HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-1989-08-01COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. August 1, 1989
PRESENT:
Mayor Gutenberger
Alderpersons (9) - Booth, Nichols, Hoffman, Cummings, Lytel,
Johnson, Killeen, Schlather, Romanowski
(Wool ABSENT:
Alderperson Peterson (excused)
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Clerk - Paolangeli
City Controller - Cafferillo
Director, Planning & Development - Van Cort
Personnel Administrator - Walker
Building Commissioner - Datz
Oki FIre Chief - Olmstead
(� Board of Public Works Commissioner - Reeves
i3 Acting Superintendent of Public Works - Fabbroni
Youth Bureau Director - Cohen
Assistant City Attorney - Beers - Schnock
4Z:�. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to
the American flag.
MINUTES:
Approval of Minutes of the July 5, 1989 Common Council Meeting
Alderperson Schlather requested that on page 7, in the fifth
paragraph, the word 'do' be changed to 'design'. It should read
(woe, as follows: "commissioned to design the renovations.....".
Alderperson Schlather stated that on page 34, under
"Adjournment ", it should be noted that the meeting was adjourned
after the Executive Session at 12:00 midnight.
Resolution
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the July 5, 1989 Common Council
meeting be approved with the above corrections.
Carried (9 -0)
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
Budget and Administration Committee
Alderperson Schlather requested the addition of two items -
14.12, a resolution for the appointment of an Acting
Superintendent of Public Works, and 14.13 an amendment to the
authorized equipment list for the Finance Department.
Alderperson Schlather stated that there is also a revised copy of
the Agreement between the City /Community Recreation Center,
Inc. /Ithaca Youth Hockey Association, item 14.2 on the agenda.
MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS:
Youth Bureau Advisory Board
(awe, Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the
appointment of Than Sun, 520 West Buffalo Street, to the Youth
Bureau Advisory Board, with a term to expire December 31, 1991,
and Valerie Walker, 63 Sheraton Drive, with a term to expire
December 31, 1990.
Resolution
By Alderperson Booth:
RESOLVED, That this 0
and Valerie Walker to
to expire December 31,
Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
3uncil approves the appointment of Than Sun
the Youth Bureau Advisory Board with terms
1991 and December 31, 1990, respectively.
Carried (9 -0)
W;
f ,1
2
August 1, 1989
Tompkins County Youth Bureau Board
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the
appointment of Heather Tallman, 317 Richard Place, and Francis
Shattuck, 901 Dryden Road as City Representatives to the Tompkins
County Youth Bureau Board with terms to expire December 31, 1991.
Resolution
By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
RESOLVED, That this Council approves the appointment of Heather
Tallman and Francis Shattuck as City Representatives to the
Tompkins County Youth Bureau Board with terms to expire December
31 1991
Carried (9 -0)
Board of Public Works
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the
appointment of Joseph Spano, 171 East State Street, to the Board
of Public Works with a term to expire December 31, 1989.
Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That this Council approves the appointment of Joseph
Spano to the Board of Public Works with a term to expire December
31, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
Purchasing Agent Search Committee
Mayor Gutenberger announced that due to the upcoming retirement
of John C. Clynes, Purchasing Agent for the City of Ithaca, he
has appointed the following persons to serve on the Search
Committee for that position:
Jean McPheeters
Michael Sprague
Sheila Ferrari
Alderperson Booth
Alderperson Schlather
Alderperson Killeen
a member of the Energy Commission will be
announced.
Deputy City Clerk Search Committee
Mayor Gutenberger announced that due to the resignation of Betty
F. Poole as Deputy City Clerk for the City of Ithaca, he has
appointed the following persons to serve on the Search Committee
for that position:
Dominick Cafferillo
Callista Paolangeli
Debra Parsons
Jean Swartwood
Alderperson Lytel
Alderperson Johnson
Alderperson Romanowski
Arts and Culture Committee
Mayor Gutenberger stated that he has appointed the following
persons to serve on the Arts and Culture Committee: Jill Hartz,
John Johnson, Jean Deming, and Michael Cannon. A fifth person
will be announced at a later date.
Capital Review Committee
Mayor Gutenberger stated that he has named the following persons
to serve on the Capital Review Committee: Larry Fabbroni,
Dominick Cafferillo, Thys Van Cort, Raymond Schlather, Susan
Cummings, Joseph Daley, Carol Reeves, Susan Blumenthal, Moncrief
Cochran, and the Mayor.
(f e�
3
August 1, 1989
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Hydropower
The following persons spoke to Council regarding the Hydropower
issue and expressed their reasons for being against the
development of hydropower at Ithaca Falls:
Sarah Jane Bokaer, Linn Street
Lois Darlington, 409 Lake Street
Margaret Fabrizio, 213 King Street
(4wool Alfredo Rossi, 409 Lake Street
Jeanne Fadula, 615 North Aurora Street
Second Hockey Rink at Cass Park
Doria Higgins, representing 'Citizens to Save Our Parks', stated
that before reading her statement this evening she would like to
make it clear that their group is not opposed, at this time, to a
new hockey rink but they are opposed to the contract that is on
the agenda for Council this evening and they are opposed to the
proposed location for the new rink. Ms. Higgins read the
following statement to Council:
"We respectfully ask you to consider the following four points
when voting tonight on Item 14.2 - -a contract between the City,
the Community Recreational Center, Inc., and the Ithaca Youth
Hockey Association, which would commit the City to start building
a second hockey rink at Cass Park on the site of the present
tennis courts upon payment to the City by CRC of 'at least
$550,000.00.'
