adjustments, the Board hopes to have the information to NYSEG on
or before the deadline date of June 1, 1989.
Street Lights for Sunrise Road and Taylor Place - The Board is
still waiting for figures for adding street lights on Sunrise
Road and Taylor Place.
City Park Land Discussion -_ The City park land discussion is
scheduled for May 17th at the Committee of the Whole meeting.
All Way Stop Signs - The Board has looked at and reviewed three
of the All Way Stop Signs throughout the City. They are West
Clinton and South Geneva Streets; West Court and North Geneva
Streets; and Utica and Lewis Streets. The Board has the
information from the City Traffic Engineer and while the Board
has not voted yet, the general consensus at this point is no
change at West Clinton and South Geneva Streets; no change at
West Court and North Geneva Streets; and to have just Stop signs
on Utica Street and have Lewis Street a thru street. This packet
of information is available at the Superintendent's Office if
anyone wishes to see it.
Hudson Street Reconstruction - The Hudson Street reconstruction
project has been postponed until Spring of 1990. The final
designs and a public information session will take place in the
Fall.
Fire Station Construction and Renovation - The Board of Public
Works approved at its last formal Board meeting, the award of
contracts for the fire station construction and renovation.
Alderperson Schlather asked if the issue of a "curbside swapping
day" to replace the Spring Pick -up has been discussed by the
Board yet. Commissioner Reeves replied that it has not been
addressed by the Board at this time.
Alderperson Booth asked what the response was city wide to the
Department of Public Works picking up branches and yard waste
and running them through a chipper to turn them into something
that could be composted. Commissioner Reeves responded that
there was not a great deal of success in this regard but she
hopes that the next time will be better. She thinks that there
should be more publicity on the issue.
Alderperson Killeen referred to an article in the Ithaca Journal
on May 3 in regard to Cornell's new traffic plan that they are
about to implement in mid -May and are receiving information on up
to that point. He asked Commissioner Reeves if she could give
him a sense of what the Board is doing in terms of implications
of a close off on May 15th. Commissioner Reeves replied that she
understands from Commissioner Daley that it is being taken up in
Planning and he will be coming back to the Board with any
information that he gets from them.
Alderperson Lytel thanked the Board for the postponement of the
Hudson Street project, for the acceptance of the status quo on
the two intersections on South Geneva Street, and for the design
flaws that are finally going to be corrected on The Commons with
the hiring of a consultant for lighting.
7 May 3, 1989
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR:
New Fire Stations Ground Breaking Ceremonies
Mayor Gutenberger reported that the activities for the ground
breaking for the new Fire Stations will take place May 13th at
10:00 a.m. on the South Hill site and at 11:15 a.m. on the West
Hill site.
Small Cities Application
Mayor Gutenberger reported that the City's Small Cities
Application that was filed in a timely manner, has been received
and is considered complete and has been accepted for detailed
review and processing by HUD. Their processing cycle is 75 days
with final notification of funding on or about July 1st.
MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS:
Recycling Task Force
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of the appointments of Tom
Shelley, 433 North Aurora Street, and Sandra Lynn Wold, 812
Ringwood Road, to the Recycling Task Force, with indefinite
terms.
Resolution
By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the appointments of
Tom Shelley and Sandra Lynn Wold to the Recycling Task Force with
indefinite terms.
Carried Unanimously
Personnel Administrator
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of the appointment of
Valerie Walker as Personnel Administrator of the City of Ithaca,
at a salary of $32,295, effective May 8, 1989.
Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the appointment of
Valerie Walker as Personnel Administrator of the City of Ithaca
at a salary of $32,295, effective May 8, 1989.
Carried Unanimously
Ms. Walker took the Oath of Office and was sworn in by City Clerk
Paolangeli.
CITY CLERK'S REPORT
*11.1 Designation of Polling Places for 1989
By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
RESOLVED, That the following be and are hereby designated as
polling places in the City of Ithaca, New York, for the year
1989:
Alternative
Community School,
Titus Towers
Housing
#6 Fire Station
G.I.A.C. Building
Alternative
Community School
G.I.A.C. Building
Reconstruction
Home
South Hill School
Reconstruction
Home
G.I.A.C. Building
i.e, I
FIRST WARD 1st
District
Chestnut Street
2nd
District
800
S. Plain St.
3rd
District
626
W. State St.
4th
District
300
W. Court St.
5th
District
Chestnut Street
t
SECOND WARD 1st
District
300
W. Court St.
2nd
District
318
S. Albany St.
3rd
District
520
Hudson St.
4th
District
318
S. Albany St.
5th
District
300
W. Court St.
Alternative
Community School,
Titus Towers
Housing
#6 Fire Station
G.I.A.C. Building
Alternative
Community School
G.I.A.C. Building
Reconstruction
Home
South Hill School
Reconstruction
Home
G.I.A.C. Building
i.e, I
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Donation of Finkelstein Land on Gun Shop Hill
Alderperson Peterson asked for an update on the donation of land
from the Finkelstein project on Gun Shop Hill.
City Attorney Nash responded that nothing has come across his
desk of anyone donating land in that area to the City.
Alderperson Cummings stated that there was a preliminary
presentation at the Planning and Development Committee but they
have not seen anything more on it. She will remind Mr.
Finkelstein that there is that unfinished business pending and
that we would like to get it back on the agenda.
2% Monies
Alderperson Peterson asked if Atty. Nash has received any
confirmation or signed documents from the Veteran Fire Fighters
about the 2% monies.
City Attorney Nash replied that he has received a communication
from a staff member of the legislative committee in Albany who
has worked on the recent legislative change. Atty. Nash has
submitted all the documentation that he had to Senator Seward's
office who in turn submitted it to this staff member of the
legislative committee. Atty. Nash stated that this staff person
agreed with the way he construed that legislative provision
regarding the new money. On the old money, he has not made any
progress.
Update on the Jason Fane Case
Alderperson Killeen asked for an update on the People vs. Jason
Fane lawsuit.
City Attorney Nash responded that the last he heard the Asst.
City Prosecutor was talking to prospective witnesses. He
understands that no date has been set but it is ready for trial.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
*14.6b State Theater - Local Designation of the State Theater
Negative Declaration
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
WHEREAS, the matter of local designation of the State Theatre,
107 -119 West State Street has been recommended by the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission and is currently under
consideration by this Common Council, and
8
May 3, 1989
THIRD WARD 1st
District
Cornell Campus
Willard Straight
Central Avenue
Hall
2nd
District
Cornell Street
Belle Sherman
Annex
3rd
District
Cornell Street
Belle Sherman
Annex
FOURTH WARD 1st
District
635 Stewart Ave.
Noyes Center
2nd
District
402 E. State St.
Challenge
Industries
3rd
District
309 College Ave.
#9 Fire Station
FIFTH WARD 1st
District
615 Willow Ave.
C o o p e r a t i v e
Extension Building
2nd
District
Corner King &
Fall Creek School
Aurora Streets
3rd
District
N.Central Ave.
Johnson Art Museum
4th
District
Corner King &
Fall Creek School
Aurora Streets
Carried Unanimously
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Donation of Finkelstein Land on Gun Shop Hill
Alderperson Peterson asked for an update on the donation of land
from the Finkelstein project on Gun Shop Hill.
City Attorney Nash responded that nothing has come across his
desk of anyone donating land in that area to the City.
Alderperson Cummings stated that there was a preliminary
presentation at the Planning and Development Committee but they
have not seen anything more on it. She will remind Mr.
Finkelstein that there is that unfinished business pending and
that we would like to get it back on the agenda.
2% Monies
Alderperson Peterson asked if Atty. Nash has received any
confirmation or signed documents from the Veteran Fire Fighters
about the 2% monies.
City Attorney Nash replied that he has received a communication
from a staff member of the legislative committee in Albany who
has worked on the recent legislative change. Atty. Nash has
submitted all the documentation that he had to Senator Seward's
office who in turn submitted it to this staff member of the
legislative committee. Atty. Nash stated that this staff person
agreed with the way he construed that legislative provision
regarding the new money. On the old money, he has not made any
progress.
Update on the Jason Fane Case
Alderperson Killeen asked for an update on the People vs. Jason
Fane lawsuit.
City Attorney Nash responded that the last he heard the Asst.
City Prosecutor was talking to prospective witnesses. He
understands that no date has been set but it is ready for trial.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
*14.6b State Theater - Local Designation of the State Theater
Negative Declaration
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
WHEREAS, the matter of local designation of the State Theatre,
107 -119 West State Street has been recommended by the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission and is currently under
consideration by this Common Council, and
9 May 3, 1989
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 (SEQR),
including the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and is an
"unlisted" action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act
(EQR Section 36.5 (E)), 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, be and hereby does adopt as its own the findings and
conclusions more fully set forth on the Short Environmental
Assessment Form and the Long Environmental Assessment Form dated
0) April 5, 1989, and be it further
(Y)
0.1 RESOLVED, That this common Council as lead agency, be and it
hereby 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 be and she is hereby
directed to file a copy of the same, together with the
attachment, in the City Clerk's Office and forward the same to
any other parties as required by law.
Carried Unanimously
*14.6a. State Theater - Local Designation
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission finds that
the State Theatre, 107 -119 West State Street meets criteria for
local landmark status, set forth in Section 32.3 (4) of the
Municipal Code as follows: "a. an outstanding example of a
structure representative of its era "; "b. one of the few
remaining examples of a past architectural style or combination
of styles "; "c. a structure which has a special character,
special historical and aesthetic interest and value as part of
the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of the
City of Ithaca ", and
WHEREAS, following the advertised public hearing held on April
10, 1989, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission voted
unanimously to recommend local designation to the Common
Council, and
WHEREAS, at the meeting held April 25, 1989, the Planning and
Development Board made the finding that the proposed action does
not conflict with the master plan, existing zoning, projected
public improvements or plans for renewal of the site and area
involved, and
WHEREAS, the State Theatre is a vital element on the 100 block of
West State Street, contributing to the historic and
architectural character of the streetscape and serving to
enliven the downtown environment; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council, in accordance
with the provisions and procedures set forth in the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Ordinance approves local designation of
the State Theatre, effective May 4, 1989.
hh r�
10
May 3, 1989
Alderperson Cummings noted that this is as the ordinance permits,
for exterior designation only. It was also noted that the new
owner is aware of this designation and has not raised any
objections.
Carried Unanimously
*14.7 123 North Quarry Street
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, on January 19, 1989 the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission met to consider an application to demolish the garage
at 132 North Quarry Street, Ithaca, New York, and
WHEREAS, the structure is a contributing element of the East Hill
Historic District, listed on the National Register of Historic
Places in 1986, and locally designated in 1988, and
WHEREAS, the structure meets National Register criteria for
inclusion in the East Hill Historic District and is deemed by the
Commission to be of particular architectural and historic
significance, and
WHEREAS, Section 32.F of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Ordinance prohibits demolition of structures within historic
districts and deemed by the Commission to be of particular
architectural and historic significance unless the Commission
finds:
1. In the case of commercial property, that prohibition of
demolition prevents the owner of the property from earning a
reasonable return; or
2. In the case of non - commercial property, all of the
following:
(i) that preservation of the structure will seriously
interfere with the use of the property;
(ii) that the structure is not capable of conversion to
a useful purpose without excessive costs; and
(iii) that the cost of maintaining the structure
without use would entail serious expenditure all
in the light of the purposes and resources of the
owner, and
WHEREAS, the owner has failed to provide documentation to support
any of the above stated provisions; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council finds that the appeal of the ruling
of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission to deny approval
of demolition has no merit, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the appeal is hereby denied.
Alderperson Cummings stated that it is important to note that
what the Council is dealing with in this matter is a
straightforward violation of the Landmarks Ordinance. The
appellant in this case has had an opportunity to present the
above described justifications for demolition. She said that the
City's Landmark Ordinance does not unreasonably withhold
authorization to demolish a structure, even an individual
landmark. However, there are criteria which if they are met, the
person is entitled to demolish, but in this case the appellant,
Mr. Fane, and his attorney, at the hearings, made no effort to
offer any explanation under these criteria.
Discussion followed on the floor.
J
J
11 May 3, 1989
Alderperson Booth referred to a letter from Mr. Fane's attorney,
Charles Currey, Esq., dated March 14, 1989, which was sent to
City Attorney Nash, asking to be advised if they needed to do
anything further in order to perfect the appeal. He asked if
Atty. Currey or Mr. Fane was ever told that they had to appear in
front of the Landmarks Commission and make an affirmative
showing.
Llov Ms. Chatterton, Preservation /Neighborhood Planner, responded that
Atty. Currey and Mr. Fane did appear before the Landmarks
Commission, and then they wrote this letter to the City Attorney.
City Attorney Nash told them that the proper procedure for
dealing with this was to file papers with the City Clerk. The
applicant, Jason Fane, and his lawyer, both have been notified of
all meetings on which this has been an agenda item.
Alderperson Booth asked if they were notified of the Planning
Committee's meeting.
(�6 Alderperson Cummings replied that they were present at the ILPC
t)f meeting. They were notified of the Planning and Development
Committee meeting but they were not present at that meeting.
Alderperson Booth stated that it is his understanding that the
Commission has to find a structure to be of a particular
architectural, historic significance. He asked if the Landmarks
Commission determined that in this case.
Alderperson Cummings responded that it is her understanding that
it is deemed to be of historic and cultural significance by its
inclusion in the East Hill Historic District, in which every
building is mapped and described as falling into one of two
categories; contributing or non - contributing. This is a
contributing building so it is her understanding that that is the
determination of historical and architectural significance.
Preservation /Neighborhood Planner Chatterton remarked that
current standards used by the Landmarks Commission are the
standards used by the National Park Service and the State of New
York in evaluating historic buildings. That is why that
building, in particular, is listed on the National Registry and
the justification for historic significance and architectural
significance has been given by the Landmarks Commission at the
local level.
Alderperson Booth asked if what the ordinance contemplates is
that there has to be a determination that a particular building
is of a particular architectural, historic significance before
this series of provisions of what has to be shown before
demolition may proceed, kicks in.
Alderperson Cummings replied that this building has been found by
the Landmarks Commission to be of particular architectural and /or
historic significance.
Further discussion followed on the floor in regard as to when
that determination was made by the Landmarks Commission.
Alderperson Cummings stated that the process of designation is a
process of determination of particular architectural and historic
significance. The Landmarks Commission made that determination;
that determination is passed to the Council in the form of a
recommendation to nominate to the National Register and it was
again affirmed at the Council level when we created, most
recently, the local East Hill District.
Alderperson Schlather stated that his question is if, when the
district was created, the Commission determined that the
structures therein were of architectural or historical
significance. Was there in fact a determination, with respect to
r�r!'i
this garage that it was
significance.
12
of architectural
May 3, 1989
or historical
Alderperson Cummings responded yes, that there is a map which has
every building in a district color coded, according to the
category it falls into, including garages.
Alderperson Schlather asked if, when the request was made for
demolition, was there a determination by the Landmarks
Preservation Commission that in fact this building was deemed by
the Commission to be of a particular architectural or historical
significance.
Ms. Chatterton replied that it has never been deemed to be of the
type of architectural or historical significance as an individual
landmark but operating under the criteria of buildings which
contribute to a historic district, it was determined that the
fabric of the East Hill historic district would be diminished by
the loss of this building.
Alderperson Schlather asked if the claimant challenged the
historical or architectural significance of the building. Ms.
Chatterton replied that they did not challenge it during the
meeting. Alderperson Schlather then asked if there had been any
documents submitted which challenged the architectural or
historical significance of that building. Ms. Chatterton replied
nothing has been submitted to the Landmarks Commission.
Alderperson Schlather again referred to Atty. Currey's letter of
March 14, 1989 and asked City Attorney Nash if he responded to
that letter. City Atty. Nash stated that he informed Atty.
Currey to mail the determination, anything that he had submitted,
and his argument as to why he thought it was not proper and it
would be put on the agenda. All that was sent to the City
Attorney is what was in the packet that was presented to Council
last month.
Alderperson Schlather asked how Atty. Currey and Mr. Fane were
notified of the meetings. Ms. Chatterton responded that they
were sent copies of the agenda. Alderperson Cummings stated that
the standard notification for all people who appear on the agenda
for a Planning and Development Committee meeting is to send these
people an agenda and she believes this is adequate notification.
Further discussion followed on the floor on the method for
notification of meetings for which people are expected to appear.
Alderperson Cummings stated that the pattern of response to the
ordinance is consistent. The method of appeal for demolition to
the Landmarks Commission is a clearly spelled out set of steps.
That was not taken advantage of, and was ignored in this case.
After further discussion on the method of notification, Mayor
Gutenberger stated, for the record, that not only did Atty.
Currey and Mr. Fane receive an agenda for those meetings, they
received a notification.
Alderperson Schlather stated that he is still concerned that the
Council should fault these individuals for not showing up at the
Planning and Development meeting because first of all, they were
not told they should show up at that meeting, and secondly,
because they had already set forth their arguments in the letter
of March 14, 1989.
Motion to Refer Back to Committee
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
RESOLVED, That this matter be referred back to the Planning and
Development Committee for argument on the appeal.
Discussion followed on the referral motion.
13
May 3, 1989
Alderperson Hoffman asked City Attorney Nash if anything has
happened during this discussion that could cast any shadow on a
denial.
City Attorney Nash responded that it seems to him that Atty.
Currey asked whether it was necessary to be present. Obviously
it is not necessary for him to be present for the matter to be
considered. His opinion would be, even despite the fact that we
have tried to raise lots of procedural objections, that we
haven't significantly hurt a Council decision tonight.
Alderperson Cummings spoke against referral back to the
committee because she thinks they have followed the appropriate
procedures.
A vote on the motion to refer back to committee resulted as
follows:
Ayes (3) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth
Nays (7) - Nichols, Cummings, Lytel, Peterson, Hoffman,
t; ? Killeen, Johnson
Motion Fails
Main Motion
A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Lytel, Cummings, Booth, Nichols, Peterson,
Hoffman, Johnson, Killeen
Nays (2) - Schlather, Romanowski
Carried
*14.9 Alienation Home Rule Message (Alienation of Southwest Park
and Inlet Island Park Request for Legislation Authorizing Change
(Woe in Substitute Land)
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, an amendment to Chapter 757 of the Laws of 1985 has been
requested of the New York State Legislature, and
WHEREAS, said amendment would permit the removal of lands known
as the Festival Parcel from the list of lands offered as
substitute for certain city -owned park lands to be converted from
recreational use, and
WHEREAS, said amendment would allow replacement of the Festival
Parcel with other lands along Six Mile Creek, and
WHEREAS, Common Council has reviewed and concurs with State
Assembly bill A6903 and State Senate bill 54320 which authorize
the aforementioned exchange; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council does request passage of said bill
by the New York State Legislature, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to forward
the necessary Home Rule Message to the State.
Alderperson Cummings reported that this is the same resolution
which a year ago was sent to the State to allow the City to
substitute Six Mile Creek lands for Festival Lands in the
alienation process. However, the Town of Ithaca has expressed an
interest in commenting on this process in as much as the land
being considered for substitution are taxable lands within their
Township.
Motion to Refer to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the matter of the Alienation Home Rule Message be
referred to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee.
14 May 3, 1989
Alderperson Booth suggested that the segment from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund Grants Manual that was handed out by
Doria Higgins, raises substantial questions about the use of this
land for substitution purposes and he hopes the Planning and
Development Committee will look at those in the future.
A vote on the Motion to Refer resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
*14.12a Miller Street Rezoning - Negative Declaration
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the matter of the rezoning of land on the north side of
Miller Street from R -3b to R -2b is currently under consideration
by this Common Council, and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted,
including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment
Form (SEAF), and
WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an "unlisted"
action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR),
including the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and may be a Type
I action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act (EQR
Section 36.5 (B) (5)), 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, be and it hereby does adopt as its own the findings and
conclusions as set forth on the attached Short Environmental
Assessment Form dated March 21, 1989, and be it further
That this Common Council, as lead agency be and it
RESOLVED,
hereby does determine that the proposed action 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 be and she is hereby
directed to file a copy of the same, together with the
attachment, in the City Clerk's office and forward the same to
any other parties as required by law.
Carried Unanimously
*14.12b Miller Street Rezoning
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
ORDINANCE NO. 89 -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP 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 THE ZONING MAP.
1. That the "Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca,
New York ", as last amended, is hereby amended and changed so that
the following described area presently located in the R -3b,
Residence District, is reclassified and changed to the R -2b,
Residence District:
All that tract or parcel of land described as follows:
14
LE.!
