Loading...
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 __