1. There is no limit set in this contract upon the eventual cost
of the hockey rink. Item 10 gives the impression of such a limit
but in fact the wording is vague and the intent ambiguous. The
item reads "...the City reserves the right to refuse to go
(awoe forward... if the total cost... should exceed $1,100,000.00." It
says only that the "City reserves the right to refuse to go
forward." It does not say the City will refuse to go forward if
the cost should exceed $1,100,000.00.
Suppose the City has started construction (as the contract says
it must on receipt of $550,000.00) and finds after it has already
spent $550,000.00 or more that the eventual cost will be two
million dollars over the estimated cost. What does the City do
then? Stop construction and simply lose whatever it has already
spent?
2. The itemization of costs as presented in the agreement are of
doubtful accuracy. For instance cost of "Relocation of Tennis
Courts" is given as 11$25,000.00." We spoke yesterday to McGuire
Bennett who built the new tennis courts at La Tourelle and they
said of the cost listed in your proposed contact "It couldn't be
done at that price." They said 11$25,000.00 per court was a
minimum." Which means the relocation of the four tennis courts
would be $100,000.00 at a "minimum" not a mere $25,000.00 as
stated.
Let us be reminded that the original cost estimate for the
administration building of the Youth Bureau was $700,000.00.
ce But, in fact, it cost us seven hundred thousand plus one million.
What makes this overcharge worse is that while there are a few
facilities for youth in that building, it is, as you know,
primarily an administration building.
3. The Site Plan Review Committee has not been asked to review
the proposed location of the rink. The Conservation Advisory
Council has objected to the proposed location of the rink.
Citizens to Save Our Parks and others in the community have
publicly objected to the proposed location.
C ED
4 August 1, 1989
The estimated cost of the new rink is based on its location at
the site of the present tennis courts. A 20 foot high building
at this site, longer than the present tennis courts, will obtrude
unpleasantly on the beauty of the park and most particularly on
the comfort and beauty of the Cass Park pool. For you to bypass
the newly formed Site Plan Review Committee, expressly created by
you to evaluate sitings such as the new rink, and to ignore
recommendations from the CAC would seem to indicate a deliberate
blindfolding of yourselves in this matter.
4. We think it would be a better priority for the City
government, at this time, to complete arrangements to provide
GIAC with a decent pool before spending money to construct a
second hockey rink."
Mr. Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, stated that he thinks the
location of the proposed hockey rink is unwise. He urged Council
to delay action on the issue of the second hockey rink.
Access Unlimited
Larry Roberts, 315 South Albany Street, read the following
statement to Council:
"I represent Access Unlimited, a group of people interested in
disability and access issues in Ithaca and the surrounding areas.
We understand that, finally, the City is taking action to make
Clinton Hall accessible from the rear. Though we are glad this
action is being taken we want to express outrage at longstanding
City inaction in failing to enforce its Building Code.
We want to make it clear that we are unhappy with rear access,
but consider it better than no access. Tonight, we urge your
adoption of a policy for the future prohibiting of rear access in
City buildings. Such access 4_s insulting and demeaning. It is
also problematic in that doors are often locked for security
reasons or blocked for deliveries or otherwise commonly
obstructed.
On July 26, Mayor Gutenberger met with members of Access
Unlimited. We discussed a preliminary list of areas of concern
to us at that time. For your information and attention, we are
passing that list along to you. Please feel free to add to it if
you wish. The Mayor expressed some enthusiasm about setting up
an advisory panel, with staff assistance assigned, to help the
City move forward on issues affecting people with disabilities.
We look forward to working with you to lead Ithaca in the
direction of becoming barrier - free."
Sciencenter on old Sewer Treatment Plant Site
Robert Leathers, 99 East Lake Road, Architect for the new
Sciencenter, addressed the resolution on tonight's agenda on
establishing an Ad Hoc Committee to consider uses for the old
Sewage Treatment Plant site. He gave background information on
the Sciencenter and stated that since they have been displaced
from their location on Tioga Street, they are temporarily located
in Center Ithaca. At that time the Sciencenter set up a
committee to begin a community volunteer process to design,
organize and build a new Sciencenter in Ithaca. The first choice
that the committee has for a permanent home is the old Sewage
Treatment Plant site.
Mr. Leathers stated that they felt that not only would
establishing a Sciencenter at that site provide a fun place for
the family to visit but in addition, it would provide an
educational resource that the neighborhood, the school system,
the whole community would be able to use. He said that in
l)
k
August 1, 1989
addition, they plan to build a neighborhood park on that same
site, and they feel that the center would be a regional magnet
that would attract people from all over the state.
Mr. Leathers further stated that the Sciencenter committee
welcomes the opportunity to work with the City to set up an
agreement whereby they might lease a portion of that site and
establish a dynamic, exciting community center here in Ithaca.
(00" Plant Closing Legislation
Coert Bonthius, 109 West State Street, addressed Council about
the resolution that is on tonight's agenda in support of State
legislation on plant closings. He stated that the Tompkins
County Labor Coalition urges Council to pass the resolution.
Mr. Bonthius also spoke regarding the MacCormick Center. Last
week 44 employees at the Center received notification that their
jobs are being terminated on October 1, 1989. He said that many
r:o of these workers live in Tompkins County and have made a
commitment to the community. Due to budgetary concerns, the
0) State Division for Youth has decided to terminate the positions
and re -hire the same workers at a lower pay grade. While this is
.� not the same as a plant closing, it is a mass lay -off. Mr.
Bonthius urged Common Council to show support for these workers.
Joseph Maratea, 109 West State Street, representing CSEA Local
561 at the MacCormick Center, addressed Council and explained
what has happened at the Center. He said that 18 months ago the
McCormick Center was changed from a secure facility for juveniles
to a limited secure. At that time the NYS Division for Youth
gave the 44 employees that worked directly with these youth
their word that their salaries would not be reduced due to the
changing in the status of the Center. These people were informed
on July 25th of a change in their job status. They were given
until August 7th to let the state know what their intention is as
far as wanting a demotion or taking a lay -off or relocating. The
only offer that the state has made regarding the relocating is to
a facility that is 150 miles away and they have been given 24
days to make up their minds and report to their new job.