14
-15- May 3, 1989
Beginning at a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel
number 66 -3 -25, thence northerly a distance of approximately one
hundred feet along the eastern boundary of the right -of -way of
Cornell Street to a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel
number 66 -3 -25, thence easterly a distance of approximately seven
hundred ninety eight feet along a line that is parallel to and
one hundred feet north of the northern boundary of the right -of-
way of Miller Street between Cornell Street and Pearl Street to
the intersection of the eastern boundary of the corporate limits
of the City of Ithaca, thence southerly a distance of
approximately one hundred thirteen feet along the eastern
boundary of the corporate limits of the City of Ithaca to a point
on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 66 -3 -10.1, thence
westerly a distance of approximately 174.8 feet along the
northern boundary of the right -of -way of Miller Street to a point
that is approximately 174.8 feet west of the southeast corner of
tax parcel number 66 -3 -10.1, thence northerly a distance of
approximately thirteen feet to a point at the intersection of the
northern boundary of the right -of -way of Miller Street, thence
westerly a distance of approximately six hundred twenty four feet
along the northern boundary of the right -of -way of Miller Street
to the point of beginning. Said described area includes all of
tax parcel numbers 66 -3 -16, 66 -3 -18, 66 -3 -20, 66 -3 -22 and 66 -3 -25
and portions of tax parcel number 66 -3 -1, 66 -3 -9, 66 -3 -10.1 and
66 -3 -10.2.
Section 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in
accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in
Section 3.11 (B) of the Ithaca City Charter.
Carried Unanimously
Recess
Council recessed at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened in Regular Session
at 9:50 p.m.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
*14.1a. Route 96 - Investigation of Locally Funded Route
96 /Octopus Alternatives
By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Department of Public Works be hereby requested
to investigate elevated railroad crossings including but not
limited to the following locations Clinton /Brindley Streets,
Esty Street, and the proposed southwest connector, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That a report be made to the Common Council as soon as
possible on the conceptual design and costs of these various
alternatives.
Alderperson Killeen offered the following substitute resolution:
Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
"RAILROAD OVERPASS"
WHEREAS, for far too long the
a barrier to free movement for
west or west to east, and
WHEREAS, this Common Council
currently cleaving the City
spheres, and
West End railroad tracks have been
Ithacans seeking to travel east to
agrees to eliminate this barrier
and its citizens into separate
WHEREAS, it is the expressed intent of this resolution that a
commitment is being made to guarantee unimpeded passage for
pedestrians and motor vehicles over this historic railroad track
barrier; now, therefore, be it
0r-1
16 May 3, 1989
RESOLVED, That the Department of Public Works be hereby requested
to investigate elevated railroad crossings including but not
limited to the following locations: Clinton /Brindley Streets,
Esty Street, and the proposed southwest connector, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That a report be made to the Common Council as soon as
possible on the conceptual design and costs of these various
alternatives.
Alderperson Romanowski asked where the city is going to find the
time to do this, where the city is going to find the money to
have someone study it, and are we going to ask the local
taxpayers to fund whatever is decided to be done on the local
level. He stated that he thinks this is totally unworkable and a
fraud on the public.
Alderperson Schlather stated that he understands the concerns
that have been raised but he thinks that until we begin getting
some solid numbers and some solid plans that it is premature for
Council to write it off. That is especially important in light
of the fact that it is apparent that Option C with Overpass is
simply not in the cards as far as this Common Council is
concerned and recognizing that, it would be equally fraudulent
for the Council to simply ignore the question of the railroad and
the need to overpass it.
Further discussion followed on the floor on the pros and cons of
this substitute resolution.
Amending Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That in the second WHEREAS, the word "agrees" be
changed to "desires ", and in the third WHEREAS, the word
"guarantee" be changed to "attempt to provide ".
Ayes (4) - Hoffman, Peterson, Lytel, Johnson
Nays (6) - Nichols, Booth, Killeen, Cummings, Schlather,
Romanowski
Discussion followed on the floor on the amendment.
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Motion Fails
Amending Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
RESOLVED, That the last RESOLVED read as follows: "That a report
be made to the Common Council as soon as possible on the
conceptual design, costs of these various alternatives, traffic
analysis, and models for predicted use."
Ayes (8) -
Nays ( 2 ) -
Romanowski, Hoffman, Peterson,
Nichols, Booth, Johnson
Schlather, Killeen
Carried
Lytel, Cummings,
Amending Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That a Be it Further RESOLVED be added to read as
follows: "That the Department of Public Works, in consultation
with the Planning Department and the City Attorney, immediately
propose an emergency vehicle corridor which would be located on
the west side of the railroad tracks between the Third Street
crossing and West Buffalo Street, which proposal shall include
conceptual designs, estimated costs and timetable for
implementation."
Discussion followed on the amendment.
D
17 May 3, 1989
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Ayes (9) - Schlather, Romanowski, Lytel, Cummings, Hoffman
Johnson, Peterson, Booth, Killeen
Nay (1) - Nichols
Carried
Substitute Resolution as Amended
WHEREAS, for far too long the West End railroad tracks have been
a barrier to free movement for Ithacans seeking to travel east to
west or west to east, and
WHEREAS, this Common Council agrees to eliminate this barrier
currently cleaving the City and its citizens into separate
spheres, and
WHEREAS, it is the expressed intent of this resolution that a
(Y) commitment is being made to guarantee unimpeded passage for
pedestrians and motor vehicles over this historic railroad track
0'j barrier; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Department of Public Works be hereby requested
to investigate elevated railroad crossings including but not
limited to the following locations: Clinton /Brindley Streets,
Esty Street, and the proposed southwest connector, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That a report be made to the Common Council as soon as
possible on the conceptual design, costs of these various
alternatives, traffic analysis, and models for predicted use,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Department of Public Works, in consultation
with the Planning Department and the City Attorney, immediately
propose an emergency vehicle corridor which would be located on
the west side of the railroad tracks between the Third Street
crossing and West Buffalo Street, which proposal shall include
conceptual designs, estimated costs and time table for
implementation.
A vote on the Substitute Resolution as Amended resulted as
follows:
Ayes (6) - Schlather, Lytel, Nichols, Johnson, Booth,
Killeen
Nays (4) - Romanowski, Peterson, Hoffman, Cummings
Carried
*14 1b(1) Route 96 - DoT Alternatives - Octopus and Route 96
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca has carefully
considered various proposals for the redevelopment of the so-
called Octopus and Route 13'';0�aAd has carefully considered the
very large array of comments by members of the public, both from
within and from outside the city, concerning the traffic and
access problems associated with the Octopus and that portion of
(400, Route 96 and concerning the various proposals for redeveloping
those areas, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has reviewed the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement prepared by the NYS Department of
Transportation regarding several proposals for redeveloping the
Octopus and Route 96, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has not made the findings regarding
environmental impact which it must eventually make pursuant to
the State Environmental Quality Review. Act (Article 8, NYS
Environmental Conservation Law) and the City Environmental
Quality Review ordinance respecting the redevelopment of the
Octopus and Route 96, and Common Council may not make those
1C�
May 3, 1989
findings until the NYS Department of Transportation finishes the
final Environmental Impact Statement regarding this redevelopment
project, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council concludes that all of the "build"
alternatives being considered by the NYS Department of
Transportation with respect to the Octopus and Route 96 (i.e.,
the A, B, and C alternatives with their various permutations)
would, if developed, provide significant advantages over the
current situation and at the same time cause substantial negative
impacts, which advantages and negative impacts are discussed in
the above - mentioned Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has carefully considered the impacts
that redevelopment of the Octopus and Route 96 along the lines
proposed by the NYS Department of Transportation will have on the
public health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of
Ithaca and Tompkins county and of other persons who live beyond
the boundaries of the county, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council is well aware of the significant
divisions of opinion that exist in and outside the City of
Ithaca with respect to the redevelopment of the Octopus and
Route 96, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council recognizes that in order to create
the possibility of a broad public consensus in the greater Ithaca
community regarding the development of the Octopus and Route 96,
it is necessary and desirable to create a solution for this
redevelopment project that encompasses elements from the various
plans proposed by the NYS Department of Transportation and new
elements not included in those plans, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council recognizes that at this time it may
appropriately provide an advisory statement of its position
regarding the redevelopment of the Octopus and Route 96 to the
NYS Department of Transportation, which advisory statement does
not and cannot constitute a final or binding Council decision on
this matter; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council has concerns about all options
now being reviewed by NYS Department of Transportation which
concerns are more fully set forth in the Common Council
resolution of April 5, 1989 and be it further
RESOLVED, That if DoT selects either option "A" or option "B ",
the following further actions be taken by the appropriate
jurisdictions:
1. that the terms and conditions specified in Common
Council's resolution of April 5, 1989 are fulfilled;
2. that prior to January 1, 1990 or the date on which the
NYS Department of Transportation actually begins a
project for redeveloping the Octopus and Route 96,
whichever date is later, (a) plans for the construction
of a two -way railroad overpass that provides permanent,
constant access over the railroad in Ithaca's West End
and ties in to the rest of this redevelopment project
are developed and accepted by the appropriate
governmental bodies (such overpass to permit east -west
and west -east traffic; and to be located in the Esty
Street area, the Brindley Street area, or in some other
suitable place that lies in similar proximity to the
existing Octopus); and (b) binding commitments are made
by the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca, and Tompkins
County to pay for the construction of that overpass,
I F_�
I-J
.�5 11
19 May 3, 1989
3. If Option "A" is adopted, that an access road from
Cliff Street to Cass Park is designed and built, such
road to be developed within the time period in which
the NYS Department of Transportation completes its work
on the redevelopment of the Octopus and Route 96, and
4 a. If Option "B" is adopted, that the NYS Department of
Transportation incorporates into the new three -lane
highway on West Hill measures that to the greatest
(600,1 degree possible maximize visual screening of that
highway from vantage points north, east, and south of
the highway and that to the greatest degree possible
minimize traffic noise emanating from that highway, and
b. If Option "B" is adopted, that prior to January 1, 1990
or the date on which the NYS Department of
Transportation actually begins a project for
redeveloping the Octopus and Route 96, whichever date
co is later, the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca, and
0 affected residents of the Town of Ithaca complete the
�. necessary actions and decisions pursuant to the laws of
--, the State of New York through which the City of Ithaca
annexes the following portion of the Town of Ithaca:
(a) that area lying generally east of existing Route 96
between the City of Ithaca line and the Town of Ulysses
line, and (b) existing Route 96 and that area lying
within one mile of the westerly boundary of existing
Route 96 and north of a line extending due west from
the intersection of the west city line and Williams
Brook.
Mayor Gutenberger asked for clarification in regards to the final
Resolved paragraph and the conditions following that resolved.
(,4VMWe_ He referred to the language of "if DoT accepts either option 'A'
or option 'B', the following conditions be met." He asked what
happens if the State selects option 'A' but doesn't meet all of
the criteria, is option 'A' then rejected or and likewise with
option 'B'.
Alderperson Cummings responded that her understanding is that
this resolution is not an ultimatum to the State but rather an
effort to provide suggestion and direction of what sort of things
would make either of these alternatives acceptable.
Mayor Gutenberger stated that the way the resolution is written
it reads that if the State doesn't meet all the conditions for
either 'A' or 'B', the Council is going to reject them.
Alderperson Schlather responded that these conditions are set
forth simply as a statement of preference on the part of the
city.
Further discussion followed on the floor in regard to the
resolution and the conditions and alternatives that the State
might find acceptable.
(400e A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (5) - Schlather, Lytel, Booth, Cummings, Killeen
Nays (5) - Romanowski, Hoffman, Peterson, Johnson, Nichols
Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye, breaking the tie.
Carried
*14.1b (21 -
6 - Dot Alternatives -Pro
Position in Support of Plan A With Route 89 Alignment
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation has
released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement that presents the
design options offered for the Route 96 /Octopus improvement
project, and
20
May 3, 1989
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation is now
in the process of selecting the alternative it will recommend to
Common Council, possibly in June 1989, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council wishes to move this matter toward a
resolution as quickly as possible, by making its own preference
clear to the New York State Department of Transportation now, as
other municipalities have already done; now, therefore, be it
Council makes the following RESOLVED, That Common g findings:
1. The City desires an expeditious correction of the
confusion and traffic congestion at the Octopus
intersection. The "no action" alternative provides no
relief to this situation.
2. Alternative A (original design) has little if any
support because it requires the removal of nine homes
on Cliff Street, and because it does not separate Route
89 traffic from the Octopus intersection.
3. Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment requires
the least displacement of residences and commercial
buildings of all the designs offered by New York State
Department of Transportation.
4. Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment would
cause less disruption during construction, could be
completed more quickly, and would be far less costly
than any of the B or C plans.
5. Among the options presented by New York State
Department of Transportation, the only design that
permanently eliminates the Octopus intersection, by
separating Route 79, Cliff Street, and Route 89, is
Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment.
6. The only design that eliminates possible interruption
of northbound Route 96 traffic by trains crossing the
West End is Alternative C With Overpass. However, the
long elevated highway it includes would have a
blighting influence on the neighborhood and waterfront
and would cause significant physical and visual
impacts. It is the expressed intent of the City to
pursue as expeditiously as possible the provision of a
less intrusive overpass of the railroad tracks.
7. Alternatives B and C (Low Level) do not solve the
railroad problem and keep the Octopus intersection as a
permanent feature of Ithaca's traffic pattern. The B
and C designs involve construction of a new highway up
West Hill (and related interchanges) that will cause
permanent environmental damage to Cass Park and West
Hill, as well as having a negative impact on businesses
in the West End. According to the DEIS, Alternatives B
and C will encourage more growth on West Hill than
Alternative A. Because of the danger of inadequate
controls, the potential for an increased rate of growth
is viewed by the City as a detrimental aspect of
Alternative B and C. Meanwhile measures can be taken
to decrease the traffic on Cliff Street by such actions
as the construction of a new road directly from Route
89 to the back of the hospital, the requirement that
through truck traffic take an alternate route into and
out of the City other than Cliff Street, and the
provision of a truck safety check station at the top of
Cliff Street.
and be it further
21
May 3, 1989
RESOLVED, That in making its recommendation for a smaller scale
project, Common Council acknowledges the importance of related,
larger issues, including:
- the depletion of natural resources and energy supplies;
- increasingly serious pollution problems, including the
"greenhouse effect" and major oil spills, due in large
part to increased use of automobiles and the expansion
of a car - oriented transportation system;
the need for greatly improved public transportation;
the urgency and magnitude of repairing and maintaining
existing roads and bridges to protect public safety.
These concerns point to a priority, not for investment in
new highways, but for the development of transportation
systems and land use planning that minimize pollution,
energy use, and environmental degradation, rather than
encouraging greater automobile use and increased traffic,
and be it further
IA J
,�- RESOLVED, That Common Council makes the following recommendations
to the New York State Department of Transportation:
1. Common Council does not support further development of
the following Route 96 designs: The Null Alternative,
Plan A /Original, Plan B, Plan C (elevated or at- grade).
2. Among the options presented by New York State
Department of Transportation, Common Council favors
Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment, for
further design development.
Alderperson Killeen proposed to Council the following amending
resolutions:
Amending Resolution #1
RESOLVED, That Number 6 under Findings read as follows:
"recognizing that alternative A with optional Route 89 alignment
does insignificantly little to reduce traffic on Cliff Street
(Route 96) and recognizing the probable profound negative impact
the increased traffic volume will have upon this neighborhood,
Cliff Street (Route 96) will be mitigated by the Council's fair -
play establishment of a $6 -8 million compensatory /relocational
building fund for those residents."
Amending Resolution #2
RESOLVED, That the original Number 6 under Findings become Number
7, and the following language be added in the closing sentence so
that it reads as follows: "Other, less intrusive solutions to
the railroad problem are being pursued specifically in Council's
commitment to overpass the tracks." (Ref. 14.1a)
Amending Resolution #3
RESOLVED, That Number 7 under Findings be deleted from the
resolution.
Amending Resolution #4
RESOLVED, That under the Be it Further Resolved, the following be
added as the first item: "- the value of people, neighborhoods
and local determination."
Amending Resolution #5
RESOLVED, That the final Be it Further Resolved, read as follows:
"That Common Council conveys this resolution which endorses
Alternative A with option 89 alignment to the New York State
Department of Transportation."
,514
22
May 3, 1989
Amending Resolution #6
RESOLVED, That items 1 and 2 after the final Be it Further
Resolved be deleted.
Discussion followed on the floor.
Alderperson Romanowski made the following statement for the
record: "Those of you who vote for this resolution are saying
that you understand what you are doing to a neighborhood - that
trees are more important than people - that we should divert
local funds from other purposes to correct shortcomings in Plan A
Alternate - that we dismiss the collective judgments of medical,
public safety and other municipal officials and individuals."
It was suggested by Alderperson Nichols that Alderperson
Killeen's amendments be voted on separately.
A vote on Amending Resolution #1 moved by Alderperson Killeen and
seconded by Alderperson Romanowski resulted as follows:
Ayes (3) - Cummings, Killeen, Booth
Nays (7) - Lytel, Romanowski, Schlather, Johnson, Nichols,
Peterson, Hoffman
_ � Motion Fails
Alderperson Nichols notbd that he had previously inserted that
same language as a friendly amendment in Number 6 and it had been
accepted.
A vote on Amending Resolution #3 moved by Alderperson Killeen and
seconded by Alderperson Schlather resulted as follows:
Ayes (7) - Schlather, Romanowski, Cui
Johnson, Booth, Killeen
Nays (3) - Hoffman, Peterson, Lytel
A vote on Amending Resolution #4 moved by
seconded by Alderperson Cummings resulted
nmings, Nichols,
"Wi
Carried
Alderperson Killeen and
as follows:
Carried Unanimously
In regard to Amending Resolution #5, the following substitute
wording was suggested by Alderperson Nichols: "Be it Further
Resolved, That Common Council expresses its endorsement of
Alternate Plan A with optional Route 89 and Be it Further
Resolved, That this recommendation be conveyed to the New York
State Department of Transportation."
A vote on Amending Resolution #5 with the substitute wording by
Alderperson Nichols and Amending Resolution #6 that eliminated
items 1 and 2 after the final Be it Further Resolved resulted as
follows:
Ayes (9) - Romanowski, Lytel, Cummings, Nichols, Booth,
Hoffman, Johnson, Peterson, Killeen
Nay (1) - Schlather Carried
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That a Further Resolved after the 'Findings' be added
to the resolution to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That in
recognition of the continued high level of traffic on Cliff
Street under Plan A with Route 89 Alignment, as well as on other
main arterials through the City, the City shall establish a
capital fund for mitigation of traffic impacts."
Ayes (1) - Hoffman
Nays (9) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth, Killeen, Johnson,
Peterson, Lytel, Cummings, Nichols
Motion Fails
23
May 3, 1989
Discussion followed on the floor on the amendments and on the
various options and alternatives.
Main Motion as Amended
The Main Motion as Amended is as follows:
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation has
released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement that presents the
design options offered for the Route 96 /Octopus improvement
project, and
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation is now
in the process of selecting the alternative it will recommend to
Common Council, possibly in June 1989, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council wishes to move this matter toward a
resolution as quickly as possible, by making its own preference
clear to the New York State Department of Transportation now, as
U -1 other municipalities have already done; now, therefore, be it
0)
RESOLVED, That Common Council makes the following findings:
r
1. The City desires an expeditious correction of the
Y� confusion and traffic congestion at the Octopus
<a intersection. The "no action" alternative provides no
relief to this situation.
2. Alternative A (original design) has little if any
support because it requires the removal of nine homes
on Cliff Street, and because it does not separate
Route 89 traffic from the Octopus intersection.
3. Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment
requires the least displacement of residences and
commercial buildings of all the designs offered by New
York State Department of Transportation.
4. Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment would
cause less disruption during construction, could be
completed more quickly, and would be far less costly
than any of the B or C Plans.
5. Among the options presented by New York State
Department of Transportation, the only design that
permanently eliminates the Octopus intersection, by
separating Route 79, Cliff Street, and Route 89, is
Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment.
6.
The only design that eliminates possible interruption
of northbound Route 96 traffic by trains crossing the
West End is Alternative C With Overpass. However, the
long elevated highway it includes would have a
blighting influence on the neighborhood and waterfront
and would cause significant physical and visual
impacts. It is the expressed intent of the City to
pursue as expeditiously as possible the provision of
a less intrusive overpass of the railroad tracks,
and be it
further
RESOLVED,
That in making its recommendation for a smaller scale
project,
Common Council acknowledges the importance of related,
larger issues,
including:
-
the value of people, neighborhoods and local
determination;
-
the depletion of natural resources and energy supplies;
24
May 3, 1989
increasingly serious pollution problems, including the
"greenhouse effect" and major oil spills, due in large
part to increased use of automobiles and the expansion
of car - oriented transportation system;
the need for greatly improved public transportation;
the urgency and magnitude of repairing and maintaining
existing roads and bridges to protect public safety.
These concerns point to a priority, not for investment in IJ
new highways, but for the development of transportation
systems and land use planning that minimize pollution,
energy use, and environmental degradation, rather than
encouraging greater automobile use and increased traffic,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council expresses its endorsement of
Alternate Plan A with optional Route 89, and be it further
RESOLVED, That this recommendation be conveyed to the New York
State Department of Transportation.
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) - Lytel, Booth, Johnson, Nichols, Peterson,
Hoffman
Nays (4) - Romanowski, Schlather, Killeen, Cummings
Carried
Mayor Gutenberger reminded Council that the resolutions and votes
taken tonight were advisory only.