Mr. Maratea handed out a resolution that he had drafted and he
urged the Council to strongly oppose such action by the State by
adopting this resolution.
Baling Station
Chris Zikakis, 309 Sunnyview Lane, spoke on the issue of the
baling station at the Commercial Avenue site. He urged Council
not to delay their decision for another month. He asked Council
to vote tonight to pass a resolution proclaiming their
opposition to the Commercial Avenue site for a baling station.
The following persons voiced their concerns regarding a Baling
Station at the Commercial Avenue site:
Fred Remilard, Elmira Road - Representing McDonald's
Restaurant
Tim McGuire, Meadow Street - Representing McGuire Ford
Steve Homerada, Elmira Road - Representing Southern Tier
Pizza Hut
Gordon Chambers, Meadow Street - Representing PIP Printing
Bruce Abbott, Manager West Village Apartments
Jeanne Fadula, North Aurora Street, spoke in support of the
plant closing legislation. She also urged Council to renew their
commitment to energy conservation and waste reduction.
Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, voiced concerns regarding location
of the baling station and also urged Council to delay action on
the resolution on tonight's agenda regarding the Hockey Rink at
Cass Park.
(11 1
6 August 1, 1989
Markles Flat for Day Care
David Scovronick, 403 North Plain Street, owner of Ithaca
Soyfoods, stated that his business is located in the Markles Flat
building and he has grave concerns about the possibility of
moving the Day Care Center to that location. He said that at
this point having to move his business would incur a severe
economic hardship upon him to the extent that there would be the
chance that he might not be able to continue in business. He
asked that other sites, as well as the Markles Flat building, be
considered for day care.
Reproductive Choice
Shelley Drazen, 118 East Fall Street, representing the Center for
Reproductive Choice, urged Council to support the resolution
regarding reproductive choice on tonight's agenda.
Development of the Treman Marina and Surroundinq Area
Rick Bonney, Ornithologist, Barnes Hill, Newfield, read the
following statement to Council:
"When the first white settlers arrived in the Finger Lakes, the
southern end of Cayuga Lake was one vast wetland, teaming with
birds, water fowl, and wading birds. These days, after 150 years
or so of rather relentless civilization the wetland at the south
end of the lake has been reduced to a vestige, a tiny little
area, wetland and grassland known as Hogs' Hole. Most of that
area is owned by the State and doesn't have a whole lot to do
with the people around the table tonight but there is a small
part there that is owned by the City. It is called the Festival
Land.
Andrew Mazzella, Commissioner of Finger Lakes State Parks, has
asked that the city transfer the Festival Lands to the State so
that the State can develop them by adding to the Marina one more
pier, putting in a road and some parking lots. I think it is a
terrible idea; I think probably the birds do too and I would
really like to present to you the idea that this land should be
retained by the City because if it turns into a marina and a road
and a parking lot, one of these parking lots is located very,
very close to the boundary of the wetland that the State is
calling Hogs' Hole. I think it would impact very negatively on
the birds that are there. But more than that, that whole area
has potential for being restored to one large wetland, much like
it used to be 150 years ago.
I was talking with some people at DEC today, Mazzella's parent
organization. There is money available for municipalities to
restore wetlands and it might even be possible to look into the
feasibility of cooperating with the State to try to get some
money from the State to develop the wetland there which would be
much more ecologically advantageous than a picnic ground.
In the interest of brevity, I would like to hand out a statement
to Council members."
RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC:
MacCormick Center Issue
Alderperson Lytel stated that he would like to add the resolution
to the agenda under New Business that was presented by Joseph
Maratea, regarding the MacCormick Center.
The resolution was not added to the agenda due to Alderperson
Booth's objection.
69
7 August 1, 1989
REPORT OF CITY BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS
Board of Public Works
Commissioner Reeves reported on the following:
Traffic Island -- Mitchell and State Streets - On July 26,
the Board of Public Works passed a resolution to place a traffic
island at the corner of State and Mitchell Streets on a trial
basis. Further discussion on this matter will be held at the
(00" Committee of the Whole meeting on August 9th to discuss with the
Transit Supervisor concerns of unscheduled transit stops in that
area. Comm. Reeves stated that one of her concerns is
notifiying the residents in the area of the pending change. She
asked if the Alderpersons from that area have specific ideas
about how to go about notification of the residents in the area,
the Board would appreciate their feedback on this. She further
remarked that there is a drawing available in the Traffic
Engineer's Office showing different proposals. The Board of
00, Public Works favored Plan B -1.
Future Use of City Owned Property - Comm. Reeves stated that
�lrS in regard to agenda item 16.3, the Board of Public Works and the
Department of Public Works are in the process of reviewing the
`j operations for a report. Until this review process is complete,
the old Sewage Treatment Plant site has not been declared surplus
and will not be turned over for general City use until a long -
range plan is developed.
Privatization Policy for the Wastewater Treatment Plant and
Water Filtration Plant Facilities - Comm. Reeves said that
in regard to item 14.3 on the agenda, she would like to propose
friendly amendments and she handed out copies of the proposed
amendments to Council members. She said that the Board of Public
(600,01 Works never sought to bypass anyone's protections, breach any
promises or good faith or to resolve any problems by looking at
privatization. The Board, had it been allowed to look at
privatization, wanted to see what opportunities might be
available to either the City or to its employees at those
facilities. She stated that the negative approach was not the
Boards. She urged a positive vote on the amendments that she
presented.