Motion to Extend Meeting Until 12:30 a.m._
By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That this Common Council extends its meeting time until
12:30 a.m.
Ayes (9) - Schlather, Romanowski, Hoffman, Lytel, Killeen,
Cummings, Nichols, Booth, Johnson
Nay (1) - Peterson
Carried
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE:
*18.2 City Hall Annex Property Sale
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has entered into a certain Purchase
Offer with Charles Schlough dated December 8, 1988 for the sale
of property known as the City Hall Annex, and
WHEREAS, the Purchase Offer required, in part, that the Buyer
obtain a mortgage commitment by April 8, 1989 which requirement
could be extended under certain conditions, required a closing
pursuant to the Purchase Offer not later than June 8, 1989, and
provided that the Buyer's interest in said Purchase Offer might
not be assigned without express City approval; and
WHEREAS, the City has by resolution of Common Council at its
April, 1989 meeting extended for a period of one month the period
of time within which a mortgage commitment could be obtained
pursuant to the Purchase Offer, and
WHEREAS, Buyer has made application for the various approvals
required pursuant to said Purchase Offer, and
r�
25 May 3, 1989
WHEREAS, it has become apparent that the Buyer cannot obtain a
mortgage commitment or financing for the project as planned
because of the provision of Paragraph XII -8 of the Purchase Offer
which restricts rights in the offer to the Buyer personally, and
WHEREAS, it is not feasible to close title pursuant to the
Purchase Offer by June 8, 1989, and
WHEREAS, the parties to said Purchase Offer desire said project
(600.1 to go forward as planned and to consummate the Purchase Offer,
and
WHEREAS, the Buyer is willing to compensate the City for the
financial loss which will or may accrue to the City by reason of
Buyer's inability to close on the Purchase Offer by June 8, 1989;
now, therefore, be it
0 ) RESOLVED:
The City shall and it hereby does extend the time
pursuant to the Purchase Offer for the Buyer to obtain a mortgage
commitment pursuant to Paragraph III thereof, to June 15, 1989;
2. The City Clerk shall give such public notice by
.►
publication or otherwise as may be required for consideration of
a resolution to amend said Purchase Offer, and shall place on the
agenda for the June, 1989 meeting of the Common Council a
resolution to amend the Purchase Offer in the following respects:
(a) Paragraph III of the Purchase Offer is deleted in
its entirety;
(b) Paragraph II is deleted in its entirety and there
is substituted therefor the following:
"At closing Seller shall deliver to Buyer a Warranty
Deed for the consideration stated hereinabove, sufficient to
convey good marketable title in fee simple, free and clear of all
liens and encumbrances except as stated herein. The closing
shall take place in Ithaca, New York, on or before December 31,
1989.
"As and for liquidated damages for Buyer's failure to
close pursuant to the Purchase Offer on or by June 8, 1989, Buyer
shall pay to Seller at closing, or December 31, 1989 whichever
occurs first, a sum equal to Seventy and No /100 Dollars ($70.00)
multiplied by the number of days following June 8, 1989 that this
payment is made. In addition, Buyer shall forfeit the $5,000.00
deposit paid pursuant to Paragraph II -A in the event closing does
not occur on or by December 31, 1989.11;
(c) Paragraph XII -8 of said Purchase Offer is deleted
in its entirety.
3. The Purchase Offer as amended by this resolution is in
all other respects ratified and confirmed.
4. The Mayor or other proper City Officer is authorized and
directed to execute such documents as may be required in the
opinion of counsel to the City to give effect to this resolution.
Discussion followed on the floor.
City Attorney Nash remarked that he had received this day a
communication from Peter Walsh, Mr. Schlough's Attorney,
regarding this request and he had handed copies of the letter out
to Council members.
.51 R
26 May 3, 1989
Alderperson Nichols left the meeting at 11:50 p.m.
Ayes (9) - Schlather, Booth, Lytel, Killeen, Peterson,
Hoffman, Cummings, Johnson, Romanowski
Carried (9 -0)
Atty. Walsh addressed Council on the letter that he had written
to the Council regarding Mr. Schlough's request for extension of
time.
Discussion followed on the floor on the resolution that was just
passed by Council.
Alderperson Schlather remarked that it was his sense that Council
did not wish to change the resolution that was just passed. He
stated that if Mr. Schlough is not happy with that resolution and
wants to make some further proposals to modify the contract
perhaps the Intergovernmental Relations Committee would review
it.
*18.3 City Hall Annex Property Sale
This Item was withdrawn from the agenda due to the passing of
Item 18.2.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
14.2 A and B - Hydropower - Van Natta Dam RFP - Report and Fall
Creek Recreational River Boundary Designation - Report
These items were withdrawn from the agenda at the request of
Mayor Gutenberger.
14.10 Ithaca Industrial Park - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the Planning and Development
Committee is working to re- evaluate rate structures for the
city's Industrial Park and will be coming back to Council with
recommendations.
*14.11 Community Gardens - Water Policy
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby directs that the water
bill for the Community Gardens be expunged and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works is directed to make
water available immediately to the Community Gardens at no
charge, subject to further rules and regulations to be developed
jointly by the Budget and Administration Committee, the Board of
Public Works, and the Community Garden leadership with report
back to Common Council June 7, 1989.
Carried (9-0)
*14.3 South Hill Recreation Way
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has indicated its desire to protect
and preserve the Six Mile Creek watershed and natural area, by
extensively studying its needs, by establishing and maintaining
the Six Mile Creek oversight Committee, by hiring a Gorge Ranger,
by acquiring additional property, and by consideration of further
property acquisition and /or protection, and
WHEREAS, the City desires that any proposed future activities or
development in or near the watershed /Six Mile Creek Natural Area
be thoroughly studied to evaluate whether they can be carried out
in a manner that preserves the beauty, character, and
environmental quality of the area; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council asks the Town of Ithaca to
defer a final decision on implementation of the Recreation Way
plan until the City and Town have completed the necessary reviews
and reached agreement with particular attention to the following
items:
L, I t
27
May 3, 1989
Alderperson Cummings stated that the Planning and Development
Committee thought that the Town of Ithaca was going to be
delaying a month their action on the Recreation Way. She said
that this is an expression, not to be construed in any way to be
a negative expression, but a statement from one political entity
to the other, such as the Town recently made to the City in
regard to the substitute lands in the watershed.
Alderperson Peterson stated that the Six Mile Creek Committee met
on May 1 and discussed this matter with George Frantz, Asst. Town
Planner, and he reported to the committee that the Town Board had
Q1V01 voted that they will do final design approval and that they are
meeting on May 8th to discuss this issue. She remarked that the
Six Mile Creek Committee voted on several things which supports
this Recreation Way?4)i ,: ,
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Six Mile Creek Acquisition Policy Report, Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission Report, GIAC Pool /GIAC Renovations Report
These items were withdrawn from the agenda at the Mayor's
request.
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
Homeless Shelter - Report
Alderperson Peterson reported that the committee received
information from Southside Center that they would be willing to
serve as a temporary shelter again for 1989 -90, with significant
dollars attached for assistance to pay for staff. This matter is
still in the discussion stage, along with the Homeless Shelter
Task Force that Alderperson Lytel is chairing and those meetings
are ongoing.
Affirmative Action Statistics - Report
Alderperson Peterson reported that the Human Services Committee
is pleased is have received from Personnel Administrator Walker
and the Affirmative Action Committee the first batch of
affirmative action statistics which are part and parcel of the
new affirmative action plan that the Council approved a few
months ago.
Weekend Meal Program at Southside- Report and 2% Monies
Alderperson Peterson stated that the Weekend Meal Program at
Southside will come up on the agenda under the Budget and
Administration Committee, and the 2% Monies were reported on
under the City Attorney's Report.
- the width and use of materials for the bed of
the "trail"
- whether the trail will be used by trucks and /or other
motorized vehicles
- whether future use of the right of way for
utilities or a
road is allowed or prohibited
Q,000�1
- establishment of conservation overlay zoning
to protect the
watershed /natural area
- what structures, fences, signage, parking
facilities or
other additional features will accompany the
recreation way,
- that there be an inventory of the important shrubs
and trees
in the area of the trail.
and be it further
(1)
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk is hereby directed
to send a copy
of this resolution immediately to the members of
the Ithaca Town
Board.
Alderperson Cummings stated that the Planning and Development
Committee thought that the Town of Ithaca was going to be
delaying a month their action on the Recreation Way. She said
that this is an expression, not to be construed in any way to be
a negative expression, but a statement from one political entity
to the other, such as the Town recently made to the City in
regard to the substitute lands in the watershed.
Alderperson Peterson stated that the Six Mile Creek Committee met
on May 1 and discussed this matter with George Frantz, Asst. Town
Planner, and he reported to the committee that the Town Board had
Q1V01 voted that they will do final design approval and that they are
meeting on May 8th to discuss this issue. She remarked that the
Six Mile Creek Committee voted on several things which supports
this Recreation Way?4)i ,: ,
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Six Mile Creek Acquisition Policy Report, Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission Report, GIAC Pool /GIAC Renovations Report
These items were withdrawn from the agenda at the Mayor's
request.
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
Homeless Shelter - Report
Alderperson Peterson reported that the committee received
information from Southside Center that they would be willing to
serve as a temporary shelter again for 1989 -90, with significant
dollars attached for assistance to pay for staff. This matter is
still in the discussion stage, along with the Homeless Shelter
Task Force that Alderperson Lytel is chairing and those meetings
are ongoing.
Affirmative Action Statistics - Report
Alderperson Peterson reported that the Human Services Committee
is pleased is have received from Personnel Administrator Walker
and the Affirmative Action Committee the first batch of
affirmative action statistics which are part and parcel of the
new affirmative action plan that the Council approved a few
months ago.
Weekend Meal Program at Southside- Report and 2% Monies
Alderperson Peterson stated that the Weekend Meal Program at
Southside will come up on the agenda under the Budget and
Administration Committee, and the 2% Monies were reported on
under the City Attorney's Report.
t ; ; _' C)
28 May 3, 1989
CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE:
*16.1 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 31 of the City of It
Mnnir_inal Code With Respect to the City's Provision of Infra-
structure to Residential Subdivisions - Lift From Table
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That the Ordinance amending Chapter 31 of the City of
Ithaca Municipal Code with respect to the City's provision of
infrastructure to residential subdivisions be lifted from the
table. Carried (9 -0)
ORDINANCE NO. 89 -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 31 ENTITLED 'SUBDIVISION
REGULATIONS' 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. That Chapter 31 entitled "Subdivision
Regulations" is amended as follows:
1. That Section 31.1, Definitions, is amended by adding a
new Definition 9 to read as follows:
119. "Infrastructure" shall mean improvements to the
land to be subdivided that are necessary to provide the
basis for final development and operation of the subdivision
considered as a whole. Such improvements include, but are
not limited to, streets, sidewalks, gutters and curbs, water
mains, storm and sanitary sewer mains, drainage ways, street
lighting facilities and other public and private utility
structures and facilities, and may include amenity features
such as street trees within street rights -of -way.
Improvements to individual parcels in a subdivision are not
considered infrastructure for the purpose of this Chapter."
2. That Section 31.3, entitled "Requirements for
dedication of streets;" Section 31.4, entitled "Services to
be supplied by city;" and Subdivision G, entitled "City work
at subdivider's expense" of Section 31.21, "General
procedure," are hereby repealed.
3. That a new Section 31.3 to be known and designated as
Section 31.3, entitled "Requirements for dedication of
subdivision streets and provision of subdivision
infrastructure," is hereby added to said Chapter to read as
follows:
"Section 31.3 Requirements for dedication of
subdivision streets and provision of subdivision
infrastructure
A. Any streets and utility infrastructure necessary to the
proper service and function of the property subdivided shall
be provided at the subdivider's expense, before Final
Approval of the subdivision becomes effective. If such
improvements are not complete, provision for completion
shall be made by means of a performance bond, as further
specified under Section 31.27 below. Staged or phased
development of a subdivision may be undertaken in this
manner, with the required infrastructure for each section
covered by performance bond acceptable to the Board.
29
May 3, 1989
B. Any streets or infrastructure provided by the
subdivider shall conform to the following requirements, and
in the event such improvements are to be offered to the City
for dedication, shall so conform before they may be
accepted:
1. Street network and block size.
All regulations of this Chapter pertaining to block
length and width, dead -end streets, grades and lines
shall have been complied with, unless otherwise in
compliance with the City Master Plan or official Map,
if any.
Storm drainage facilities provided in accordance with
this section shall be designed to accommodate surface
runoff from adjoining undeveloped property uphill; and
where storm drainage from the subdivision will
discharge into natural or artificial surface drainage
ways, the subdivider shall insure that such discharge
will not occur at a greater rate than would occur under
QW0.1 the most severe conditions if the subdivision site were
undeveloped.
5. Sanitary sewers.
In accordance with city specifications, sanitary sewers
of adequate capacity to serve the subdivision and
adjacent areas shall have been installed, connecting to
existing city mains. Plans for such sanitary sewers
must have received the approvals of the Board of Public
Works and of the Tompkins County Department of Health
before sewer installation.
2. Trees and brush.
Clearing and grubbing of trees and brush shall be done
for the full width of the right -of -way of each new
street, unless otherwise specified by the Board.
3. Grades and grading.
Grades proposed for the streets, surface drainage ways,
!•�
and all water and sewer mains must be approved by the
[�
City Engineer before any street development is begun.
tz1
Cross - sections through street rights -of -way shall be
such that sidewalks can be constructed in the same
general plane as the street pavement. Any deviation in
the above due to special conditions must have prior
approval from the City Engineer.
In rough grading the right -of -way for a new street, the
subdivider shall be responsible for the proper
disposition of any rock excavated, or of any excess
soil or other material. The subdivider shall also be
responsible for providing any additional fill needed to
meet the approved grades for streets and sidewalks.
4. Storm drainage.
Any swales, ditches or channels within street or
drainage rights -of -way must be approved by the City
Engineer with respect to capacity and construction
design, including connecting with storm sewers; and
their construction shall be coordinated with the
construction of any streets or other vehicular or
pedestrian access way serving the subdivision and
shall have been completed before any subdivision
streets may be accepted by the City.
„Necessary storm sewers of capacity and construction
design approved by the City Engineer shall have been
completed in conjunction with construction of any new
streets.
Storm drainage facilities provided in accordance with
this section shall be designed to accommodate surface
runoff from adjoining undeveloped property uphill; and
where storm drainage from the subdivision will
discharge into natural or artificial surface drainage
ways, the subdivider shall insure that such discharge
will not occur at a greater rate than would occur under
QW0.1 the most severe conditions if the subdivision site were
undeveloped.
5. Sanitary sewers.
In accordance with city specifications, sanitary sewers
of adequate capacity to serve the subdivision and
adjacent areas shall have been installed, connecting to
existing city mains. Plans for such sanitary sewers
must have received the approvals of the Board of Public
Works and of the Tompkins County Department of Health
before sewer installation.
30 May 3, 1989
6. Curbs and gutters.
Curbs and gutters, constructed in accordance with city
specifications, shall be required to serve all or any
portion of any street in the subdivision, unless an
alternate design is approved by the Board and the Board
of Public Works.
7. Sidewalks.
Construction of sidewalks serving all streets in the
subdivision shall be required, unless that requirement
is waived by the Board of Planning and Development and
the Board of Public Works. Any such sidewalks shall
conform to city specifications.
8. Shade trees.
The Board of Planning and Development may require the
planting of shade trees within the space between the
pavement and the edge of the right -of -way of any new
subdivision street or portion thereof. Tree species
shall be selected from the current list of Recommended
Street Trees for Ithaca in use by the Department of
Public Works; tree size, type and placement shall be as
directed or approved by the Board, and shall conform
with the guidelines and specifications of the City's
Shade Tree Ordinance, if any. If appropriate, existing
trees may be utilized.
9. Street monuments.
Street monuments shall be placed at such block corners,
angle points, points of curvature in the streets and
such intermediate points as may be necessary to
furnish a complete, permanent marking of the bounds of
the proposed streets. The street monuments shall be of
such material, size and length as may be fixed by the
City as a standard or as approved by the City Engineer.
10. Evidence of title; maps.
For any subdivision street or other area that is
offered to the City for dedication, the subdivider
shall furnish an abstract of title or other evidence
satisfactory to the City Attorney, and shall also
furnish an acceptable map on recordable mylar or
other material acceptable for record, showing the
boundaries of the property offered and describing them
by dimensions, bearings and other data necessary to
provide a complete, permanent record of the rights -of-
way and street monuments.
11. Water mains.
Water mains of capacity adequate to serve the entire
subdivision, and adjacent areas where appropriate and
required by the Board upon the advice of the City
Engineer, shall be installed in accordance with city
specifications. When a subdivision is opened and
developed in sections, the Board may decide not to
require installation of mains in a section until it is
to be opened.
12. Street grading.
Final grading of the full street width to the approved
grades shall be completed, including provision of any
fill needed, which shall be of a type and quality
acceptable to the City Engineer. The developer shall
also be responsible for removal of any dirt in excess
of that needed, and for its disposition in accordance
with applicable regulations.
19
J
31
13. Gravel roadway.
A compacted gravel roadway
width suitable to carry the
of traffic, as approved by
provided by the subdivider.
May 3, 1989
of a finished depth and
anticipated type and volume
the City Engineer, shall be
14. Street paving.
Paving of the street to city standards, including base
and wearing courses of material approved by the City
Engineer, shall be provided by the subdivider. Such
street shall be designed and built to carry the
anticipated type and volume of traffic, as approved by
the Engineer.
15. Curb cuts and driveway aprons.
Curb cuts and driveway aprons installed by the
subdivider in conjunction with the initial development
of a subdivision shall conform to city standards, shall
be approved by the City Engineer as to location and
width, and shall further conform to the specifications
of Section 30.37 of Chapter 30, Zoning, of the City
Code.
16. Fire hydrants.
Fire hydrants of a type acceptable to the Department of
Public Works and the Ithaca Fire Department shall be
installed at locations specified by the Department of
Public Works in consultation with the Fire Department,
and connected to water mains by piping adequate to
carry the volume of water required to serve the
hydrants.
17. Manholes, control valves, inlets, culverts and utility
structures in streets.
All manholes, control valves, inlets, culverts and
utility structures required for access to, control and
operation of utilities and services installed or
required to be installed by or for the subdivider in
conjunction with initial development of a subdivision,
or any section thereof, shall conform to city standards
or to the standards of the provider of the utility or
service, as applicable, and shall be approved by the
City Engineer. The installation of such structures,
controls, etc, shall be coordinated with the
construction of subdivision streets at all stages, and
shall be completed before the street may be accepted by
the City.
18. Storm drainage connections to streams.
The connection of any storm drain, ditch or swale that
is constructed by the subdivider, emptying into a
stream or watercourse, shall be made in accordance with
city standards, or as approved by the City Engineer,
and with applicable State requirements. Such storm
drainage connection shall be complete before
(400'.1 the beginning of any development of any lot in any
section of the subdivision which would be served by the
drain, ditch, or swale.
19. Underground electric transmission and distribution
facilities and other utilities.
If primary facilities for underground electric service
or other utilities within the subdivision, whether
required by State law, by the Board, or otherwise
provided by the subdivider, are to be installed before
subdivision streets are offered to the
City, the subdivider shall be responsible for assuring
that such installation does not impair or damage any
L) L-
32 May 3, 1989
other subdivision infrastructure. In the event that
such installation does impair or damage other
infrastructure, the subdivider shall be responsible for
correcting the impairment or repairing any damage, to
meet applicable city standards and the approval of the
City Engineer.
20. Retaining walls, etc.
The design, construction material, and details of any
retaining wall or other special engineering feature
which is to be located in or directly adjoining any
street or pedestrian right -of -way within the
subdivision must be approved by the City Engineer prior
to construction of the feature.
21. Street lighting.
The developer shall provide street lighting as required
by the Board of Public Works."
4. That a new Section 31.4 to be known and designated as
Section 31.4, entitled "Services supplied by City," is
hereby added to said Chapter to read as follows:
"Section 31.4 Services supplied by City
A. Provided that all requirements for subdivision
infrastructure specified in Section 31.3 above,
together with any additional requirements specified by
the Board, have been satisfactorily met by the
subdivider, the provisions of this Section shall apply.
B. The City may, at its discretion and subject to
approval by the Board of Public Works, provide the
following additional improvements if not required of
the subdivider:
1. Street trees.
Planting of suitable street trees, as determined
by the City, shall follow development of the
individual lots.
2. Sidewalks, curbs and gutters.
Sidewalks, curbs and gutters may be obtained from
the City by a petition of the owners of the
abutting lots, and by specific authority of the
Board of Public Works. A special assessment for
the construction of sidewalks, curbs, and gutters
shall be levied against the abutting properties in
accord with Sections 5.28 and 5.47 of the City
Charter.
3. Street lights.
Adequate street lighting may be provided when it
is evident that building construction in the
subdivision warrants street lighting."
5. That a new Subdivision G to be known and designated as
Subdivision G of Section 31.21 entitled "General Procedure"
is hereby added to said Chapter to read as follows:
"G. City work at subdivider's expense.
If the subdivider desires the City to do any Hof the
work required under Section 31.3, above, at his., expense,
approval for city performance of such work must b6 obtained
through the Superintendent of Public Works, at which time
the subdivider shall arrange for payment for such work to be
done by the city."
J
33
May 3, 1989
SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately
and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as
provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City Charter.
Carried (9 -0)
*16.4 Citv /County Cooperation on Large Project Review
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
Qwo,� WHEREAS, Sections 239 -1, -m, and -n of the General Municipal Law
provide for review and comment by the County Commissioner of
Planning of certain zoning and subdivision actions of
municipalities in Tompkins County as an aid in coordinating such
zoning and subdivision actions among municipalities by bringing
pertinent inter - community and county -wide consideration to the
attention of municipal agencies, and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Sections 239 -1, -m, and -n are by law
applicable to zoning and subdivision actions only if they are
within 500 feet of a State or County facility or the boundary of
another municipality, and
WHEREAS, the above restrictions limit the usefulness of County-
wide review and comment, particularly as to the implications of
traffic increases resulting from local actions; now, therefore,
be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca does hereby agree to submit to
the County Commissioner of Planning for advisory review and
comment those zoning and subdivision actions which exceed
certain size or have potential community impacts, especially in
the area of traffic generation, as more fully described below,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the actions covered by such advisory County review
and comment shall be:
1. major residential developments: subdivisions resulting in
five or more lots, and multi - family projects of equivalent
size;
2. major discretionary zoning actions: special permits, major
site -plan reviews, and variances involving five or more
dwelling units, or involving commercial or other
nonresidential developments which may generate twenty or
more vehicle trips per day, and
3. zoning map and text amendments,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City will submit to the County Commissioner
of Planning a copy of the Building Commissioner's weekly listing
of building permit applications, and be it further
RESOLVED, That this resolution does not alter in any respects
the rights and obligations of the City or any other entity or
person arising pursuant to the General Municipal Law, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That this resolution is hereby referred to the
Director of Planning and Development, the Building Commissioner,
and the City Clerk for investigation of the means by which the
above reports can be made in a timely manner allowing County
comment without delays in the processing of applications.
Carried (9 -0)
34 May 3, 1989
*16.5 Amendment to Chapter 106 of the Municipal Code of the City
of Ithaca Respecting Membership of the Conservation Advisory
Council - Local Law Being Laid on Table_
Alderperson Booth laid the following Local Law on the table:
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1989
CITY OF ITHACA
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF
THE CITY OF ITHACA WITH RESPECT TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE
CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ITHACA.
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City
of Ithaca, New York as follows:
SECTION 1. AMENDING SUBDIVISION A OF SECTION 106.3 OF THE
CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE.
Subdivision A of Section 106.3 of the City of Ithaca
Municipal Code Entitled 'Membership' is hereby amended to read as
follows:
S 106.3 Membership
A. The Commission shall consist of fifteen (15) members, of
whom nine (9) shall be voting members appointed by the Mayor,
subject to approval by Common Council, and the remainder shall be
ex- officio members as provided herein. All members shall be
appointed for full terms of two years. Persons residing within
the City of Ithaca and not more than two persons residing outside
the City of Ithaca who are interested in the improvement and
preservation of environmental quality shall be eligible for
appointment as members of the Commission. All members of the
Commission shall have reached their sixteenth birthday on the day
that their appointment takes effect, [and at least] but not more
than one voting member shall not have reached his or her [twenty -
second] eighteenth birthday. Vacancies on the Commission shall
be filled in the same manner as the original appointment, except
that a vacancy occurring other than by the expiration of the term
of office shall be filled only for the remainder of the unexpired
term.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Local Law shall take effect immediately after filing in
the Office of the Secretary of State.
*16.6 Amendment to the Operations Manual of the Ithaca Commons
Advisory Board Respecting Authority of the Commons Advisory Board
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Commons serves to promote the general welfare
of the people of Ithaca and the greater Ithaca community, and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Commons Advisory Board successfully oversees
the management and use of the Ithaca Commons; now, therefore, be
it
RESOLVED,
Section 1. The Commons Advisory Board's Operations Manual
is hereby amended to add a new Section VIII as follows:
"Section VIII. Limited Waivers and Exceptions
The Commons Advisory Board is authorized to grant limited
waivers and exceptions to the provisions of the Operations
Manual, as appropriate and for temporary periods not to
r 1
35
May 3, 1989
exceed one week in duration, such waivers and exceptions to
be subject to any appropriate review by the Department of
Public Works, the Fire Department,. or the Police
Department."
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately
upon the City's completion of any applicable requirements
for public notice.
Carried ( 9 -0)
*16.7 Amendment to Section 60.49 of the Municipal Code
Pertaining to Delegation of Authority to Hire Non - uniformed
Personnel for Enforcement of Parking Regulations - Local Law
Being Laid on Table
Alderperson Booth laid the following Local Law on the table:
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1989
CITY OF ITHACA
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 60 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE
CITY OF ITHACA TO ENABLE DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES OF THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT TO ENFORCE PARKING REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF
ITHACA AND THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca,
New York as follows:
SECTION 1. AMENDING SECTION 60.49 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF
THE CITY OF ITHACA.
Section 60.49 entitled "Enforcement of Parking Regulations"
of Chapter 60 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca
entitled "Traffic and Vehicles" is amended to read as follows:
Section 60.49 Enforcement of Parking Regulations
Employees of the [Department of Public Works] Police
Department of the City of Ithaca who are not Police Officers and
who are duly designated by the [Board of Public Works] Chief of
Police as Parking Regulations Enforcement Officers shall be
authorized to issue appearance tickets for violation of any
provisions of Article IV of Chapter 60 of the Municipal Code of
the City of Ithaca and for violation of any provisions of Article
32 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Local Law shall take effect immediately after filing in
the office of the Secretary of State.
Amendment to Municipal Code Pertaining to Exactions of Money for
Park Purposes- Report and Shade Tree Ordinance Report
Alderperson Booth withdrew these two reports from the agenda.
BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
*17.1 1988 Finance Department Annual Report
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
RESOLVED, That this Common Council acknowledges the receipt of
the 1988 Finance Department Annual Report.
Carried (9 -0)
36
May 3, 1989
*17.2 D.P.W. Personnel Roster
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
RESOLVED, That the 1989 Authorized Personnel Roster for the
Department of Public Works be amended as follows:
Add - 1 Automotive Body Repairer Position - 40 hours
Delete - 1 Automotive Mechanic Position - 40 hours
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the position of Automotive Body Repairer be added
to the 1989 D.P.W. Unit Compensation Plan at Grade 28 with a
salary range of $6.56 Hr. to $7.66 Hr.
Carried (9-o)
*17.3 Audit
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract
#8/1989, in the total amount of $39,315,00, be approved for
payment. Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.4 Youth Bureau Equipment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the 1989 Authorized Equipment List for the Youth
Bureau be amended to include the purchase of the following items:
66 pair of Ice Skates $4,605
1 Hot Chocolate Machine 465
2 Bicycles 350
$5,420
and be it further
RESOLVED, That $465 be transferred from Youth Bureau Account
A7310 -120, Hourly P/T and Seasonal Salaries and $4,955 from
Account A1990, Unrestricted Contingency to Youth Bureau Account
A7310 -225, Other Equipment.
Carried (9 -0)
*17.5 Deputy Controller Moving Expenses
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $750 be authorized for
reimbursement of moving expenses for the newly appointed Deputy
City Controller, and be it further
RESOLVED, That an amount not to
the Finance Department, from
Salaries to Account A1315 -455,
exceed $750 be transferred within
Account A1315 -105, Administrative
Travel and Mileage.
Carried (9-0)
*17.6 Commons Lightinq and Electrical System Consultant
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $5,000 be authorized from
Capital Reserve No. 25 - Capital Improvements, for the purpose of
retaining a Consultant to design a complete lighting and
electrical system for the Commons, as requested by the Board of
Public Works, provided that cost estimates for the lighting
system be separated from the cost estimates for the electrical
system to be prepared by the Consultant.
Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.7 Youth Bureau Administrative Assistant
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That Alice Walsh Green be provisionally appointed to
the position of Administrative Assistant, 25 hours, in the Youth
Bureau, at a salary of $10.55 per hour, effective May 8, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
it''
X- ryQ
37 May 3, 1989
*17.8 Landscape Architect /Environmental Planner Appointment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That Peter S. Weed be provisionally appointed to the
position of Landscape Architect /Environmental Planner in the
Planning Department, at a salary of $26,388, that being Step 7 on
the 1989 C.S.E.A. - Administrative Unit Compensation Plan,
effective May 22, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
*17.9 Police Department Equipment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
RESOLVED, That the 1989 Authorized Equipment List for the Police
Department be amended as follows:
Increase Account A3120 -210, Office Equipment $1,234
Decrease Account A3120 -225, Other Equipment $1,234
Carried (9 -0)
*17.10 Police Department Standardization
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
WHEREAS, this Common Council has been requested by the City of
Ithaca Police Department to standardize on badges manufactured by
the Entermann -Rovin Company as the badges to be used by the
Police Officers of the Ithaca Police Department, and to authorize
the City to purchase approved badges from the manufacturer, or a
representative thereof, and
WHEREAS, it is deemed to be in the best interest of the City for
Le reasons of efficiency, uniformity, compatibility and economics to
approve such standardization for the following reasons:
1. The City of Ithaca Police Department presently has some
Entermann -Rovin badges.
2. This action will provide for the standardization of all
badges for the Police Department so that all Police
Officers will have the same type badges which will be
easily recognized by members of the public as the
official badges of the City of Ithaca Police
Department.
3. Present Entermann -Rovin badges are satisfactory to the
uses of the City of Ithaca Police Department;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That pursuant to Section 103, Subdivision 5 of the
General Municipal Law of the State of New York, this Common
Council hereby authorizes the standardization of badges
manufactured by the Entermann -Rovin Company as the badges to be
used and purchased by the City of Ithaca Police Department for
the year 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
*17.11 Recycling Informational Flyer
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
WHEREAS, the Recycling Education Coordinator has requested
permission to enclose an informational flyer with the second
installment of the 1989 City Tax Bill, and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for Common Council to approve all
enclosures; now, therefore, be it
38 May 3, 1989
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves and authorizes the
enclosure of an informational flyer with the second installment
of the 1989 City Tax Bill, as requested by the Recycling
Education Coordinator.
Carried (9 -0)
*17.12 New Fire Stations Authorization
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, Capital Project No. 215, New Fire Stations, was
authorized by Common Council action of February 13, 1988, in an
amount not to exceed $1,800,000, and
WHEREAS, total cost of the project has now been determined to be
$2,300,000; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the request of the
Board of Public Works to increase the authorization of Capital
Project No. 215, New Fire Stations, by $500,000 from $1,800,000
to $2,300,000.
Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.13 Fire Stations Renovations Authorization
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, Capital Project No. 221, Fire Stations Renovations, was
authorized by Common Council action of February 13, 1988, in an
amount not to exceed $900,000, and
WHEREAS, total cost of the project has'not been determined to be
$1,000,000; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED,
Board of
Project
$900,000
That this Common Council approves the request of the
Public Works to increase the authorization of Capital
No 221, Fire Stations Renovations by $100,000 from
to $1,000,000.
Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.14 Southside Community Center Contract
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the City enter into a contract with the Southside
Community Center, in an amount not to exceed $2,400, to provide a
Program Coordinator for continuation of the weekend meals program
at present levels, which service shall be rendered from the end
of the Spring semester through September 1989, and be it further
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $2,400 be transferred from
Account A1990, Unrestricted Contingency to Legislative Account
A1010 -435, Contractual Services.
Carried (9-0)
*17.15 Amend 1989 Approved Budqet
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau Outing Program has submitted a proposal
involving rehabilitation of the historical WPA trail along Six
Mile Creek to the New York State Conservation Corp., and
WHEREAS, the proposal has been reviewed by the Department of
Public Works, Planning Department, the Six Mile Creek Oversight
Committee and the City's Conservation Advisory Council; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the 1989 approved budget be amended, subject to
receipt of a grant from the New York State Conservation Corp., as
follows:
J
39
Increase Revenues
A3820 Youth Programs
Increase Appropriations
A7310 -120, Hourly P/T & Seasonal
A7310 -435, Contractual Services
A7310 -445, Travel and Mileage
A7310 -460, Program Supplies
A7310 -470, Rental of Equipment
May 3, 1989
$16,711
$11,772
700
550
929
2,760
16 711
Carried (9 -0)
*17.16 Property Acquisition
By Alderperson Schlather. Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the City has had a longstanding interest in acquiring
title to privately owned parcels of land within the Six Mile
Creek watershed area, and
WHEREAS, John A. Noble has offered to sell to the City, tax
parcel No. 109 -2 -4 in the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, purchase of this parcel is essential to maintaining this
area in its natural state as this area is part of our Six Mile
Creek Park and Wildflower Preserve; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca shall pay to John A. Noble the
sum of $850 for the purchase of this parcel, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor be and he is hereby authorized to enter
into a contract for the purchase of the premises and to sign all
documents necessary thereto on a form approved by the City
Attorney. Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.17 Appointment of Deputy Fire Chief
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Roman
owski
RESOLVED, That John T. Dorman be appointed to the position of
Deputy Fire Chief at an annual salary of $42,930, effective May
22, 1989. Carried (9 -0)
Appreciation to City Controller_Spano
Alderperson Schlather asked that the record reflect his sincere
thanks to Joe Spano for his competency, loyalty, and dedication
to the City on his retirement after 20 years of service to the
City of Ithaca.
UNFINISHED AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
Alderperson Peterson stated aotfthreviewinCouncil
non
-human arservices
to help with the process g
contracts.
Alderpersons Schlather, Peterson, and Romanowski were appointed
to serve in this capacity.
AD,JOITRNMENT .
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 12:30 a.m.
a11-ist F_ Paolange��i
City Clerk
__.mil __
1 May 3, 1989
COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. May 3, 1989
PRESENT:
Mayor Gutenberger
Alderpersons (10) - Booth, Cummings, Nichols, Johnson, Killeen,
Lytel, Schlather, Romanowski, Hoffman,
Peterson
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Clerk - Paolangeli
City Attorney - Nash
Deputy City Controller - Cafferillo
Director, Planning and Development - Van Cort
Police Lieutenant - David Barnes (attending for Chief McEwen)
Acting Personnel Administrator - Walker
ch Building Commissioner - Datz
�)� Director of Youth Bureau - Cohen
��,) Fire Chief - Olmstead
(j Board of Public Works Commissioner - Reeves
1..1
Preservation /Neighborhood Planner - Chatterton
~I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to
the American flag.
MINUTES:
Approval of Minutes of the April 5, 1989 Common Council Meeting
Alderperson Booth requested that on page 33, under Cable
Industry Deregulations, in regard to the voting, Alderperson
Romanowski's abstention should read "possible conflict of
interest."
Alderperson Booth requested for clarity, that on page 14, under
Amending Resolution (Fall Creek Designation Under the Wild,
Scenic, and Recreational Rivers System Act), the first sentence
of the amending resolution read, "RESOLVED, That the Resolved
clauses read as follows: ....... etc."
Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the minutes of the April 5, 1989 Common Council
meeting be approved as corrected by Alderperson Booth.
Carried Unanimously
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
Budget and Administration Committee
Alderperson Schlather requested the addition of Item 17.17,
appointment of Deputy Fire Chief.
No Council member objected.
Report of Special Committees and council
Alderperson Peterson requested the addition of Item 19.2, a
report on the City /County Youth Bureau meetings that have taken
(4000, place over the last few months.
No Council member objected.
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Citizens to Save Our Parks
Doria Higgins, 2 Hillcrest Drive, representing "Citizens to Save
Our Parks ", addressed Council and stated that the Citizens to
Save Our Parks group is requesting that Council not vote in favor
of the Home Rule Message concerning the alienation of Inlet
Island Park which is on the agenda this evening. She stated that
the group continues to be against the alienation of this park and
they continue to object to the many improprieties involved in the
procedure. Ms. Higgins read the following statement to Council:
r ,
K
May 3, 1989
"As we have told you before, Inlet Island Park had an assessed
value on the City Tax Rolls in 1981 of $350,000. This figure was
based on 1978 to 180 real estate sales in Ithaca and is thus 10
years out of date. We have been told by appraisers that land
values in Ithaca have at least doubled in the last 10 years and
by that gauge, Inlet Island Park should have an assessed value of
at least $700,000. Yet you and the Planning Department continue
to work with the contrived 1985 appraisal figure of $71,000. The
discrepancy between $71,000 and $700,000 is too great for
reasonable people to ignore.
In this Home Rule Message the vagueness of wording of the
boundary descriptions of the 5 substitute parcels is such that
you have no way whatsoever of knowing what is really being
offered as substitute acreage. I am referring to the phrase 'all
or part of which begins the boundary description of each of the
5 substitute parcels. If you vote for this Home Rule Message
with this deliberately vague wording, you are deliberately voting
in blind ignorance of facts you should know and we would consider
this a betrayal of the public trust.
Land outside the City is not considered by us and many others as
acceptable substitute for inner city park land and the National
Park Service agrees with us."
Ms. Higgins referred to the handout that she had presented to the
Council members, entitled 'Land and Water Conservation Fund
Grants Manual' and she read the following:
"Equivalency of location is one of the standards by which they
will ultimately decide whether or not the substitute acreage for
Inlet Island Park is acceptable. Eventually you will have to
meet these standards.
In closing, we hope you will vote against the alienation of Inlet
Island Park but if you continue on the alienation path, we do not
think you can in good conscience vote for a Home Rule Message
until you have done the following:
1. Obtained an up -to -date reasonable appraisal of the fair
market value of the park;
2. Until you have accurate, specific boundary
descriptions of the replacement land so that you know
exactly what it is that you will be voting for; and
3. Until you have made sure that you meet the standards
of the National Park Service by which this alienation
conversion process will eventually be judged and if you
have done these things, you are wasting your time.
Thank you."
United Postal Workers Union
Rob Sullivan, 31 Cemetery Road, Trumansburg, addressed Council
for the Union. He thanked Common Council for last month's
resolution of support that was passed regarding Postal Workers.
He also thanked the Chamber of Commerce for a very timely letter
they sent in support, the Tompkins Cortland Labor Coalition for
their solidarity and technical help, and Congressman Matt McHugh
for allowing the union to have a meeting with him and the
Assistant Post Master General of the United States.
Mr. Sullivan stated that meeting went very well. The Post
Master General was quite impressed with the support of the
community. He made a promise in that meeting not to affect 'next
day' Ithaca mail delivery. The results of the study which is
being done right now will be shared with the Union and with the
public. The concerns of the Ithaca community would be weighed in
any future decision. Mr. Sullivan further stated that there was
a letter that came from the Buffalo office that said they would
be moving as a certainty. They rescinded that letter and they
sent a letter to our regional APWU coordinator to say that it was
3
May 3, 1989
intended to be an advance notice of an AMP study which was
scheduled to begin on February 25th. He again thanked Council
for their support.
Demolition of Historic Property
Suzanne Lichtenstein, Vice -chair of the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission, addressed Council on the issue that
came before the Landmarks Commission concerning the requested
demolition of the property at 132 North Quarry Street, which the
Commission denied. She stated that the property is a local
landmark. It is in a local landmark district and it is also in
the East Hill Historic District and on the National Register of
Historic Places. Ms. Lichtenstein stated that the reasons for
the denial are substantial and she wished to run through them.
She said that the application was denied because the applicant
did not meet the criteria by which demolition can be approved
under the guidelines and regulations of the ILPC. When the
applicant was questioned as to why demolition of a historic
�)1 property was requested, no reason was given. It seemed to the
ILPC that this was something that had no basis in the better
interest of the historic district and the neighborhood.
Ms. Lichtenstein explained that the Landmarks Preservation
IAA Commission recommended a negative decision on this because
demolition will result in the irreversible loss of a contributing
element of the East Hill Historic District. An environmental
impact statement would reveal the negative impact on this
demolition, on the visual character of the street, on the
historic fabric of the district itself and actually there would
be negative physical results if the building itself is removed.
She said that according to national registers criteria,
structures are either contributing or non - contributing to a
historic district. When the ILPC originally promoted the
district, both at the national register and the local level, they
had determined that the structure met those requirements and they
have found no reason to change that determination. At the public
hearing, representatives from the neighborhood came and spoke
against demolition and it was very obvious that there was a
continued useful life for this building. She stated that she
hopes the Council will uphold the decision of the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission.
Puck Wullenweber, 111 Stewart Avenue, President of the East Hill
School Co -op, also addressed Council on the matter of the
demolition of the structure at 132 Quarry Street, which is known
as the Electric Garage. She stated that this matter has been
tied up in litigation for the last four years and the final
Appeals Court ruled that the land belonged to the Co -op and the
applicant who made the application to destroy the garage would
have a period of up to 60 days to take the garage away at which
point in time it would revert back to the Co -op. She explained
that it was continued to be tied up in appeals and eventually a
permit was applied for to destroy the garage. The ILPC ruled
that the garage did have landmark merit and a compromise was
sought. If the East Hill School Co -op was willing to rent or sell
the garage to this applicant, then he had no desire to destroy
the garage; if on the other hand, they were not willing to do so
and wanted to keep it for themselves, then he wanted to go ahead
and destroy the garage. She wished to point out to Council that
it is a perfectly sound structure; it is a brick building with
parking spaces for 2 cars. The Co -op has use for it. They
could either continue to use it themselves, rent it or sell it.