Aucxust Schedule for the Board of Public Works Meetinas -
Comm. Reeves stated that the August schedule for the Board of
Public Works has been changed. The meeting on August 2 has been
cancelled. The Committee of the Whole will meet on August 9 and
August 23, and the Board's regular meetings will be held on
August 16 and August 30.
Tompkins County Local Emergency Planning Committee
Fire Chief Olmstead addressed the Council as the City's
representative to the Tompkins County Local Emergency Committee.
He handed out information on the committee and explained what the
emergency planning effort is.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR:
Letter from Board of Representatives
(400011 Mayor Gutenberger read the following
from James A. Mason, Chairperson,
Representatives, dated August 1, 1989,
letter that was sent to him
Tompkins County Board of
into the record:
"It is my understanding that a resolution concerning the siting
of the Tompkins County Solid Waste Management Center has been
placed on the agenda for the August 1 Common Council meeting.
I had discussed this matter with the Chair of that Committee last
week and it was my understanding that the Committee was not going
to bring this resolution forward until they had an opportunity to
review the draft Environmental Impact Statement and other data
that is to be available within the next two weeks.
70
L-11
Much of the information about
presented to the community by the
is misleading and erroneous.
misunderstanding about what the
what it will look like, and what
will be.
August 1, 1989
the proposed facility being
Elmira Road business community
There is a very serious
facility is, how it operates,
its impacts on the environment
Since the County had previously agreed to make a presentation to
the Planning and Development Committee and other interested
Council members on August 23, I would respectfully request that
action on the resolution be deferred until your next Common
Council meeting. This will provide an opportunity for Council
members and the community to hear the facts, review the dEIS, and
reach a more informed decision.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter."
Smoking Regulations
Mayor Gutenberger referred to the most recent bulletin that he
has received from the New York State Conference of Mayors and
said that there is a warning in there which says that only
municipalities that have smoking regulations which are more
stringent than this legislation shall avoid being pre - empted. He
asked Alderperson Booth if his committee has gone through the
document to make sure that our local ordinance is more stringent
or at least equal to the State's and if not, we should probably
do so.
Alderperson Booth said that he is reviewing the document now.
Our ordinance is stronger in some places and not as strong in
others.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
Jason Fane Lawsuit
Assistant City Attorney Beers - Schnock reported that the City has
received a decision on 705 East Buffalo Street, dated July 31,
1989. Judge Sherman denied the motion to dismiss and the trial
is set for August 17, 1989.
Fall Creek Designation
Alderperson Nichols asked if there could be a report to Council
from the City Attorney as to what the City's legal situation is
in regard to the Fall Creek designation and the 401C approval.
Asst. Atty. Beers - Schnock stated that it is her understanding
that the matter has been under consideration by the City
Attorney and she will check with him.
Mayor Gutenberger said that the requests for answers in writing
have been sent out to the Federal and State governments by the
City Attorney. To his knowledge, no answers have yet been
received.
Recess
Common Council recessed at 8:40 p.m. and reconvened in regular
session at 8:55 p.m.
Fall Creek Designation
Mayor Gutenberger read the following letter into the record from
the Department of Environmental Conservation, date stamped July
14, 1989, which was handed to him during the recess by Assistant
City Attorney Beers - Schnock:
"Dear Mr. Nash:
This is to respond to your letter of April 21, 1989 requesting
information on the effect designation of Fall Creek into the New
York State Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers System Act, (the
Act) with regard to new hydro developments.
71
OJ
Designation would preclude State
certification for a hydro project
Should the department deny a 401,
covered by Uniform Procedures Act
option for appeal of a denial.
August 1, 1989
approval of any new 401
at the Ithaca Falls site.
there is an appeal mechanism
and an Article 78 is another
In response to your numbered questions:
1. Diversion in [6NYCRR Part 666.18(a) (2) (2)] means any
physical removal of the river water from the natural
stream bed. To draw water from above the dam, run it
through a turbine and then release it back into the
river would constitute a diversion unless the turbine
was located in an existing dam.
2. The reference in 666.4 to past impoundment and or
diversion does not preclude designation of river
(I segments that are impounded at the time of designation
or once were impounded, [(6 NYCRR Sec.666.18(a) (2)
(4) ] .
3. Rivers are only designated by legislative amendments of
the Act, [ECL 15- 2715].
4. The Department has an established policy of denying 401
Certificates to hydro projects that would violate the
letter and or the purposes and policies of the Act. I
refer you to 6 NYCRR, Sec. 608.7 as well.
I trust this clarification will allow the City to move
forward with confidence.
Sincerely,
Thomas C. Jorling"
Mayor Gutenberger stated that the City Attorney would be going
through the communication to determine its meaning.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
* 16.2 Central Processing Facilitv at Commercial Avenue
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
WHEREAS, the County's proposed Central Processing Facility at
Commercial Avenue would be immediately adjacent to one of
Ithaca's major new retail areas, which also include dining
establishments, lodgings, and recreational facilities, and
WHEREAS, the Central Processing Facility would also impact two
neighboring parks, Buttermilk State Park on Route 13 and the
proposed City /Town Park along the Cayuga Inlet, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca currently has proposed a capital
project to plan and design the abutting undeveloped Southwest
area as a mixed use residential and commercial neighborhood,
providing much needed affordable housing and job opportunities,
(4w, and
WHEREAS, this location is also a highly visible entry to the
city, and
WHEREAS, it will not be possible to mitigate all of the negative
effects of this facility, including overwhelming size and
appearance and possible noise and odor, and
WHEREAS, there is not enough space available to adequately
separate it from these densely populated retail, residential,
and recreational areas, and
WHEREAS, there are far more appropriate, compatible, job and tax
generating uses competing for this site, and
7?