If it is destroyed they lose 2 parking spaces in Collegetown and
of course, as everyone knows, that is very important to keep.
She urged Common Council to deny the appeal to the Landmarks
Commission that ruled that this gentleman could not destroy the
garage.
4
May 3, 1989
Route 96 /Octopus
The following persons spoke to Council regarding the Route
96 /Octopus issue and voiced their opinions on the various
options:
Douglas Reid
- 105 Sheldon Road
Rueben Weiner
- 1021 Hector Street
Arthur Pivirotto
- 422 Taylor Place
Ted Day
- Interlaken, New York
Dave Cutting
- Forest Home
Wayles Browne
- 206 Eddy Street
Guy Gerard
- 140 College Avenue
Jeanne Fudala
- 615 North Aurora Street
Nancy Brown
- 324 Richard Place
Will Burbank
- 222 Utica Street
Vincent Fuchs
- Willseyville, New York
Krys Cail
- 337 DuBois Road
John Schroeder
- 618 Stewart Avenue
Tom Myers
- 337 DuBois Road
Barabra French
- 702 Cliff Street
Kris Gunsalus
- Ithaca, New York
Rich Berg
- 806 N. Tioga Street
Wendy Wollett
- Ithaca, New York
Rosalie Fontana
- Lansing, New York
Miller Street Re- zoning
Linda Caughey, 125 Pearl Street, addressed Council regarding the
change in zoning in the Miller Street area to R -2b which is on
the agenda this evening. She wished to remind Council that most
everyone in the neighborhood is very much in favor of that re-
zoning because of traffic, congestion and parking. She urged
Council to support the re- zoning of the Miller Street area.
Helen Engst, 211 Cobb Street, also urged Council to vote for R -2b
zoning for the Miller Street area.
Nomination of State Theater for Local Landmark Status
Barbara Ebert, Executive Director of Historic Ithaca, addressed
Council regarding the State Theater nomination for Local Landmark
Status which is on the agenda this evening. She gave background
on the history of the State Theater. She urged Council to
designate that theater for local landmark status.
Farmers' Market Lease /Garbage Baling Station
Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, stated to Council that he thinks it
is unfair to the Market to make them put in the capital
improvement of permanent restrooms on land that belongs to the
city which will be used by the public on other days of the week
that the Farmers' Market is not in operation. At the same time
the Farmers' Market will be building a roof over an open air
structure which will be available for picnickers and anybody that
wants to go there at any time. Mr. Sayvetz said that he had
taken a tour of Southwest Park and he saw a lot of red bricks
there and he thinks the Farmers' Market should be allowed to use
as many of those bricks as they need to make a walking floor in
their proposed structure. He suggested that the Council donate
them to the Farmers' Market.
In regard to the garbage baling station, Mr. Sayvetz does not
think the Council should be quite so quiet about letting the
County put their garbage baling station next to Southwest Park.
Mr. Sayvetz also stated that he is in favor of Plan "A" for Route
96.
2% Monies
Daniel Rhoads, 201 West Lincoln Street, Captain of Ithaca
Volunteer Company #1 and Chairman of the Ithaca Volunteer Fire
Fighters, addressed Council regarding the 2% monies. He stated
that the volunteer fire companies operate on 2% monies, which is
Ot
5 May 3, 1989
money that has been received from the State from fire insurance
that is sold in the State. At the beginning of 1989, the State
passed a new law regarding the 2% monies. The new law meant that
the City would have to re- evaluate how the money was distributed.
Mr. Rhoads said that they have tried since October 1988 to get a
reading on how that money should be distributed and they have not
been able to do so. Because of this and because of the fact that
the volunteer fire companies are reaching a critical state as far
as their financial situation is concerned, there are really just
(600", two choices to make. They have already made one choice; Council
will be receiving from the Board of Fire Commissioners a request
for $3,000 per company to administer the volunteer fire
companies. The other decision that could be made would be to do
nothing and if that happens, the companies in the very short
future will literally go broke. Without the volunteer companies,
the City of Ithaca is going to lose a lot of excellent fire
fighters. He asked Council to make a decision and to get the 2%
monies distributed.
Mr. Rhoads stated that if this problem cannot be resolved, they
will have to ask the taxpayers and they don't want to have to do
that. Taxpayers should not have to pay for this; this is
something that the State gives to all volunteer companies in the
State.
RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC:
Use of Bricks
Alderperson Cummings stated that she would like to second Mr.
Sayvetz's suggestion that the City donate the bricks that are
being stored at Southwest Park to the Ithaca Farmers' Market for
the flooring in their proposed structure.
Restrooms at the Ithaca Farmers' Market Site
(N� Alderperson Nichols wished to correct Mr. Sayvetz in regard to
the use of the restrooms at the Farmers' Market. He stated that
if the Farmers' Market builds the restrooms, they will only be
open when the Market is operating.
Federal Tax Dollars for Route 96
Alderperson Nichols stated that in regard to the issue that was
raised regarding federal tax dollars for Route 96, it should not
be put in the same terms as affordable housing. It seems
incredible to him to talk about that when over the past 8 years,
the federal money for housing has been cut by 80% by the Reagan
administration. He stated that the money has gone into nuclear
weapons and nuclear waste dumps and he does not want federal tax
dollars for a nuclear waste dump or for an elevated highway.
Appreciation to Ken Hughes, Channel 7 News Reporter
Alderperson Romanowski stated that Ken Hughes, the Channel 7 News
Reporter is leaving for a new job and he wished to thank him for
all his work and the good job that he has done for the community.
Route 96
Alderperson Booth said that he wished to state strongly that he
doesn't think Council has been at all wishy -washy on the issue of
Route 96. The stakes for the City of Ithaca are much higher than
(400", they are for any of the other groups that have taken a position
and he thinks that Council has an obligation to take a look at
all the things that many people have had to say.
REPORT OF CITY BOARDS COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS
Rental Housing Task Force
Steve Jackson, Chair of the Rental Housing Task Force, reported
that the Task Force is now in the process, having divided into 12
working groups, of hearing reports to the full Task Force from
each of those working groups. To facilitate that, the Rental
Housing Task Force has decided to meet every Monday through June
19th. At the meeting on May 8, they are going to hear from the
working group on the possibility of rent control, rent regulation
M
May 3, 1989
or rental registry as one of the options being considered by the
Rental Housing Task Force to address the issue, among others, of
affordability in rental housing. He wished to invite members of
Council and the public to attend that session.
Board of Public Works
Commissioner Reeves reported on the following items:
Street Light Conversions - The final stages of the negotiations
with NYSEG regarding the City wide conversion of street lights is
almost completed. A map has been drawn up and after some minor
adjustments, the Board hopes to have the information to NYSEG on
or before the deadline date of June 1, 1989.
Street Lights for Sunrise Road and Taylor Place - The Board is
still waiting for figures for adding street lights on Sunrise
Road and Taylor Place.
City Park Land Discussion -_ The City park land discussion is
scheduled for May 17th at the Committee of the Whole meeting.
All Way Stop Signs - The Board has looked at and reviewed three
of the All Way Stop Signs throughout the City. They are West
Clinton and South Geneva Streets; West Court and North Geneva
Streets; and Utica and Lewis Streets. The Board has the
information from the City Traffic Engineer and while the Board
has not voted yet, the general consensus at this point is no
change at West Clinton and South Geneva Streets; no change at
West Court and North Geneva Streets; and to have just Stop signs
on Utica Street and have Lewis Street a thru street. This packet
of information is available at the Superintendent's Office if
anyone wishes to see it.
Hudson Street Reconstruction - The Hudson Street reconstruction
project has been postponed until Spring of 1990. The final
designs and a public information session will take place in the
Fall.
Fire Station Construction and Renovation - The Board of Public
Works approved at its last formal Board meeting, the award of
contracts for the fire station construction and renovation.
Alderperson Schlather asked if the issue of a "curbside swapping
day" to replace the Spring Pick -up has been discussed by the
Board yet. Commissioner Reeves replied that it has not been
addressed by the Board at this time.
Alderperson Booth asked what the response was city wide to the
Department of Public Works picking up branches and yard waste
and running them through a chipper to turn them into something
that could be composted. Commissioner Reeves responded that
there was not a great deal of success in this regard but she
hopes that the next time will be better. She thinks that there
should be more publicity on the issue.
Alderperson Killeen referred to an article in the Ithaca Journal
on May 3 in regard to Cornell's new traffic plan that they are
about to implement in mid -May and are receiving information on up
to that point. He asked Commissioner Reeves if she could give
him a sense of what the Board is doing in terms of implications
of a close off on May 15th. Commissioner Reeves replied that she
understands from Commissioner Daley that it is being taken up in
Planning and he will be coming back to the Board with any
information that he gets from them.
Alderperson Lytel thanked the Board for the postponement of the
Hudson Street project, for the acceptance of the status quo on
the two intersections on South Geneva Street, and for the design
flaws that are finally going to be corrected on The Commons with
the hiring of a consultant for lighting.
7 May 3, 1989
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR:
New Fire Stations Ground Breaking Ceremonies
Mayor Gutenberger reported that the activities for the ground
breaking for the new Fire Stations will take place May 13th at
10:00 a.m. on the South Hill site and at 11:15 a.m. on the West
Hill site.
Small Cities Application
Mayor Gutenberger reported that the City's Small Cities
Application that was filed in a timely manner, has been received
and is considered complete and has been accepted for detailed
review and processing by HUD. Their processing cycle is 75 days
with final notification of funding on or about July 1st.
MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS:
Recycling Task Force
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of the appointments of Tom
Shelley, 433 North Aurora Street, and Sandra Lynn Wold, 812
Ringwood Road, to the Recycling Task Force, with indefinite
terms.
Resolution
By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the appointments of
Tom Shelley and Sandra Lynn Wold to the Recycling Task Force with
indefinite terms.
Carried Unanimously
Personnel Administrator
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of the appointment of
Valerie Walker as Personnel Administrator of the City of Ithaca,
at a salary of $32,295, effective May 8, 1989.
Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the appointment of
Valerie Walker as Personnel Administrator of the City of Ithaca
at a salary of $32,295, effective May 8, 1989.
Carried Unanimously
Ms. Walker took the Oath of Office and was sworn in by City Clerk
Paolangeli.
CITY CLERK'S REPORT
*11.1 Designation of Polling Places for 1989
By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
RESOLVED, That the following be and are hereby designated as
polling places in the City of Ithaca, New York, for the year
1989:
Alternative
Community School,
Titus Towers
Housing
#6 Fire Station
G.I.A.C. Building
Alternative
Community School
G.I.A.C. Building
Reconstruction
Home
South Hill School
Reconstruction
Home
G.I.A.C. Building
i.e, I
FIRST WARD 1st
District
Chestnut Street
2nd
District
800
S. Plain St.
3rd
District
626
W. State St.
4th
District
300
W. Court St.
5th
District
Chestnut Street
t
SECOND WARD 1st
District
300
W. Court St.
2nd
District
318
S. Albany St.
3rd
District
520
Hudson St.
4th
District
318
S. Albany St.
5th
District
300
W. Court St.
Alternative
Community School,
Titus Towers
Housing
#6 Fire Station
G.I.A.C. Building
Alternative
Community School
G.I.A.C. Building
Reconstruction
Home
South Hill School
Reconstruction
Home
G.I.A.C. Building
i.e, I
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Donation of Finkelstein Land on Gun Shop Hill
Alderperson Peterson asked for an update on the donation of land
from the Finkelstein project on Gun Shop Hill.
City Attorney Nash responded that nothing has come across his
desk of anyone donating land in that area to the City.
Alderperson Cummings stated that there was a preliminary
presentation at the Planning and Development Committee but they
have not seen anything more on it. She will remind Mr.
Finkelstein that there is that unfinished business pending and
that we would like to get it back on the agenda.
2% Monies
Alderperson Peterson asked if Atty. Nash has received any
confirmation or signed documents from the Veteran Fire Fighters
about the 2% monies.
City Attorney Nash replied that he has received a communication
from a staff member of the legislative committee in Albany who
has worked on the recent legislative change. Atty. Nash has
submitted all the documentation that he had to Senator Seward's
office who in turn submitted it to this staff member of the
legislative committee. Atty. Nash stated that this staff person
agreed with the way he construed that legislative provision
regarding the new money. On the old money, he has not made any
progress.
Update on the Jason Fane Case
Alderperson Killeen asked for an update on the People vs. Jason
Fane lawsuit.
City Attorney Nash responded that the last he heard the Asst.
City Prosecutor was talking to prospective witnesses. He
understands that no date has been set but it is ready for trial.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
*14.6b State Theater - Local Designation of the State Theater
Negative Declaration
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
WHEREAS, the matter of local designation of the State Theatre,
107 -119 West State Street has been recommended by the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission and is currently under
consideration by this Common Council, and
8
May 3, 1989
THIRD WARD 1st
District
Cornell Campus
Willard Straight
Central Avenue
Hall
2nd
District
Cornell Street
Belle Sherman
Annex
3rd
District
Cornell Street
Belle Sherman
Annex
FOURTH WARD 1st
District
635 Stewart Ave.
Noyes Center
2nd
District
402 E. State St.
Challenge
Industries
3rd
District
309 College Ave.
#9 Fire Station
FIFTH WARD 1st
District
615 Willow Ave.
C o o p e r a t i v e
Extension Building
2nd
District
Corner King &
Fall Creek School
Aurora Streets
3rd
District
N.Central Ave.
Johnson Art Museum
4th
District
Corner King &
Fall Creek School
Aurora Streets
Carried Unanimously
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Donation of Finkelstein Land on Gun Shop Hill
Alderperson Peterson asked for an update on the donation of land
from the Finkelstein project on Gun Shop Hill.
City Attorney Nash responded that nothing has come across his
desk of anyone donating land in that area to the City.
Alderperson Cummings stated that there was a preliminary
presentation at the Planning and Development Committee but they
have not seen anything more on it. She will remind Mr.
Finkelstein that there is that unfinished business pending and
that we would like to get it back on the agenda.
2% Monies
Alderperson Peterson asked if Atty. Nash has received any
confirmation or signed documents from the Veteran Fire Fighters
about the 2% monies.
City Attorney Nash replied that he has received a communication
from a staff member of the legislative committee in Albany who
has worked on the recent legislative change. Atty. Nash has
submitted all the documentation that he had to Senator Seward's
office who in turn submitted it to this staff member of the
legislative committee. Atty. Nash stated that this staff person
agreed with the way he construed that legislative provision
regarding the new money. On the old money, he has not made any
progress.
Update on the Jason Fane Case
Alderperson Killeen asked for an update on the People vs. Jason
Fane lawsuit.
City Attorney Nash responded that the last he heard the Asst.
City Prosecutor was talking to prospective witnesses. He
understands that no date has been set but it is ready for trial.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
*14.6b State Theater - Local Designation of the State Theater
Negative Declaration
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
WHEREAS, the matter of local designation of the State Theatre,
107 -119 West State Street has been recommended by the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission and is currently under
consideration by this Common Council, and
9 May 3, 1989
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 (SEQR),
including the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and is an
"unlisted" action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act
(EQR Section 36.5 (E)), 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, be and hereby does adopt as its own the findings and
conclusions more fully set forth on the Short Environmental
Assessment Form and the Long Environmental Assessment Form dated
0) April 5, 1989, and be it further
(Y)
0.1 RESOLVED, That this common Council as lead agency, be and it
hereby 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 be and she is hereby
directed to file a copy of the same, together with the
attachment, in the City Clerk's Office and forward the same to
any other parties as required by law.
Carried Unanimously
*14.6a. State Theater - Local Designation
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission finds that
the State Theatre, 107 -119 West State Street meets criteria for
local landmark status, set forth in Section 32.3 (4) of the
Municipal Code as follows: "a. an outstanding example of a
structure representative of its era "; "b. one of the few
remaining examples of a past architectural style or combination
of styles "; "c. a structure which has a special character,
special historical and aesthetic interest and value as part of
the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of the
City of Ithaca ", and
WHEREAS, following the advertised public hearing held on April
10, 1989, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission voted
unanimously to recommend local designation to the Common
Council, and
WHEREAS, at the meeting held April 25, 1989, the Planning and
Development Board made the finding that the proposed action does
not conflict with the master plan, existing zoning, projected
public improvements or plans for renewal of the site and area
involved, and
WHEREAS, the State Theatre is a vital element on the 100 block of
West State Street, contributing to the historic and
architectural character of the streetscape and serving to
enliven the downtown environment; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council, in accordance
with the provisions and procedures set forth in the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Ordinance approves local designation of
the State Theatre, effective May 4, 1989.
hh r�
10
May 3, 1989
Alderperson Cummings noted that this is as the ordinance permits,
for exterior designation only. It was also noted that the new
owner is aware of this designation and has not raised any
objections.
Carried Unanimously
*14.7 123 North Quarry Street
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, on January 19, 1989 the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission met to consider an application to demolish the garage
at 132 North Quarry Street, Ithaca, New York, and
WHEREAS, the structure is a contributing element of the East Hill
Historic District, listed on the National Register of Historic
Places in 1986, and locally designated in 1988, and
WHEREAS, the structure meets National Register criteria for
inclusion in the East Hill Historic District and is deemed by the
Commission to be of particular architectural and historic
significance, and
WHEREAS, Section 32.F of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Ordinance prohibits demolition of structures within historic
districts and deemed by the Commission to be of particular
architectural and historic significance unless the Commission
finds:
1. In the case of commercial property, that prohibition of
demolition prevents the owner of the property from earning a
reasonable return; or
2. In the case of non - commercial property, all of the
following:
(i) that preservation of the structure will seriously
interfere with the use of the property;
(ii) that the structure is not capable of conversion to
a useful purpose without excessive costs; and
(iii) that the cost of maintaining the structure
without use would entail serious expenditure all
in the light of the purposes and resources of the
owner, and
WHEREAS, the owner has failed to provide documentation to support
any of the above stated provisions; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council finds that the appeal of the ruling
of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission to deny approval
of demolition has no merit, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the appeal is hereby denied.
Alderperson Cummings stated that it is important to note that
what the Council is dealing with in this matter is a
straightforward violation of the Landmarks Ordinance. The
appellant in this case has had an opportunity to present the
above described justifications for demolition. She said that the
City's Landmark Ordinance does not unreasonably withhold
authorization to demolish a structure, even an individual
landmark. However, there are criteria which if they are met, the
person is entitled to demolish, but in this case the appellant,
Mr. Fane, and his attorney, at the hearings, made no effort to
offer any explanation under these criteria.
Discussion followed on the floor.
J
J
11 May 3, 1989
Alderperson Booth referred to a letter from Mr. Fane's attorney,
Charles Currey, Esq., dated March 14, 1989, which was sent to
City Attorney Nash, asking to be advised if they needed to do
anything further in order to perfect the appeal. He asked if
Atty. Currey or Mr. Fane was ever told that they had to appear in
front of the Landmarks Commission and make an affirmative
showing.
Llov Ms. Chatterton, Preservation /Neighborhood Planner, responded that
Atty. Currey and Mr. Fane did appear before the Landmarks
Commission, and then they wrote this letter to the City Attorney.
City Attorney Nash told them that the proper procedure for
dealing with this was to file papers with the City Clerk. The
applicant, Jason Fane, and his lawyer, both have been notified of
all meetings on which this has been an agenda item.
Alderperson Booth asked if they were notified of the Planning
Committee's meeting.
(�6 Alderperson Cummings replied that they were present at the ILPC
t)f meeting. They were notified of the Planning and Development
Committee meeting but they were not present at that meeting.
Alderperson Booth stated that it is his understanding that the
Commission has to find a structure to be of a particular
architectural, historic significance. He asked if the Landmarks
Commission determined that in this case.
Alderperson Cummings responded that it is her understanding that
it is deemed to be of historic and cultural significance by its
inclusion in the East Hill Historic District, in which every
building is mapped and described as falling into one of two
categories; contributing or non - contributing. This is a
contributing building so it is her understanding that that is the
determination of historical and architectural significance.
Preservation /Neighborhood Planner Chatterton remarked that
current standards used by the Landmarks Commission are the
standards used by the National Park Service and the State of New
York in evaluating historic buildings. That is why that
building, in particular, is listed on the National Registry and
the justification for historic significance and architectural
significance has been given by the Landmarks Commission at the
local level.
Alderperson Booth asked if what the ordinance contemplates is
that there has to be a determination that a particular building
is of a particular architectural, historic significance before
this series of provisions of what has to be shown before
demolition may proceed, kicks in.
Alderperson Cummings replied that this building has been found by
the Landmarks Commission to be of particular architectural and /or
historic significance.
Further discussion followed on the floor in regard as to when
that determination was made by the Landmarks Commission.
Alderperson Cummings stated that the process of designation is a
process of determination of particular architectural and historic
significance. The Landmarks Commission made that determination;
that determination is passed to the Council in the form of a
recommendation to nominate to the National Register and it was
again affirmed at the Council level when we created, most
recently, the local East Hill District.
Alderperson Schlather stated that his question is if, when the
district was created, the Commission determined that the
structures therein were of architectural or historical
significance. Was there in fact a determination, with respect to
r�r!'i
this garage that it was
significance.
12
of architectural
May 3, 1989
or historical
Alderperson Cummings responded yes, that there is a map which has
every building in a district color coded, according to the
category it falls into, including garages.
Alderperson Schlather asked if, when the request was made for
demolition, was there a determination by the Landmarks
Preservation Commission that in fact this building was deemed by
the Commission to be of a particular architectural or historical
significance.
Ms. Chatterton replied that it has never been deemed to be of the
type of architectural or historical significance as an individual
landmark but operating under the criteria of buildings which
contribute to a historic district, it was determined that the
fabric of the East Hill historic district would be diminished by
the loss of this building.
Alderperson Schlather asked if the claimant challenged the
historical or architectural significance of the building. Ms.
Chatterton replied that they did not challenge it during the
meeting. Alderperson Schlather then asked if there had been any
documents submitted which challenged the architectural or
historical significance of that building. Ms. Chatterton replied
nothing has been submitted to the Landmarks Commission.
Alderperson Schlather again referred to Atty. Currey's letter of
March 14, 1989 and asked City Attorney Nash if he responded to
that letter. City Atty. Nash stated that he informed Atty.
Currey to mail the determination, anything that he had submitted,
and his argument as to why he thought it was not proper and it
would be put on the agenda. All that was sent to the City
Attorney is what was in the packet that was presented to Council
last month.
Alderperson Schlather asked how Atty. Currey and Mr. Fane were
notified of the meetings. Ms. Chatterton responded that they
were sent copies of the agenda. Alderperson Cummings stated that
the standard notification for all people who appear on the agenda
for a Planning and Development Committee meeting is to send these
people an agenda and she believes this is adequate notification.
Further discussion followed on the floor on the method for
notification of meetings for which people are expected to appear.
Alderperson Cummings stated that the pattern of response to the
ordinance is consistent. The method of appeal for demolition to
the Landmarks Commission is a clearly spelled out set of steps.
That was not taken advantage of, and was ignored in this case.
After further discussion on the method of notification, Mayor
Gutenberger stated, for the record, that not only did Atty.
Currey and Mr. Fane receive an agenda for those meetings, they
received a notification.
Alderperson Schlather stated that he is still concerned that the
Council should fault these individuals for not showing up at the
Planning and Development meeting because first of all, they were
not told they should show up at that meeting, and secondly,
because they had already set forth their arguments in the letter
of March 14, 1989.
Motion to Refer Back to Committee
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
RESOLVED, That this matter be referred back to the Planning and
Development Committee for argument on the appeal.
Discussion followed on the referral motion.
13
May 3, 1989
Alderperson Hoffman asked City Attorney Nash if anything has
happened during this discussion that could cast any shadow on a
denial.
City Attorney Nash responded that it seems to him that Atty.
Currey asked whether it was necessary to be present. Obviously
it is not necessary for him to be present for the matter to be
considered. His opinion would be, even despite the fact that we
have tried to raise lots of procedural objections, that we
haven't significantly hurt a Council decision tonight.
Alderperson Cummings spoke against referral back to the
committee because she thinks they have followed the appropriate
procedures.
A vote on the motion to refer back to committee resulted as
follows:
Ayes (3) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth
Nays (7) - Nichols, Cummings, Lytel, Peterson, Hoffman,
t; ? Killeen, Johnson
Motion Fails
Main Motion
A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Lytel, Cummings, Booth, Nichols, Peterson,
Hoffman, Johnson, Killeen
Nays (2) - Schlather, Romanowski
Carried
*14.9 Alienation Home Rule Message (Alienation of Southwest Park
and Inlet Island Park Request for Legislation Authorizing Change
(Woe in Substitute Land)
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, an amendment to Chapter 757 of the Laws of 1985 has been
requested of the New York State Legislature, and
WHEREAS, said amendment would permit the removal of lands known
as the Festival Parcel from the list of lands offered as
substitute for certain city -owned park lands to be converted from
recreational use, and
WHEREAS, said amendment would allow replacement of the Festival
Parcel with other lands along Six Mile Creek, and
WHEREAS, Common Council has reviewed and concurs with State
Assembly bill A6903 and State Senate bill 54320 which authorize
the aforementioned exchange; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council does request passage of said bill
by the New York State Legislature, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to forward
the necessary Home Rule Message to the State.
Alderperson Cummings reported that this is the same resolution
which a year ago was sent to the State to allow the City to
substitute Six Mile Creek lands for Festival Lands in the
alienation process. However, the Town of Ithaca has expressed an
interest in commenting on this process in as much as the land
being considered for substitution are taxable lands within their
Township.
Motion to Refer to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the matter of the Alienation Home Rule Message be
referred to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee.
14 May 3, 1989
Alderperson Booth suggested that the segment from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund Grants Manual that was handed out by
Doria Higgins, raises substantial questions about the use of this
land for substitution purposes and he hopes the Planning and
Development Committee will look at those in the future.
A vote on the Motion to Refer resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
*14.12a Miller Street Rezoning - Negative Declaration
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the matter of the rezoning of land on the north side of
Miller Street from R -3b to R -2b is currently under consideration
by this Common Council, and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted,
including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment
Form (SEAF), and
WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an "unlisted"
action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR),
including the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and may be a Type
I action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act (EQR
Section 36.5 (B) (5)), 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, be and it hereby does adopt as its own the findings and
conclusions as set forth on the attached Short Environmental
Assessment Form dated March 21, 1989, and be it further
That this Common Council, as lead agency be and it
RESOLVED,
hereby does determine that the proposed action 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 be and she is hereby
directed to file a copy of the same, together with the
attachment, in the City Clerk's office and forward the same to
any other parties as required by law.
Carried Unanimously
*14.12b Miller Street Rezoning
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Booth
ORDINANCE NO. 89 -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP 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 THE ZONING MAP.
1. That the "Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca,
New York ", as last amended, is hereby amended and changed so that
the following described area presently located in the R -3b,
Residence District, is reclassified and changed to the R -2b,
Residence District:
All that tract or parcel of land described as follows:
14
LE.!
14
-15- May 3, 1989
Beginning at a point on the southwest corner of tax parcel
number 66 -3 -25, thence northerly a distance of approximately one
hundred feet along the eastern boundary of the right -of -way of
Cornell Street to a point on the northwest corner of tax parcel
number 66 -3 -25, thence easterly a distance of approximately seven
hundred ninety eight feet along a line that is parallel to and
one hundred feet north of the northern boundary of the right -of-
way of Miller Street between Cornell Street and Pearl Street to
the intersection of the eastern boundary of the corporate limits
of the City of Ithaca, thence southerly a distance of
approximately one hundred thirteen feet along the eastern
boundary of the corporate limits of the City of Ithaca to a point
on the southeast corner of tax parcel number 66 -3 -10.1, thence
westerly a distance of approximately 174.8 feet along the
northern boundary of the right -of -way of Miller Street to a point
that is approximately 174.8 feet west of the southeast corner of
tax parcel number 66 -3 -10.1, thence northerly a distance of
approximately thirteen feet to a point at the intersection of the
northern boundary of the right -of -way of Miller Street, thence
westerly a distance of approximately six hundred twenty four feet
along the northern boundary of the right -of -way of Miller Street
to the point of beginning. Said described area includes all of
tax parcel numbers 66 -3 -16, 66 -3 -18, 66 -3 -20, 66 -3 -22 and 66 -3 -25
and portions of tax parcel number 66 -3 -1, 66 -3 -9, 66 -3 -10.1 and
66 -3 -10.2.
Section 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in
accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in
Section 3.11 (B) of the Ithaca City Charter.
Carried Unanimously
Recess
Council recessed at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened in Regular Session
at 9:50 p.m.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
*14.1a. Route 96 - Investigation of Locally Funded Route
96 /Octopus Alternatives
By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Department of Public Works be hereby requested
to investigate elevated railroad crossings including but not
limited to the following locations Clinton /Brindley Streets,
Esty Street, and the proposed southwest connector, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That a report be made to the Common Council as soon as
possible on the conceptual design and costs of these various
alternatives.
Alderperson Killeen offered the following substitute resolution:
Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
"RAILROAD OVERPASS"
WHEREAS, for far too long the
a barrier to free movement for
west or west to east, and
WHEREAS, this Common Council
currently cleaving the City
spheres, and
West End railroad tracks have been
Ithacans seeking to travel east to
agrees to eliminate this barrier
and its citizens into separate
WHEREAS, it is the expressed intent of this resolution that a
commitment is being made to guarantee unimpeded passage for
pedestrians and motor vehicles over this historic railroad track
barrier; now, therefore, be it
0r-1
16 May 3, 1989
RESOLVED, That the Department of Public Works be hereby requested
to investigate elevated railroad crossings including but not
limited to the following locations: Clinton /Brindley Streets,
Esty Street, and the proposed southwest connector, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That a report be made to the Common Council as soon as
possible on the conceptual design and costs of these various
alternatives.
Alderperson Romanowski asked where the city is going to find the
time to do this, where the city is going to find the money to
have someone study it, and are we going to ask the local
taxpayers to fund whatever is decided to be done on the local
level. He stated that he thinks this is totally unworkable and a
fraud on the public.
Alderperson Schlather stated that he understands the concerns
that have been raised but he thinks that until we begin getting
some solid numbers and some solid plans that it is premature for
Council to write it off. That is especially important in light
of the fact that it is apparent that Option C with Overpass is
simply not in the cards as far as this Common Council is
concerned and recognizing that, it would be equally fraudulent
for the Council to simply ignore the question of the railroad and
the need to overpass it.
Further discussion followed on the floor on the pros and cons of
this substitute resolution.
Amending Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That in the second WHEREAS, the word "agrees" be
changed to "desires ", and in the third WHEREAS, the word
"guarantee" be changed to "attempt to provide ".
Ayes (4) - Hoffman, Peterson, Lytel, Johnson
Nays (6) - Nichols, Booth, Killeen, Cummings, Schlather,
Romanowski
Discussion followed on the floor on the amendment.
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Motion Fails
Amending Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
RESOLVED, That the last RESOLVED read as follows: "That a report
be made to the Common Council as soon as possible on the
conceptual design, costs of these various alternatives, traffic
analysis, and models for predicted use."
Ayes (8) -
Nays ( 2 ) -
Romanowski, Hoffman, Peterson,
Nichols, Booth, Johnson
Schlather, Killeen
Carried
Lytel, Cummings,
Amending Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That a Be it Further RESOLVED be added to read as
follows: "That the Department of Public Works, in consultation
with the Planning Department and the City Attorney, immediately
propose an emergency vehicle corridor which would be located on
the west side of the railroad tracks between the Third Street
crossing and West Buffalo Street, which proposal shall include
conceptual designs, estimated costs and timetable for
implementation."
Discussion followed on the amendment.
D
17 May 3, 1989
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Ayes (9) - Schlather, Romanowski, Lytel, Cummings, Hoffman
Johnson, Peterson, Booth, Killeen
Nay (1) - Nichols
Carried
Substitute Resolution as Amended
WHEREAS, for far too long the West End railroad tracks have been
a barrier to free movement for Ithacans seeking to travel east to
west or west to east, and
WHEREAS, this Common Council agrees to eliminate this barrier
currently cleaving the City and its citizens into separate
spheres, and
WHEREAS, it is the expressed intent of this resolution that a
(Y) commitment is being made to guarantee unimpeded passage for
pedestrians and motor vehicles over this historic railroad track
0'j barrier; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Department of Public Works be hereby requested
to investigate elevated railroad crossings including but not
limited to the following locations: Clinton /Brindley Streets,
Esty Street, and the proposed southwest connector, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That a report be made to the Common Council as soon as
possible on the conceptual design, costs of these various
alternatives, traffic analysis, and models for predicted use,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Department of Public Works, in consultation
with the Planning Department and the City Attorney, immediately
propose an emergency vehicle corridor which would be located on
the west side of the railroad tracks between the Third Street
crossing and West Buffalo Street, which proposal shall include
conceptual designs, estimated costs and time table for
implementation.
A vote on the Substitute Resolution as Amended resulted as
follows:
Ayes (6) - Schlather, Lytel, Nichols, Johnson, Booth,
Killeen
Nays (4) - Romanowski, Peterson, Hoffman, Cummings
Carried
*14 1b(1) Route 96 - DoT Alternatives - Octopus and Route 96
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca has carefully
considered various proposals for the redevelopment of the so-
called Octopus and Route 13'';0�aAd has carefully considered the
very large array of comments by members of the public, both from
within and from outside the city, concerning the traffic and
access problems associated with the Octopus and that portion of
(400, Route 96 and concerning the various proposals for redeveloping
those areas, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has reviewed the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement prepared by the NYS Department of
Transportation regarding several proposals for redeveloping the
Octopus and Route 96, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has not made the findings regarding
environmental impact which it must eventually make pursuant to
the State Environmental Quality Review. Act (Article 8, NYS
Environmental Conservation Law) and the City Environmental
Quality Review ordinance respecting the redevelopment of the
Octopus and Route 96, and Common Council may not make those
1C�
May 3, 1989
findings until the NYS Department of Transportation finishes the
final Environmental Impact Statement regarding this redevelopment
project, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council concludes that all of the "build"
alternatives being considered by the NYS Department of
Transportation with respect to the Octopus and Route 96 (i.e.,
the A, B, and C alternatives with their various permutations)
would, if developed, provide significant advantages over the
current situation and at the same time cause substantial negative
impacts, which advantages and negative impacts are discussed in
the above - mentioned Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has carefully considered the impacts
that redevelopment of the Octopus and Route 96 along the lines
proposed by the NYS Department of Transportation will have on the
public health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of
Ithaca and Tompkins county and of other persons who live beyond
the boundaries of the county, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council is well aware of the significant
divisions of opinion that exist in and outside the City of
Ithaca with respect to the redevelopment of the Octopus and
Route 96, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council recognizes that in order to create
the possibility of a broad public consensus in the greater Ithaca
community regarding the development of the Octopus and Route 96,
it is necessary and desirable to create a solution for this
redevelopment project that encompasses elements from the various
plans proposed by the NYS Department of Transportation and new
elements not included in those plans, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council recognizes that at this time it may
appropriately provide an advisory statement of its position
regarding the redevelopment of the Octopus and Route 96 to the
NYS Department of Transportation, which advisory statement does
not and cannot constitute a final or binding Council decision on
this matter; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council has concerns about all options
now being reviewed by NYS Department of Transportation which
concerns are more fully set forth in the Common Council
resolution of April 5, 1989 and be it further
RESOLVED, That if DoT selects either option "A" or option "B ",
the following further actions be taken by the appropriate
jurisdictions:
1. that the terms and conditions specified in Common
Council's resolution of April 5, 1989 are fulfilled;
2. that prior to January 1, 1990 or the date on which the
NYS Department of Transportation actually begins a
project for redeveloping the Octopus and Route 96,
whichever date is later, (a) plans for the construction
of a two -way railroad overpass that provides permanent,
constant access over the railroad in Ithaca's West End
and ties in to the rest of this redevelopment project
are developed and accepted by the appropriate
governmental bodies (such overpass to permit east -west
and west -east traffic; and to be located in the Esty
Street area, the Brindley Street area, or in some other
suitable place that lies in similar proximity to the
existing Octopus); and (b) binding commitments are made
by the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca, and Tompkins
County to pay for the construction of that overpass,
I F_�
I-J
.�5 11
19 May 3, 1989
3. If Option "A" is adopted, that an access road from
Cliff Street to Cass Park is designed and built, such
road to be developed within the time period in which
the NYS Department of Transportation completes its work
on the redevelopment of the Octopus and Route 96, and
4 a. If Option "B" is adopted, that the NYS Department of
Transportation incorporates into the new three -lane
highway on West Hill measures that to the greatest
(600,1 degree possible maximize visual screening of that
highway from vantage points north, east, and south of
the highway and that to the greatest degree possible
minimize traffic noise emanating from that highway, and
b. If Option "B" is adopted, that prior to January 1, 1990
or the date on which the NYS Department of
Transportation actually begins a project for
redeveloping the Octopus and Route 96, whichever date
co is later, the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca, and
0 affected residents of the Town of Ithaca complete the
�. necessary actions and decisions pursuant to the laws of
--, the State of New York through which the City of Ithaca
annexes the following portion of the Town of Ithaca:
(a) that area lying generally east of existing Route 96
between the City of Ithaca line and the Town of Ulysses
line, and (b) existing Route 96 and that area lying
within one mile of the westerly boundary of existing
Route 96 and north of a line extending due west from
the intersection of the west city line and Williams
Brook.
Mayor Gutenberger asked for clarification in regards to the final
Resolved paragraph and the conditions following that resolved.
(,4VMWe_ He referred to the language of "if DoT accepts either option 'A'
or option 'B', the following conditions be met." He asked what
happens if the State selects option 'A' but doesn't meet all of
the criteria, is option 'A' then rejected or and likewise with
option 'B'.
Alderperson Cummings responded that her understanding is that
this resolution is not an ultimatum to the State but rather an
effort to provide suggestion and direction of what sort of things
would make either of these alternatives acceptable.
Mayor Gutenberger stated that the way the resolution is written
it reads that if the State doesn't meet all the conditions for
either 'A' or 'B', the Council is going to reject them.
Alderperson Schlather responded that these conditions are set
forth simply as a statement of preference on the part of the
city.
Further discussion followed on the floor in regard to the
resolution and the conditions and alternatives that the State
might find acceptable.
(400e A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (5) - Schlather, Lytel, Booth, Cummings, Killeen
Nays (5) - Romanowski, Hoffman, Peterson, Johnson, Nichols
Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye, breaking the tie.
Carried
*14.1b (21 -
6 - Dot Alternatives -Pro
Position in Support of Plan A With Route 89 Alignment
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation has
released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement that presents the
design options offered for the Route 96 /Octopus improvement
project, and
20
May 3, 1989
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation is now
in the process of selecting the alternative it will recommend to
Common Council, possibly in June 1989, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council wishes to move this matter toward a
resolution as quickly as possible, by making its own preference
clear to the New York State Department of Transportation now, as
other municipalities have already done; now, therefore, be it
Council makes the following RESOLVED, That Common g findings:
1. The City desires an expeditious correction of the
confusion and traffic congestion at the Octopus
intersection. The "no action" alternative provides no
relief to this situation.
2. Alternative A (original design) has little if any
support because it requires the removal of nine homes
on Cliff Street, and because it does not separate Route
89 traffic from the Octopus intersection.
3. Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment requires
the least displacement of residences and commercial
buildings of all the designs offered by New York State
Department of Transportation.
4. Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment would
cause less disruption during construction, could be
completed more quickly, and would be far less costly
than any of the B or C plans.
5. Among the options presented by New York State
Department of Transportation, the only design that
permanently eliminates the Octopus intersection, by
separating Route 79, Cliff Street, and Route 89, is
Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment.
6. The only design that eliminates possible interruption
of northbound Route 96 traffic by trains crossing the
West End is Alternative C With Overpass. However, the
long elevated highway it includes would have a
blighting influence on the neighborhood and waterfront
and would cause significant physical and visual
impacts. It is the expressed intent of the City to
pursue as expeditiously as possible the provision of a
less intrusive overpass of the railroad tracks.
7. Alternatives B and C (Low Level) do not solve the
railroad problem and keep the Octopus intersection as a
permanent feature of Ithaca's traffic pattern. The B
and C designs involve construction of a new highway up
West Hill (and related interchanges) that will cause
permanent environmental damage to Cass Park and West
Hill, as well as having a negative impact on businesses
in the West End. According to the DEIS, Alternatives B
and C will encourage more growth on West Hill than
Alternative A. Because of the danger of inadequate
controls, the potential for an increased rate of growth
is viewed by the City as a detrimental aspect of
Alternative B and C. Meanwhile measures can be taken
to decrease the traffic on Cliff Street by such actions
as the construction of a new road directly from Route
89 to the back of the hospital, the requirement that
through truck traffic take an alternate route into and
out of the City other than Cliff Street, and the
provision of a truck safety check station at the top of
Cliff Street.
and be it further
21
May 3, 1989
RESOLVED, That in making its recommendation for a smaller scale
project, Common Council acknowledges the importance of related,
larger issues, including:
- the depletion of natural resources and energy supplies;
- increasingly serious pollution problems, including the
"greenhouse effect" and major oil spills, due in large
part to increased use of automobiles and the expansion
of a car - oriented transportation system;
the need for greatly improved public transportation;
the urgency and magnitude of repairing and maintaining
existing roads and bridges to protect public safety.