10
August 1, 1989
WHEREAS, the location of the Central Processing Facility at the
Commercial Avenue site would not be consistent with the City's
Master Plan and would be a violation of the City's Zoning
Ordinance; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca strongly
requests that the Tompkins County Board of Representatives
discontinue consideration of Commercial Avenue as a site for the
County Central Processing Facility.
Alderperson Cummings urged the Council to vote on the resolution
this evening. She referred to the request made by the Tompkins
County Board of Representatives to defer action pending
additional information to be made available in the dEIS.
However, the dEIS is only one of the several factors that the
City ought to be considering. She said that we are a community,
an urban area, of extremely limited available space. Processing,
and compressing of garbage within an urban area is not an
appropriate land use, particularly in a community where we don't
have the space to adequately buffer and protect surrounding
residential and retail facilities.
Alderperson Cummings further stated that there is some vacant
land available next to this proposed site. However, this is a
precious piece of land. It is a resource that we have all
looked at and talked about as the site for future affordable
housing and for job opportunities for our citizens. She said
that these people on the flats have in the past, for many years,
dealt with landfill sites next to their homes and their
businesses. She reminded Council what the community looked like
when landfill was there and she said that this area has indeed
done its fair share in accommodating and hosting solid waste
materials.
Alderperson Cummings said that it is critical that the City send
a message to the County that the City believes it is not the best
possible location for such a facility.
Alderperson Booth stated that he would like to know the meaning
of the eighth 'Whereas' clause. He said that he has always
understood that this is going to be located in an industrial
zone.
Discussion followed on the Zoning Ordinance and what uses might
be permitted in different zones. Planning Director Van Cort
answered questions from Council.
Alderperson Schlather suggested that the words 'and it would be a
violation of the City's Zoning Ordinance' be stricken from the
last 'Whereas' of the resolution. Alderperson Cummings accepted
that as a friendly amendment.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That there be a second RESOLVED to read as follows:
"That the Common Council requests the Board of Representatives to
immediately conduct full environmental review, and legal review
as necessary, in connection with the so- called Mancini and
Airport sites as alternatives to the Commercial Avenue site."
Discussion followed as to whether the amendment should be tied
into the original resolution or a resolution by itself.
Alderperson Schlather stated that the reason he wants to tie 'it
into the original resolution is because of the time schedule. He
said that it is very clear that notwithstanding the best
intentions of the County Board of Representatives, and they have
certainly acted in good faith throughout this process, there
just will not be enough time to begin serious consideration of
alternative sites. The County is on a time track that requires
that we have something in place by August 1990 and there is not .
It
Irn
11
August 1, 1989
enough time for the City to do the full environmental review
that is necessary at other sites. The County may, in fact, end
up at the Commercial Avenue site not because it is ecologically
sound, but simply because time wise it is chronologically
expedient.
Alderperson Schlather further stated that because the reasons for
not locating at that site are so obvious and so significant from
(WO." the City's standpoint, we have to take the somewhat unprecedented
step of asking the County to abandon this process before we dig
the hole any deeper. It seems to him that the die will be cast
and we will be stuck with a baling station at this site for lack
of a better alternative; we will be stuck with it by default.
an alternative resolution to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That
(two.' the Intergovernmental Relations Committee and Planning staff give
every possible assistance to County officials in the study of
alternate sites for the Central Processing Facility."
Alderperson Schlather said that his concern with Alderperson
Nichols' amendment is he does not think it goes far enough. The
County has already done a very exhausted preliminary study as to
certain sites. The next step to be taken is to begin the
environmental review.
Mayor Gutenberger again asked Alderperson Schlather to separate
his amendment from the original resolution. Alderperson
Schlather asked to hear from other members of Council on the
amendment.
Alderperson Killeen remarked that he thinks the idea of a baling
station at Commercial Avenue is a bad idea. In view of the
discussions, the great concerns and his belief that the
Commercial Avenue is not good he is increasingly convinced that
there is not a site in the City that has been looked at thus far
that is acceptable. The whole concept of loading up the County
seat with the County's trash is inconceivable to him. He agrees
with Alderperson Schlather's amendment. He would specify two
sites, but perhaps add the phrasing 'but not be limited to the
following sites'.
Alderperson Schlather offered the following language for his
amendment: "RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests the Board
of Representatives to immediately conduct full environmental
review, and legal review as necessary, of alternative sites
including but not limited the so- called Mancini site and the
Airport site."
Alderperson Booth stated that
thinks for the Common Council
County to look at sites that
politically not supportable.
Further discussion followed on
in regard to the amendment he
to send a message that urges the
are not in the City of Ithaca is
the amendment.
73
Discussion continued on the amendment.
Alderperson Hoffman said that the City might want to give
the
-`�
County a little more latitude and suggest that at least
two
alternative sites should be explored economically
and
environmentally, but he does not feel comfortable suggesting
only
13 i
these two sites when there may be a third site they find
more
attractive.
Alderperson Nichols stated that he agrees with Alderperson
Schlather in regard to the need for speed in this action and
the
fact that it is vitally important in terms of time
that
alternate sites be explored immediately. However, if
this
amendment were adopted he would have questions about voting
for
the motion. He thinks we should put this amendment aside
and
argue about the location in another format but include something
positive about alternate sites without naming them. He suggested
an alternative resolution to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That
(two.' the Intergovernmental Relations Committee and Planning staff give
every possible assistance to County officials in the study of
alternate sites for the Central Processing Facility."
Alderperson Schlather said that his concern with Alderperson
Nichols' amendment is he does not think it goes far enough. The
County has already done a very exhausted preliminary study as to
certain sites. The next step to be taken is to begin the
environmental review.
Mayor Gutenberger again asked Alderperson Schlather to separate
his amendment from the original resolution. Alderperson
Schlather asked to hear from other members of Council on the
amendment.