These concerns point to a priority, not for investment in
new highways, but for the development of transportation
systems and land use planning that minimize pollution,
energy use, and environmental degradation, rather than
encouraging greater automobile use and increased traffic,
and be it further
IA J
,�- RESOLVED, That Common Council makes the following recommendations
to the New York State Department of Transportation:
1. Common Council does not support further development of
the following Route 96 designs: The Null Alternative,
Plan A /Original, Plan B, Plan C (elevated or at- grade).
2. Among the options presented by New York State
Department of Transportation, Common Council favors
Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment, for
further design development.
Alderperson Killeen proposed to Council the following amending
resolutions:
Amending Resolution #1
RESOLVED, That Number 6 under Findings read as follows:
"recognizing that alternative A with optional Route 89 alignment
does insignificantly little to reduce traffic on Cliff Street
(Route 96) and recognizing the probable profound negative impact
the increased traffic volume will have upon this neighborhood,
Cliff Street (Route 96) will be mitigated by the Council's fair -
play establishment of a $6 -8 million compensatory /relocational
building fund for those residents."
Amending Resolution #2
RESOLVED, That the original Number 6 under Findings become Number
7, and the following language be added in the closing sentence so
that it reads as follows: "Other, less intrusive solutions to
the railroad problem are being pursued specifically in Council's
commitment to overpass the tracks." (Ref. 14.1a)
Amending Resolution #3
RESOLVED, That Number 7 under Findings be deleted from the
resolution.
Amending Resolution #4
RESOLVED, That under the Be it Further Resolved, the following be
added as the first item: "- the value of people, neighborhoods
and local determination."
Amending Resolution #5
RESOLVED, That the final Be it Further Resolved, read as follows:
"That Common Council conveys this resolution which endorses
Alternative A with option 89 alignment to the New York State
Department of Transportation."
,514
22
May 3, 1989
Amending Resolution #6
RESOLVED, That items 1 and 2 after the final Be it Further
Resolved be deleted.
Discussion followed on the floor.
Alderperson Romanowski made the following statement for the
record: "Those of you who vote for this resolution are saying
that you understand what you are doing to a neighborhood - that
trees are more important than people - that we should divert
local funds from other purposes to correct shortcomings in Plan A
Alternate - that we dismiss the collective judgments of medical,
public safety and other municipal officials and individuals."
It was suggested by Alderperson Nichols that Alderperson
Killeen's amendments be voted on separately.
A vote on Amending Resolution #1 moved by Alderperson Killeen and
seconded by Alderperson Romanowski resulted as follows:
Ayes (3) - Cummings, Killeen, Booth
Nays (7) - Lytel, Romanowski, Schlather, Johnson, Nichols,
Peterson, Hoffman
_ � Motion Fails
Alderperson Nichols notbd that he had previously inserted that
same language as a friendly amendment in Number 6 and it had been
accepted.
A vote on Amending Resolution #3 moved by Alderperson Killeen and
seconded by Alderperson Schlather resulted as follows:
Ayes (7) - Schlather, Romanowski, Cui
Johnson, Booth, Killeen
Nays (3) - Hoffman, Peterson, Lytel
A vote on Amending Resolution #4 moved by
seconded by Alderperson Cummings resulted
nmings, Nichols,
"Wi
Carried
Alderperson Killeen and
as follows:
Carried Unanimously
In regard to Amending Resolution #5, the following substitute
wording was suggested by Alderperson Nichols: "Be it Further
Resolved, That Common Council expresses its endorsement of
Alternate Plan A with optional Route 89 and Be it Further
Resolved, That this recommendation be conveyed to the New York
State Department of Transportation."
A vote on Amending Resolution #5 with the substitute wording by
Alderperson Nichols and Amending Resolution #6 that eliminated
items 1 and 2 after the final Be it Further Resolved resulted as
follows:
Ayes (9) - Romanowski, Lytel, Cummings, Nichols, Booth,
Hoffman, Johnson, Peterson, Killeen
Nay (1) - Schlather Carried
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That a Further Resolved after the 'Findings' be added
to the resolution to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That in
recognition of the continued high level of traffic on Cliff
Street under Plan A with Route 89 Alignment, as well as on other
main arterials through the City, the City shall establish a
capital fund for mitigation of traffic impacts."
Ayes (1) - Hoffman
Nays (9) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth, Killeen, Johnson,
Peterson, Lytel, Cummings, Nichols
Motion Fails
23
May 3, 1989
Discussion followed on the floor on the amendments and on the
various options and alternatives.
Main Motion as Amended
The Main Motion as Amended is as follows:
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation has
released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement that presents the
design options offered for the Route 96 /Octopus improvement
project, and
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation is now
in the process of selecting the alternative it will recommend to
Common Council, possibly in June 1989, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council wishes to move this matter toward a
resolution as quickly as possible, by making its own preference
clear to the New York State Department of Transportation now, as
U -1 other municipalities have already done; now, therefore, be it
0)
RESOLVED, That Common Council makes the following findings:
r
1. The City desires an expeditious correction of the
Y� confusion and traffic congestion at the Octopus
<a intersection. The "no action" alternative provides no
relief to this situation.
2. Alternative A (original design) has little if any
support because it requires the removal of nine homes
on Cliff Street, and because it does not separate
Route 89 traffic from the Octopus intersection.
3. Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment
requires the least displacement of residences and
commercial buildings of all the designs offered by New
York State Department of Transportation.
4. Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment would
cause less disruption during construction, could be
completed more quickly, and would be far less costly
than any of the B or C Plans.
5. Among the options presented by New York State
Department of Transportation, the only design that
permanently eliminates the Octopus intersection, by
separating Route 79, Cliff Street, and Route 89, is
Alternative A With Optional Route 89 Alignment.
6.
The only design that eliminates possible interruption
of northbound Route 96 traffic by trains crossing the
West End is Alternative C With Overpass. However, the
long elevated highway it includes would have a
blighting influence on the neighborhood and waterfront
and would cause significant physical and visual
impacts. It is the expressed intent of the City to
pursue as expeditiously as possible the provision of
a less intrusive overpass of the railroad tracks,
and be it
further
RESOLVED,
That in making its recommendation for a smaller scale
project,
Common Council acknowledges the importance of related,
larger issues,
including:
-
the value of people, neighborhoods and local
determination;
-
the depletion of natural resources and energy supplies;
24
May 3, 1989
increasingly serious pollution problems, including the
"greenhouse effect" and major oil spills, due in large
part to increased use of automobiles and the expansion
of car - oriented transportation system;
the need for greatly improved public transportation;
the urgency and magnitude of repairing and maintaining
existing roads and bridges to protect public safety.
These concerns point to a priority, not for investment in IJ
new highways, but for the development of transportation
systems and land use planning that minimize pollution,
energy use, and environmental degradation, rather than
encouraging greater automobile use and increased traffic,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council expresses its endorsement of
Alternate Plan A with optional Route 89, and be it further
RESOLVED, That this recommendation be conveyed to the New York
State Department of Transportation.
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) - Lytel, Booth, Johnson, Nichols, Peterson,
Hoffman
Nays (4) - Romanowski, Schlather, Killeen, Cummings
Carried
Mayor Gutenberger reminded Council that the resolutions and votes
taken tonight were advisory only.
Motion to Extend Meeting Until 12:30 a.m._
By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That this Common Council extends its meeting time until
12:30 a.m.
Ayes (9) - Schlather, Romanowski, Hoffman, Lytel, Killeen,
Cummings, Nichols, Booth, Johnson
Nay (1) - Peterson
Carried
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE:
*18.2 City Hall Annex Property Sale
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has entered into a certain Purchase
Offer with Charles Schlough dated December 8, 1988 for the sale
of property known as the City Hall Annex, and
WHEREAS, the Purchase Offer required, in part, that the Buyer
obtain a mortgage commitment by April 8, 1989 which requirement
could be extended under certain conditions, required a closing
pursuant to the Purchase Offer not later than June 8, 1989, and
provided that the Buyer's interest in said Purchase Offer might
not be assigned without express City approval; and
WHEREAS, the City has by resolution of Common Council at its
April, 1989 meeting extended for a period of one month the period
of time within which a mortgage commitment could be obtained
pursuant to the Purchase Offer, and
WHEREAS, Buyer has made application for the various approvals
required pursuant to said Purchase Offer, and
r�
25 May 3, 1989
WHEREAS, it has become apparent that the Buyer cannot obtain a
mortgage commitment or financing for the project as planned
because of the provision of Paragraph XII -8 of the Purchase Offer
which restricts rights in the offer to the Buyer personally, and
WHEREAS, it is not feasible to close title pursuant to the
Purchase Offer by June 8, 1989, and
WHEREAS, the parties to said Purchase Offer desire said project
(600.1 to go forward as planned and to consummate the Purchase Offer,
and
WHEREAS, the Buyer is willing to compensate the City for the
financial loss which will or may accrue to the City by reason of
Buyer's inability to close on the Purchase Offer by June 8, 1989;
now, therefore, be it
0 ) RESOLVED:
The City shall and it hereby does extend the time
pursuant to the Purchase Offer for the Buyer to obtain a mortgage
commitment pursuant to Paragraph III thereof, to June 15, 1989;
2. The City Clerk shall give such public notice by
.►
publication or otherwise as may be required for consideration of
a resolution to amend said Purchase Offer, and shall place on the
agenda for the June, 1989 meeting of the Common Council a
resolution to amend the Purchase Offer in the following respects:
(a) Paragraph III of the Purchase Offer is deleted in
its entirety;
(b) Paragraph II is deleted in its entirety and there
is substituted therefor the following:
"At closing Seller shall deliver to Buyer a Warranty
Deed for the consideration stated hereinabove, sufficient to
convey good marketable title in fee simple, free and clear of all
liens and encumbrances except as stated herein. The closing
shall take place in Ithaca, New York, on or before December 31,
1989.
"As and for liquidated damages for Buyer's failure to
close pursuant to the Purchase Offer on or by June 8, 1989, Buyer
shall pay to Seller at closing, or December 31, 1989 whichever
occurs first, a sum equal to Seventy and No /100 Dollars ($70.00)
multiplied by the number of days following June 8, 1989 that this
payment is made. In addition, Buyer shall forfeit the $5,000.00
deposit paid pursuant to Paragraph II -A in the event closing does
not occur on or by December 31, 1989.11;
(c) Paragraph XII -8 of said Purchase Offer is deleted
in its entirety.
3. The Purchase Offer as amended by this resolution is in
all other respects ratified and confirmed.
4. The Mayor or other proper City Officer is authorized and
directed to execute such documents as may be required in the
opinion of counsel to the City to give effect to this resolution.
Discussion followed on the floor.
City Attorney Nash remarked that he had received this day a
communication from Peter Walsh, Mr. Schlough's Attorney,
regarding this request and he had handed copies of the letter out
to Council members.
.51 R
26 May 3, 1989
Alderperson Nichols left the meeting at 11:50 p.m.
Ayes (9) - Schlather, Booth, Lytel, Killeen, Peterson,
Hoffman, Cummings, Johnson, Romanowski
Carried (9 -0)
Atty. Walsh addressed Council on the letter that he had written
to the Council regarding Mr. Schlough's request for extension of
time.
Discussion followed on the floor on the resolution that was just
passed by Council.
Alderperson Schlather remarked that it was his sense that Council
did not wish to change the resolution that was just passed. He
stated that if Mr. Schlough is not happy with that resolution and
wants to make some further proposals to modify the contract
perhaps the Intergovernmental Relations Committee would review
it.
*18.3 City Hall Annex Property Sale
This Item was withdrawn from the agenda due to the passing of
Item 18.2.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
14.2 A and B - Hydropower - Van Natta Dam RFP - Report and Fall
Creek Recreational River Boundary Designation - Report
These items were withdrawn from the agenda at the request of
Mayor Gutenberger.
14.10 Ithaca Industrial Park - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the Planning and Development
Committee is working to re- evaluate rate structures for the
city's Industrial Park and will be coming back to Council with
recommendations.
*14.11 Community Gardens - Water Policy
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby directs that the water
bill for the Community Gardens be expunged and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works is directed to make
water available immediately to the Community Gardens at no
charge, subject to further rules and regulations to be developed
jointly by the Budget and Administration Committee, the Board of
Public Works, and the Community Garden leadership with report
back to Common Council June 7, 1989.
Carried (9-0)
*14.3 South Hill Recreation Way
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has indicated its desire to protect
and preserve the Six Mile Creek watershed and natural area, by
extensively studying its needs, by establishing and maintaining
the Six Mile Creek oversight Committee, by hiring a Gorge Ranger,
by acquiring additional property, and by consideration of further
property acquisition and /or protection, and
WHEREAS, the City desires that any proposed future activities or
development in or near the watershed /Six Mile Creek Natural Area
be thoroughly studied to evaluate whether they can be carried out
in a manner that preserves the beauty, character, and
environmental quality of the area; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council asks the Town of Ithaca to
defer a final decision on implementation of the Recreation Way
plan until the City and Town have completed the necessary reviews
and reached agreement with particular attention to the following
items:
L, I t
27
May 3, 1989
Alderperson Cummings stated that the Planning and Development
Committee thought that the Town of Ithaca was going to be
delaying a month their action on the Recreation Way. She said
that this is an expression, not to be construed in any way to be
a negative expression, but a statement from one political entity
to the other, such as the Town recently made to the City in
regard to the substitute lands in the watershed.
Alderperson Peterson stated that the Six Mile Creek Committee met
on May 1 and discussed this matter with George Frantz, Asst. Town
Planner, and he reported to the committee that the Town Board had
Q1V01 voted that they will do final design approval and that they are
meeting on May 8th to discuss this issue. She remarked that the
Six Mile Creek Committee voted on several things which supports
this Recreation Way?4)i ,: ,
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Six Mile Creek Acquisition Policy Report, Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission Report, GIAC Pool /GIAC Renovations Report
These items were withdrawn from the agenda at the Mayor's
request.
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
Homeless Shelter - Report
Alderperson Peterson reported that the committee received
information from Southside Center that they would be willing to
serve as a temporary shelter again for 1989 -90, with significant
dollars attached for assistance to pay for staff. This matter is
still in the discussion stage, along with the Homeless Shelter
Task Force that Alderperson Lytel is chairing and those meetings
are ongoing.
Affirmative Action Statistics - Report
Alderperson Peterson reported that the Human Services Committee
is pleased is have received from Personnel Administrator Walker
and the Affirmative Action Committee the first batch of
affirmative action statistics which are part and parcel of the
new affirmative action plan that the Council approved a few
months ago.
Weekend Meal Program at Southside- Report and 2% Monies
Alderperson Peterson stated that the Weekend Meal Program at
Southside will come up on the agenda under the Budget and
Administration Committee, and the 2% Monies were reported on
under the City Attorney's Report.
- the width and use of materials for the bed of
the "trail"
- whether the trail will be used by trucks and /or other
motorized vehicles
- whether future use of the right of way for
utilities or a
road is allowed or prohibited
Q,000�1
- establishment of conservation overlay zoning
to protect the
watershed /natural area
- what structures, fences, signage, parking
facilities or
other additional features will accompany the
recreation way,
- that there be an inventory of the important shrubs
and trees
in the area of the trail.
and be it further
(1)
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk is hereby directed
to send a copy
of this resolution immediately to the members of
the Ithaca Town
Board.
Alderperson Cummings stated that the Planning and Development
Committee thought that the Town of Ithaca was going to be
delaying a month their action on the Recreation Way. She said
that this is an expression, not to be construed in any way to be
a negative expression, but a statement from one political entity
to the other, such as the Town recently made to the City in
regard to the substitute lands in the watershed.
Alderperson Peterson stated that the Six Mile Creek Committee met
on May 1 and discussed this matter with George Frantz, Asst. Town
Planner, and he reported to the committee that the Town Board had
Q1V01 voted that they will do final design approval and that they are
meeting on May 8th to discuss this issue. She remarked that the
Six Mile Creek Committee voted on several things which supports
this Recreation Way?4)i ,: ,
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Six Mile Creek Acquisition Policy Report, Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission Report, GIAC Pool /GIAC Renovations Report
These items were withdrawn from the agenda at the Mayor's
request.
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
Homeless Shelter - Report
Alderperson Peterson reported that the committee received
information from Southside Center that they would be willing to
serve as a temporary shelter again for 1989 -90, with significant
dollars attached for assistance to pay for staff. This matter is
still in the discussion stage, along with the Homeless Shelter
Task Force that Alderperson Lytel is chairing and those meetings
are ongoing.
Affirmative Action Statistics - Report
Alderperson Peterson reported that the Human Services Committee
is pleased is have received from Personnel Administrator Walker
and the Affirmative Action Committee the first batch of
affirmative action statistics which are part and parcel of the
new affirmative action plan that the Council approved a few
months ago.
Weekend Meal Program at Southside- Report and 2% Monies
Alderperson Peterson stated that the Weekend Meal Program at
Southside will come up on the agenda under the Budget and
Administration Committee, and the 2% Monies were reported on
under the City Attorney's Report.
t ; ; _' C)
28 May 3, 1989
CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE:
*16.1 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 31 of the City of It
Mnnir_inal Code With Respect to the City's Provision of Infra-
structure to Residential Subdivisions - Lift From Table
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That the Ordinance amending Chapter 31 of the City of
Ithaca Municipal Code with respect to the City's provision of
infrastructure to residential subdivisions be lifted from the
table. Carried (9 -0)
ORDINANCE NO. 89 -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 31 ENTITLED 'SUBDIVISION
REGULATIONS' 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. That Chapter 31 entitled "Subdivision
Regulations" is amended as follows:
1. That Section 31.1, Definitions, is amended by adding a
new Definition 9 to read as follows:
119. "Infrastructure" shall mean improvements to the
land to be subdivided that are necessary to provide the
basis for final development and operation of the subdivision
considered as a whole. Such improvements include, but are
not limited to, streets, sidewalks, gutters and curbs, water
mains, storm and sanitary sewer mains, drainage ways, street
lighting facilities and other public and private utility
structures and facilities, and may include amenity features
such as street trees within street rights -of -way.
Improvements to individual parcels in a subdivision are not
considered infrastructure for the purpose of this Chapter."
2. That Section 31.3, entitled "Requirements for
dedication of streets;" Section 31.4, entitled "Services to
be supplied by city;" and Subdivision G, entitled "City work
at subdivider's expense" of Section 31.21, "General
procedure," are hereby repealed.
3. That a new Section 31.3 to be known and designated as
Section 31.3, entitled "Requirements for dedication of
subdivision streets and provision of subdivision
infrastructure," is hereby added to said Chapter to read as
follows:
"Section 31.3 Requirements for dedication of
subdivision streets and provision of subdivision
infrastructure
A. Any streets and utility infrastructure necessary to the
proper service and function of the property subdivided shall
be provided at the subdivider's expense, before Final
Approval of the subdivision becomes effective. If such
improvements are not complete, provision for completion
shall be made by means of a performance bond, as further
specified under Section 31.27 below. Staged or phased
development of a subdivision may be undertaken in this
manner, with the required infrastructure for each section
covered by performance bond acceptable to the Board.
29
May 3, 1989
B. Any streets or infrastructure provided by the
subdivider shall conform to the following requirements, and
in the event such improvements are to be offered to the City
for dedication, shall so conform before they may be
accepted:
1. Street network and block size.
All regulations of this Chapter pertaining to block
length and width, dead -end streets, grades and lines
shall have been complied with, unless otherwise in
compliance with the City Master Plan or official Map,
if any.
Storm drainage facilities provided in accordance with
this section shall be designed to accommodate surface
runoff from adjoining undeveloped property uphill; and
where storm drainage from the subdivision will
discharge into natural or artificial surface drainage
ways, the subdivider shall insure that such discharge
will not occur at a greater rate than would occur under
QW0.1 the most severe conditions if the subdivision site were
undeveloped.
5. Sanitary sewers.
In accordance with city specifications, sanitary sewers
of adequate capacity to serve the subdivision and
adjacent areas shall have been installed, connecting to
existing city mains. Plans for such sanitary sewers
must have received the approvals of the Board of Public
Works and of the Tompkins County Department of Health
before sewer installation.
2. Trees and brush.
Clearing and grubbing of trees and brush shall be done
for the full width of the right -of -way of each new
street, unless otherwise specified by the Board.
3. Grades and grading.
Grades proposed for the streets, surface drainage ways,
!•�
and all water and sewer mains must be approved by the
[�
City Engineer before any street development is begun.
tz1
Cross - sections through street rights -of -way shall be
such that sidewalks can be constructed in the same
general plane as the street pavement. Any deviation in
the above due to special conditions must have prior
approval from the City Engineer.
In rough grading the right -of -way for a new street, the
subdivider shall be responsible for the proper
disposition of any rock excavated, or of any excess
soil or other material. The subdivider shall also be
responsible for providing any additional fill needed to
meet the approved grades for streets and sidewalks.
4. Storm drainage.
Any swales, ditches or channels within street or
drainage rights -of -way must be approved by the City
Engineer with respect to capacity and construction
design, including connecting with storm sewers; and
their construction shall be coordinated with the
construction of any streets or other vehicular or
pedestrian access way serving the subdivision and
shall have been completed before any subdivision
streets may be accepted by the City.
„Necessary storm sewers of capacity and construction
design approved by the City Engineer shall have been
completed in conjunction with construction of any new
streets.
Storm drainage facilities provided in accordance with
this section shall be designed to accommodate surface
runoff from adjoining undeveloped property uphill; and
where storm drainage from the subdivision will
discharge into natural or artificial surface drainage
ways, the subdivider shall insure that such discharge
will not occur at a greater rate than would occur under
QW0.1 the most severe conditions if the subdivision site were
undeveloped.
5. Sanitary sewers.
In accordance with city specifications, sanitary sewers
of adequate capacity to serve the subdivision and
adjacent areas shall have been installed, connecting to
existing city mains. Plans for such sanitary sewers
must have received the approvals of the Board of Public
Works and of the Tompkins County Department of Health
before sewer installation.
30 May 3, 1989
6. Curbs and gutters.
Curbs and gutters, constructed in accordance with city
specifications, shall be required to serve all or any
portion of any street in the subdivision, unless an
alternate design is approved by the Board and the Board
of Public Works.
7. Sidewalks.
Construction of sidewalks serving all streets in the
subdivision shall be required, unless that requirement
is waived by the Board of Planning and Development and
the Board of Public Works. Any such sidewalks shall
conform to city specifications.
8. Shade trees.
The Board of Planning and Development may require the
planting of shade trees within the space between the
pavement and the edge of the right -of -way of any new
subdivision street or portion thereof. Tree species
shall be selected from the current list of Recommended
Street Trees for Ithaca in use by the Department of
Public Works; tree size, type and placement shall be as
directed or approved by the Board, and shall conform
with the guidelines and specifications of the City's
Shade Tree Ordinance, if any. If appropriate, existing
trees may be utilized.
9. Street monuments.
Street monuments shall be placed at such block corners,
angle points, points of curvature in the streets and
such intermediate points as may be necessary to
furnish a complete, permanent marking of the bounds of
the proposed streets. The street monuments shall be of
such material, size and length as may be fixed by the
City as a standard or as approved by the City Engineer.
10. Evidence of title; maps.
For any subdivision street or other area that is
offered to the City for dedication, the subdivider
shall furnish an abstract of title or other evidence
satisfactory to the City Attorney, and shall also
furnish an acceptable map on recordable mylar or
other material acceptable for record, showing the
boundaries of the property offered and describing them
by dimensions, bearings and other data necessary to
provide a complete, permanent record of the rights -of-
way and street monuments.
11. Water mains.
Water mains of capacity adequate to serve the entire
subdivision, and adjacent areas where appropriate and
required by the Board upon the advice of the City
Engineer, shall be installed in accordance with city
specifications. When a subdivision is opened and
developed in sections, the Board may decide not to
require installation of mains in a section until it is
to be opened.
12. Street grading.
Final grading of the full street width to the approved
grades shall be completed, including provision of any
fill needed, which shall be of a type and quality
acceptable to the City Engineer. The developer shall
also be responsible for removal of any dirt in excess
of that needed, and for its disposition in accordance
with applicable regulations.
19
J
31
13. Gravel roadway.
A compacted gravel roadway
width suitable to carry the
of traffic, as approved by
provided by the subdivider.
May 3, 1989
of a finished depth and
anticipated type and volume
the City Engineer, shall be
14. Street paving.
Paving of the street to city standards, including base
and wearing courses of material approved by the City
Engineer, shall be provided by the subdivider. Such
street shall be designed and built to carry the
anticipated type and volume of traffic, as approved by
the Engineer.
15. Curb cuts and driveway aprons.
Curb cuts and driveway aprons installed by the
subdivider in conjunction with the initial development
of a subdivision shall conform to city standards, shall
be approved by the City Engineer as to location and
width, and shall further conform to the specifications
of Section 30.37 of Chapter 30, Zoning, of the City
Code.
16. Fire hydrants.
Fire hydrants of a type acceptable to the Department of
Public Works and the Ithaca Fire Department shall be
installed at locations specified by the Department of
Public Works in consultation with the Fire Department,
and connected to water mains by piping adequate to
carry the volume of water required to serve the
hydrants.
17. Manholes, control valves, inlets, culverts and utility
structures in streets.
All manholes, control valves, inlets, culverts and
utility structures required for access to, control and
operation of utilities and services installed or
required to be installed by or for the subdivider in
conjunction with initial development of a subdivision,
or any section thereof, shall conform to city standards
or to the standards of the provider of the utility or
service, as applicable, and shall be approved by the
City Engineer. The installation of such structures,
controls, etc, shall be coordinated with the
construction of subdivision streets at all stages, and
shall be completed before the street may be accepted by
the City.
18. Storm drainage connections to streams.
The connection of any storm drain, ditch or swale that
is constructed by the subdivider, emptying into a
stream or watercourse, shall be made in accordance with
city standards, or as approved by the City Engineer,
and with applicable State requirements. Such storm
drainage connection shall be complete before
(400'.1 the beginning of any development of any lot in any
section of the subdivision which would be served by the
drain, ditch, or swale.
19. Underground electric transmission and distribution
facilities and other utilities.
If primary facilities for underground electric service
or other utilities within the subdivision, whether
required by State law, by the Board, or otherwise
provided by the subdivider, are to be installed before
subdivision streets are offered to the
City, the subdivider shall be responsible for assuring
that such installation does not impair or damage any
L) L-
32 May 3, 1989
other subdivision infrastructure. In the event that
such installation does impair or damage other
infrastructure, the subdivider shall be responsible for
correcting the impairment or repairing any damage, to
meet applicable city standards and the approval of the
City Engineer.
20. Retaining walls, etc.
The design, construction material, and details of any
retaining wall or other special engineering feature
which is to be located in or directly adjoining any
street or pedestrian right -of -way within the
subdivision must be approved by the City Engineer prior
to construction of the feature.
21. Street lighting.
The developer shall provide street lighting as required
by the Board of Public Works."
4. That a new Section 31.4 to be known and designated as
Section 31.4, entitled "Services supplied by City," is
hereby added to said Chapter to read as follows:
"Section 31.4 Services supplied by City
A. Provided that all requirements for subdivision
infrastructure specified in Section 31.3 above,
together with any additional requirements specified by
the Board, have been satisfactorily met by the
subdivider, the provisions of this Section shall apply.
B. The City may, at its discretion and subject to
approval by the Board of Public Works, provide the
following additional improvements if not required of
the subdivider:
1. Street trees.
Planting of suitable street trees, as determined
by the City, shall follow development of the
individual lots.
2. Sidewalks, curbs and gutters.
Sidewalks, curbs and gutters may be obtained from
the City by a petition of the owners of the
abutting lots, and by specific authority of the
Board of Public Works. A special assessment for
the construction of sidewalks, curbs, and gutters
shall be levied against the abutting properties in
accord with Sections 5.28 and 5.47 of the City
Charter.
3. Street lights.
Adequate street lighting may be provided when it
is evident that building construction in the
subdivision warrants street lighting."
5. That a new Subdivision G to be known and designated as
Subdivision G of Section 31.21 entitled "General Procedure"
is hereby added to said Chapter to read as follows:
"G. City work at subdivider's expense.
If the subdivider desires the City to do any Hof the
work required under Section 31.3, above, at his., expense,
approval for city performance of such work must b6 obtained
through the Superintendent of Public Works, at which time
the subdivider shall arrange for payment for such work to be
done by the city."
J
33
May 3, 1989
SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately
and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as
provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City Charter.
Carried (9 -0)
*16.4 Citv /County Cooperation on Large Project Review
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
Qwo,� WHEREAS, Sections 239 -1, -m, and -n of the General Municipal Law
provide for review and comment by the County Commissioner of
Planning of certain zoning and subdivision actions of
municipalities in Tompkins County as an aid in coordinating such
zoning and subdivision actions among municipalities by bringing
pertinent inter - community and county -wide consideration to the
attention of municipal agencies, and
WHEREAS, the provisions of Sections 239 -1, -m, and -n are by law
applicable to zoning and subdivision actions only if they are
within 500 feet of a State or County facility or the boundary of
another municipality, and
WHEREAS, the above restrictions limit the usefulness of County-
wide review and comment, particularly as to the implications of
traffic increases resulting from local actions; now, therefore,
be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca does hereby agree to submit to
the County Commissioner of Planning for advisory review and
comment those zoning and subdivision actions which exceed
certain size or have potential community impacts, especially in
the area of traffic generation, as more fully described below,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the actions covered by such advisory County review
and comment shall be:
1. major residential developments: subdivisions resulting in
five or more lots, and multi - family projects of equivalent
size;
2. major discretionary zoning actions: special permits, major
site -plan reviews, and variances involving five or more
dwelling units, or involving commercial or other
nonresidential developments which may generate twenty or
more vehicle trips per day, and
3. zoning map and text amendments,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City will submit to the County Commissioner
of Planning a copy of the Building Commissioner's weekly listing
of building permit applications, and be it further
RESOLVED, That this resolution does not alter in any respects
the rights and obligations of the City or any other entity or
person arising pursuant to the General Municipal Law, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That this resolution is hereby referred to the
Director of Planning and Development, the Building Commissioner,
and the City Clerk for investigation of the means by which the
above reports can be made in a timely manner allowing County
comment without delays in the processing of applications.
Carried (9 -0)
34 May 3, 1989
*16.5 Amendment to Chapter 106 of the Municipal Code of the City
of Ithaca Respecting Membership of the Conservation Advisory
Council - Local Law Being Laid on Table_
Alderperson Booth laid the following Local Law on the table:
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1989
CITY OF ITHACA
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 106 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF
THE CITY OF ITHACA WITH RESPECT TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE
CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ITHACA.
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City
of Ithaca, New York as follows:
SECTION 1. AMENDING SUBDIVISION A OF SECTION 106.3 OF THE
CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE.
Subdivision A of Section 106.3 of the City of Ithaca
Municipal Code Entitled 'Membership' is hereby amended to read as
follows:
S 106.3 Membership
A. The Commission shall consist of fifteen (15) members, of
whom nine (9) shall be voting members appointed by the Mayor,
subject to approval by Common Council, and the remainder shall be
ex- officio members as provided herein. All members shall be
appointed for full terms of two years. Persons residing within
the City of Ithaca and not more than two persons residing outside
the City of Ithaca who are interested in the improvement and
preservation of environmental quality shall be eligible for
appointment as members of the Commission. All members of the
Commission shall have reached their sixteenth birthday on the day
that their appointment takes effect, [and at least] but not more
than one voting member shall not have reached his or her [twenty -
second] eighteenth birthday. Vacancies on the Commission shall
be filled in the same manner as the original appointment, except
that a vacancy occurring other than by the expiration of the term
of office shall be filled only for the remainder of the unexpired
term.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Local Law shall take effect immediately after filing in
the Office of the Secretary of State.
*16.6 Amendment to the Operations Manual of the Ithaca Commons
Advisory Board Respecting Authority of the Commons Advisory Board
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Commons serves to promote the general welfare
of the people of Ithaca and the greater Ithaca community, and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Commons Advisory Board successfully oversees
the management and use of the Ithaca Commons; now, therefore, be
it
RESOLVED,
Section 1. The Commons Advisory Board's Operations Manual
is hereby amended to add a new Section VIII as follows:
"Section VIII. Limited Waivers and Exceptions
The Commons Advisory Board is authorized to grant limited
waivers and exceptions to the provisions of the Operations
Manual, as appropriate and for temporary periods not to
r 1
35
May 3, 1989
exceed one week in duration, such waivers and exceptions to
be subject to any appropriate review by the Department of
Public Works, the Fire Department,. or the Police
Department."
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately
upon the City's completion of any applicable requirements
for public notice.
Carried ( 9 -0)
*16.7 Amendment to Section 60.49 of the Municipal Code
Pertaining to Delegation of Authority to Hire Non - uniformed
Personnel for Enforcement of Parking Regulations - Local Law
Being Laid on Table
Alderperson Booth laid the following Local Law on the table:
LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 1989
CITY OF ITHACA
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 60 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE
CITY OF ITHACA TO ENABLE DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES OF THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT TO ENFORCE PARKING REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF
ITHACA AND THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca,
New York as follows:
SECTION 1. AMENDING SECTION 60.49 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF
THE CITY OF ITHACA.
Section 60.49 entitled "Enforcement of Parking Regulations"
of Chapter 60 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca
entitled "Traffic and Vehicles" is amended to read as follows:
Section 60.49 Enforcement of Parking Regulations
Employees of the [Department of Public Works] Police
Department of the City of Ithaca who are not Police Officers and
who are duly designated by the [Board of Public Works] Chief of
Police as Parking Regulations Enforcement Officers shall be
authorized to issue appearance tickets for violation of any
provisions of Article IV of Chapter 60 of the Municipal Code of
the City of Ithaca and for violation of any provisions of Article
32 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Local Law shall take effect immediately after filing in
the office of the Secretary of State.
Amendment to Municipal Code Pertaining to Exactions of Money for
Park Purposes- Report and Shade Tree Ordinance Report
Alderperson Booth withdrew these two reports from the agenda.
BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
*17.1 1988 Finance Department Annual Report
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
RESOLVED, That this Common Council acknowledges the receipt of
the 1988 Finance Department Annual Report.
Carried (9 -0)
36
May 3, 1989
*17.2 D.P.W. Personnel Roster
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
RESOLVED, That the 1989 Authorized Personnel Roster for the
Department of Public Works be amended as follows:
Add - 1 Automotive Body Repairer Position - 40 hours
Delete - 1 Automotive Mechanic Position - 40 hours
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the position of Automotive Body Repairer be added
to the 1989 D.P.W. Unit Compensation Plan at Grade 28 with a
salary range of $6.56 Hr. to $7.66 Hr.
Carried (9-o)
*17.3 Audit
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract
#8/1989, in the total amount of $39,315,00, be approved for
payment. Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.4 Youth Bureau Equipment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the 1989 Authorized Equipment List for the Youth
Bureau be amended to include the purchase of the following items:
66 pair of Ice Skates $4,605
1 Hot Chocolate Machine 465
2 Bicycles 350
$5,420
and be it further
RESOLVED, That $465 be transferred from Youth Bureau Account
A7310 -120, Hourly P/T and Seasonal Salaries and $4,955 from
Account A1990, Unrestricted Contingency to Youth Bureau Account
A7310 -225, Other Equipment.
Carried (9 -0)
*17.5 Deputy Controller Moving Expenses
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $750 be authorized for
reimbursement of moving expenses for the newly appointed Deputy
City Controller, and be it further
RESOLVED, That an amount not to
the Finance Department, from
Salaries to Account A1315 -455,
exceed $750 be transferred within
Account A1315 -105, Administrative
Travel and Mileage.
Carried (9-0)
*17.6 Commons Lightinq and Electrical System Consultant
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $5,000 be authorized from
Capital Reserve No. 25 - Capital Improvements, for the purpose of
retaining a Consultant to design a complete lighting and
electrical system for the Commons, as requested by the Board of
Public Works, provided that cost estimates for the lighting
system be separated from the cost estimates for the electrical
system to be prepared by the Consultant.
Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.7 Youth Bureau Administrative Assistant
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That Alice Walsh Green be provisionally appointed to
the position of Administrative Assistant, 25 hours, in the Youth
Bureau, at a salary of $10.55 per hour, effective May 8, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
it''
X- ryQ
37 May 3, 1989
*17.8 Landscape Architect /Environmental Planner Appointment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That Peter S. Weed be provisionally appointed to the
position of Landscape Architect /Environmental Planner in the
Planning Department, at a salary of $26,388, that being Step 7 on
the 1989 C.S.E.A. - Administrative Unit Compensation Plan,
effective May 22, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
*17.9 Police Department Equipment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
RESOLVED, That the 1989 Authorized Equipment List for the Police
Department be amended as follows:
Increase Account A3120 -210, Office Equipment $1,234
Decrease Account A3120 -225, Other Equipment $1,234
Carried (9 -0)
*17.10 Police Department Standardization
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
WHEREAS, this Common Council has been requested by the City of
Ithaca Police Department to standardize on badges manufactured by
the Entermann -Rovin Company as the badges to be used by the
Police Officers of the Ithaca Police Department, and to authorize
the City to purchase approved badges from the manufacturer, or a
representative thereof, and
WHEREAS, it is deemed to be in the best interest of the City for
Le reasons of efficiency, uniformity, compatibility and economics to
approve such standardization for the following reasons:
1. The City of Ithaca Police Department presently has some
Entermann -Rovin badges.
2. This action will provide for the standardization of all
badges for the Police Department so that all Police
Officers will have the same type badges which will be
easily recognized by members of the public as the
official badges of the City of Ithaca Police
Department.
3. Present Entermann -Rovin badges are satisfactory to the
uses of the City of Ithaca Police Department;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That pursuant to Section 103, Subdivision 5 of the
General Municipal Law of the State of New York, this Common
Council hereby authorizes the standardization of badges
manufactured by the Entermann -Rovin Company as the badges to be
used and purchased by the City of Ithaca Police Department for
the year 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
*17.11 Recycling Informational Flyer
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
WHEREAS, the Recycling Education Coordinator has requested
permission to enclose an informational flyer with the second
installment of the 1989 City Tax Bill, and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for Common Council to approve all
enclosures; now, therefore, be it
38 May 3, 1989
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves and authorizes the
enclosure of an informational flyer with the second installment
of the 1989 City Tax Bill, as requested by the Recycling
Education Coordinator.
Carried (9 -0)
*17.12 New Fire Stations Authorization
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, Capital Project No. 215, New Fire Stations, was
authorized by Common Council action of February 13, 1988, in an
amount not to exceed $1,800,000, and
WHEREAS, total cost of the project has now been determined to be
$2,300,000; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That this Common Council approves the request of the
Board of Public Works to increase the authorization of Capital
Project No. 215, New Fire Stations, by $500,000 from $1,800,000
to $2,300,000.
Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.13 Fire Stations Renovations Authorization
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, Capital Project No. 221, Fire Stations Renovations, was
authorized by Common Council action of February 13, 1988, in an
amount not to exceed $900,000, and
WHEREAS, total cost of the project has'not been determined to be
$1,000,000; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED,
Board of
Project
$900,000
That this Common Council approves the request of the
Public Works to increase the authorization of Capital
No 221, Fire Stations Renovations by $100,000 from
to $1,000,000.
Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.14 Southside Community Center Contract
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the City enter into a contract with the Southside
Community Center, in an amount not to exceed $2,400, to provide a
Program Coordinator for continuation of the weekend meals program
at present levels, which service shall be rendered from the end
of the Spring semester through September 1989, and be it further
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $2,400 be transferred from
Account A1990, Unrestricted Contingency to Legislative Account
A1010 -435, Contractual Services.
Carried (9-0)
*17.15 Amend 1989 Approved Budqet
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau Outing Program has submitted a proposal
involving rehabilitation of the historical WPA trail along Six
Mile Creek to the New York State Conservation Corp., and
WHEREAS, the proposal has been reviewed by the Department of
Public Works, Planning Department, the Six Mile Creek Oversight
Committee and the City's Conservation Advisory Council; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the 1989 approved budget be amended, subject to
receipt of a grant from the New York State Conservation Corp., as
follows:
J
39
Increase Revenues
A3820 Youth Programs
Increase Appropriations
A7310 -120, Hourly P/T & Seasonal
A7310 -435, Contractual Services
A7310 -445, Travel and Mileage
A7310 -460, Program Supplies
A7310 -470, Rental of Equipment
May 3, 1989
$16,711
$11,772
700
550
929
2,760
16 711
Carried (9 -0)
*17.16 Property Acquisition
By Alderperson Schlather. Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the City has had a longstanding interest in acquiring
title to privately owned parcels of land within the Six Mile
Creek watershed area, and
WHEREAS, John A. Noble has offered to sell to the City, tax
parcel No. 109 -2 -4 in the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, purchase of this parcel is essential to maintaining this
area in its natural state as this area is part of our Six Mile
Creek Park and Wildflower Preserve; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca shall pay to John A. Noble the
sum of $850 for the purchase of this parcel, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Mayor be and he is hereby authorized to enter
into a contract for the purchase of the premises and to sign all
documents necessary thereto on a form approved by the City
Attorney. Carried ( 9 -0)
*17.17 Appointment of Deputy Fire Chief
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Roman
owski
RESOLVED, That John T. Dorman be appointed to the position of
Deputy Fire Chief at an annual salary of $42,930, effective May
22, 1989. Carried (9 -0)
Appreciation to City Controller_Spano
Alderperson Schlather asked that the record reflect his sincere
thanks to Joe Spano for his competency, loyalty, and dedication
to the City on his retirement after 20 years of service to the
City of Ithaca.
UNFINISHED AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
Alderperson Peterson stated aotfthreviewinCouncil
non
-human arservices
to help with the process g
contracts.
Alderpersons Schlather, Peterson, and Romanowski were appointed
to serve in this capacity.
AD,JOITRNMENT .
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 12:30 a.m.
a11-ist F_ Paolange��i
City Clerk
__.mil __