Alderperson Killeen remarked that he thinks the idea of a baling
station at Commercial Avenue is a bad idea. In view of the
discussions, the great concerns and his belief that the
Commercial Avenue is not good he is increasingly convinced that
there is not a site in the City that has been looked at thus far
that is acceptable. The whole concept of loading up the County
seat with the County's trash is inconceivable to him. He agrees
with Alderperson Schlather's amendment. He would specify two
sites, but perhaps add the phrasing 'but not be limited to the
following sites'.
Alderperson Schlather offered the following language for his
amendment: "RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests the Board
of Representatives to immediately conduct full environmental
review, and legal review as necessary, of alternative sites
including but not limited the so- called Mancini site and the
Airport site."
Alderperson Booth stated that
thinks for the Common Council
County to look at sites that
politically not supportable.
Further discussion followed on
in regard to the amendment he
to send a message that urges the
are not in the City of Ithaca is
the amendment.
73
4
12
August 1, 1989
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Cummings, Nichols, Lytel, Johnson, Schlather,
Romanowski, Killeen, Hoffman
Nay (1) - Booth
Carried (8 -1)
Discussion followed on the Resolution as Amended.
Y'
Alderperson Hoffman suggested friendly amendments to the
Resolution and they were accepted by Alderpersons Cummings and
Lytel, as makers of the motion.
Alderperson Romanowski stated that he has consistently opposed
having the Central Processing Facility in this particular area,
in fact, anywhere along Route 13 in the City, would not be
acceptable to him.
Alderperson Johnson stated that he does not think that it is
procrastination to get all the information that is available
about this; rather it is acting responsibly to get as much
information as possible. He personally does not want a Central
Processing Facility on Commercial Avenue. He would like to see a
resolution to implore the County to do a dEIS on the alternative
sites so that they won't be left with just this one.
Alderperson Booth stated that while he is not delighted with the
Commercial Avenue site he believes that at this stage it is
feasible and he is willing to wait for the environmental,,,review.
He said the County has been open with the City and A,AAf acted in
good faith. The Council should remember that the County has the
power to locate this facility where they want to locate it,
since it is a governmental facility. The City generates a lot of
garbage and he believes it is irresponsible for the City to say
we don't want this kind of facility in the City of Ithaca.
Alderperson Hoffman remarked that he believes Alderperson Booth's
comments are well taken. He believes we should respect the
environmental review process and hear what this process has to
say. He does not like being asked to vote on this before all the
information is in.
Alderperson Lytel stated that on the question of whether or not
the City is willing to do their part to wrestle with the problem,
he thinks that clearly we are. What we have seen in this process
is a real escalation in the space demand for this facility to a
point where it does not fit this space. Nor does it fit the
parcels that remain within the City of Ithaca. What is at issue
here is that this is a proposed use that simply is not
compatible with urban density.
Main Motion As Amended
The Main Motion as Amended is as follows:
WHEREAS, the County's proposed Central Processing Facility at
Commercial Avenue would be immediately adjacent to one of
Ithaca's major new retail areas, which also include dining
establishments, lodgings, and recreational facilities, and
WHEREAS, the Central Processing Facility may also impact two
neighboring parks, Buttermilk State Park on Route 13 and the
proposed City /Town Park along the Cayuga Inlet, and
WHEREAS, there is currently under consideration a proposed
capital project to plan and design the abutting undeveloped
Southwest area as a mixed use residential and commercial
neighborhood, providing much needed affordable housing and job
opportunities, and
13 August 1, 1989
WHEREAS, this location is also a highly visible entry to the
city, and
WHEREAS, it will not be possible to mitigate all of the negative
effects of this facility, and
WHEREAS, there is not enough space available to adequately
separate it from these already developed retail, residential,
and recreational areas, and
WHEREAS, there are far more appropriate, compatible, job and tax
generating uses competing for this site, and
WHEREAS, the location of the Central Processing Facility at the
Commercial Avenue site would not be consistent with the City's
Master Plan; Now, therefore, be it
Cki RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca strongly
requests that the Tompkins County Board of Representatives
discontinue consideration of Commercial Avenue as a site for the
County Central Processing Facility, and be it further
as
E!j RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests the Board of
L Representatives to immediately conduct full environmental review
and legal review as necessary of alternative sites, including but
not limited to the so- called Mancini site and the Airport site.
Alderperson Hoffman asked Mayor Gutenberger if he would support
abstentions for lack of information. Mayor Gutenberger
responded, no. Unless someone has a personal stake in the
financial outcome of this particular resolution, the Mayor would
(Woe not accept an abstention.
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) - Schlather, Nichols, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel,
Romanowski
Nays (3) - Hoffman, Booth, Johnson
Carried (6 -3)
Mayor's Veto Message
Mayor Gutenberger stated that he has only vetoed, in 5 1/2 years,
two resolutions passed by Common Council and those were both on
process. First, he is disappointed in the sense that this Common
Council has passed numerous rules demanding of the public, that
for various actions the public wants to take, they must come
forward with projects, and plans well thought out and go through
an environmental review process which this City of Ithaca, we as
the lawmakers, have set up. We expect the public to go through
this whether it is Site Plan Review, Environmental Review or
SEQR. We demand the public go through a process before a
decision is made to grant a building permit or before a decision
is made to reject a building permit or the various types of
permits that are required by us, the government.
Mayor Gutenberger said that he is very disappointed that with
(400", this action on a 6 - 3 vote, this Common Council has pre - judged
and ignored the environmental review process. We are in effect
saying that we know the answers before the environmental review
process is completed. He thinks the Council must be fair to the
public when they come forward. We cannot pre -judge any project.
We have to abide by the rules that government has established.
Mayor Gutenberger further stated he is also disappointed that, as
was mentioned earlier, to vote against this was lip service to
SEQR. He thinks that voting this in is lip service to the
environmental review. You are pre - judging or making judgments
and ignoring the environmental review process. You should make
judgments based upon information - if you believe in the system.
If you believe in the environmental review process, which you
7 f;
14
August 1, 1989
have put in place, then you have to stand ready to decide on the
results of that environmental review process, or it is a sham.
It was said last night, to not support the rejection of this
site, could be harmful to a person's political future. He said
he is going to say right now, that the failure to hold ourselves
accountable to the laws that we enact is more harmful to the
public than any single individual's political future. We have to
have faith in our laws, and the public has to have faith in us to
make decisions based upon the information and facts. We have
not done that tonight.
This resolution is hereby vetoed.
Alderperson Cummings stated there is an amendment in the form of
a 'Resolved' requesting that the County consider additional sites
simultaneously. She stated she would like to again put that
forward.
Mayor Gutenberger stated that the Chair will entertain the re-
introduction of that resolution.
Resolution
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests the Board of
Representatives to immediately conduct full environmental review,
and legal review as necessary, of alternative sites including
but not but limited to the so- called Mancini site and the Airport
site.
Alderperson Cummings pointed out
before the Council tonight was
issues beyond the subject of
specific site. She said the
environmental review or just 01
address the much broader issue of
in the City.
that the resolution which was
a resolution which addressed
environmental review on that
real concern has been that
ze site does not allow us to
whether such a facility belongs
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
* 16.1a Hydropower - Investigation of Underground Hydro Plant at
Ithaca Falls
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
WHEREAS, the environmental impact of an underground hydropower
plant at Ithaca Falls may be significantly less than for an
above ground facility; and
WHEREAS, Common Council must have additional information and
financial estimates in order to determine the desirability and
feasibility of proceeding with an underground design; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that Common Council directs Planning Department staff
to investigate the underground hydro plant concept and to elicit
engineering proposals for preliminary designs, for consideration
by Common Council at its October 1989 meeting.
Discussion followed on the feasibility of an underground hydro
plant. Requests for Proposals are being sent out by Planner
Helen Jones.
Alderperson Killeen asked the location of other underground
hydro plants. Alderperson Hoffman replied that Watervliet, New
York and Troy, New York both have underground facilities.
77
15 August 1, 1989
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Nichols, Hoffman, Johnson, Romanowski, Lytel,
Cummings, Killeen, Schlather
Nay (1) - Booth
Carried (8 -1)
* 16.1b Hydropower - Van Natta Dam - Request for Supplemental
Extension
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, negotiations with private developers are currently
underway for construction and operation of the Van Natta Dam
hydropower project, and
WHEREAS, it is possible that as result of said negotiations the
Exemption issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on
the project will be transferred to the preferred developer, and
WHEREAS, negotiations and finalization of a development agreement
are not likely to be completed early enough to permit project
construction to be begun prior to the March 1990 deadline; now,
�? therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby direct staff to request
a supplemental extension of the deadline for beginning
construction on the project.
Carried (9 -0)
* 16.3 Future Use of City Owned Property
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has received several requests for the
(Ww", use, sale or lease of property owned by the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, one of the properties in question includes the former
site of the sewage treatment plant and other adjacent property
that is currently being used by the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, in order to effectively respond to these requests it
will be necessary to resolve such issues as whether the City of
Ithaca should continue to use these parcels, what alternate plans
must be made to move the current City functions, what other uses
are appropriate for these parcels, by what process should they be
made available to other users and what compensation the City
would expect to receive in return for making them available; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to
appoint an ad hoc committee to discuss and make recommendations
to the Common Council concerning the future use of the former
sewage treatment plant site, the adjacent City -owned lands, and
other City parcels that the City may wish to consider selling.
These recommendations should address, but not be limited to, the
issues raised above, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the ad hoc committee shall be composed of members
(4010" from each of the following municipal bodies:
Common Council (2 members) ( Alderperson Killeen
volunteered to serve on committee)
Board of Public Works (2 members)
Planning and Development Board (1 member)
and be it further
RESOLVED, That staff services be provided by the Director of
Planning and Development, the acting Superintendent of Public
Works, and the City Engineer, and be it further
78
16
RESOLVED, That the recommendation of
regarding the above issues shall
committee as soon as possible.
August 1, 1989
the Board of Public Works
be given to the ad hoc
Carried (9 -0)
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
* 15.5 Clinton Hall Accessibility
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, for over two years the Human Services Committee has
attempted to resolve handicapped access problems in the Clinton
Hall building, and
WHEREAS, the Human Services Committee has learned that access for
the handicapped is still incomplete, including the locking of the
back entrance door through which a handicapped person must enter,
and
WHEREAS, the failure to provide acceptable and adequate
accessibility to Clinton Hall for the handicapped has precluded
the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Clinton Hall;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council directs the Building Commissioner
and City Attorney to take appropriate legal action to address the
violation of occupancy of a building without a proper
certificate, which is due to not meeting requirements for
handicapped accessibility.
Alderperson Lytel referred to a letter from Building Commissioner
Datz to Joseph Ciaschi, owner of the building, dated July 27,
1989 directing that the work be done by August 11, 1989. If the
order is not followed by that date, the matter will be turned
over to the City Attorney for prosecution in City Court.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That there be a further RESOLVED to read as follows:
That it shall be City policy to make every effort to establish
procedures so that a building plan that provides only rear access
for physically handicapped persons not be accepted as meeting the
requirements for access ".
Discussion followed on the amendment. Building Commissioner Datz
responded to questions from Council members.
A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Main Motion as Amended
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
* 14.2 City /Community Recreation Center, Inc. /Ithaca Youth
Hockey Association Second Ice Rink Agreement
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Mayor be authorized to execute the agreement
between the City and Community Recreation Center, Inc. and Ithaca
Youth Hockey Association, Inc., for the construction and
operation of an ice rink, related improvements, equipment
acquisition and the relocation of tennis courts adjacent to the
existing Cass Park Ice Skating Rink.
Discussion followed on the agreement.
Alderperson Booth stated that he feels the contract is
substantially different than what was presented to Council in the
beginning. He is also concerned that as site review goes forward
this may well result in a negative answer. He is concerned about
any food concessions being removed from the City Youth Bureau and
fd �7
17 August 1, 1989
he also believes the Youth Bureau Board should be asked to
comment on this agreement. Because of these and other concerns
he does not feel ready to vote on the resolution tonight.
Alderperson Nichols commented that he shares the concerns of
Alderperson Booth. He is also concerned because there does not
seem to be any commitment beyond the initial $550,000 by the
Community Recreational Center.
Alderperson Schlather explained that the project, as it is now,
is different than when it was originally presented. The bottom
line is the cost of the project has gone up substantially and the
CRC has raised as much as they can raise.
Discussion followed on using a surcharge on the hourly rate for
ice time to retire the debt.
0i Alderperson Killeen stated that he is reluctant to use City money
to build a second ice rink when we already have an ice rink and
GO to
there are so many compelling forces for City money.
Alderperson Lytel commented that he believes taking advantage of
(t.t private fund raising for establishing a permanent facility that
will be available to all and will be financed out of a user sur-
charge is the sort of thing the City should be encouraging.
Alderperson Hoffman said he does not believe it will pay for
itself in the way others think it will. He does not like the
idea of imposing an increased hourly sur- charge for users of the
old rink.
(60'e Youth Bureau Director Cohen responded to questions from Council.
Further discussion followed.
Motion to Table
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the City /Community Recreation Center, Inc. /Ithaca
Youth Hockey Association Second Ice Rink Agreement be tabled.
Ayes (8) - Killeen, Lytel, Nichols, Cummings, Booth,
Schlather, Romanowski, Johnson
Nay (1) - Hoffman
Carried (8 -1)
Alderperson Nichols asked that the Youth Bureau Advisory Board
give Council a written opinion on this proposal.
* 14.1 City Court Facility Plan
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
WHEREAS, the Ithaca City Court is currently housed on the fourth
floor of the Hall of Justice building, located at 120 East
Clinton Street in Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 825 of the Laws of 1987,
Representatives of the State Office of Court Administration have
(W00.1 identified various deficiencies in the existing City Court
Facilities, and
WHEREAS, Chapter 825 requires that the City adopt a Court
Facility Plan, which addresses various capital improvement
options intended to alleviate said deficiencies, no later than
August 7, 1989; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the following Court Facility Plan be, and is
hereby adopted for submission to the Chief Administrative Judge
of the Office of Court Administration, by the aforementioned
date.
80
ku
August 1, 1989
SECTION VI: ITHACA CITY COURT
COURT FACILITY PLAN
A. Facilities.
Ithaca City Court is currently housed in the Hall of
Justice, located at 120 East Clinton Street in Ithaca. This
building was constructed in 1936, and was originally built
as the headquarters for a private business.
The City Court occupies all of the fourth floor of the
building, with the exception of one office designated for use by
the City Prosecutor. The remainder of the building houses the
various offices of the Ithaca City Police Department.
B. Existing and Projected Facility Needs:
1. A review of the current court space in light of the
facility guidelines reveals the following .existinc{
deficiencies:
_ - The Hearing Room is too small ( +179 sq. ft.) , and
has heating and cooling system deficiencies. On
many mornings the maximum fire capacity of the
courtroom is exceeded.
The court lacks any attorney /client conference
rooms. At least two are needed ( +200 sq. ft.).
- The current prisoner holding room is too small
( +23 sq. ft.), and lacks heating, cooling and
ventilation.
The Judge's Chambers, while 23 sq. ft. less in
area than the guidelines would suggest, would
otherwise be acceptable were it not for the
continual heating and cooling problems.
- The Judges and staff lack private rest room
facilities ( +250 sq. ft.).
- The support staff offices currently lack
sufficient public counter and general work area
( +222 sq.ft.).
- The Chief Clerk Office is overcrowded, and
additional space is required ( +67 sq. ft.).
The Court has a serious record storage problem.
Because of this, the Jury Room which, other than
ventilation problems, would be large enough to be
adequate, is the home to numerous file cabinets
and storage boxes. Before each jury trial it is
necessary to clear adequate access passageways so
that jurors may be seated at the table ( +200
sq.ft.).
2. Projected court needs include the following:
The long -term need for a secure attorney /client
conference room adjacent to the holding facility
( +50 sq. ft.).
A public waiting area is needed for the court.
Utilization of hallway space for waiting is
inappropriate. ( +180 sq.ft.).
W_
I Wn
81
19 August 1, 1989
An addition 190 sq. ft. to house the projected
additional two staff persons during the planning
period.
An additional 100 sq. ft. for long -term
copy /supply and storage needs.
C. Facility Plans:
As noted above, the City Court shares the Hall of Justice
with the Ithaca Police Department. As with the Court, the
Department suffers from a serious lack of needed space. This
fact has effectively precluded the City's ability to obtain
additional space for the court in the Hall of Justice. The
decision has been made, therefore, that any short- and long- term
relief for the court must come through either new construction or
renovation of another existing facility.
The City has limited the options to be considered as noted
below:
1. Facility Options
The following facility options are to be considered:
a. Construction of an addition to the Hall of Justice
which will house the City Court facilities.
b. Construction of a new City Court facility on the
site of a current City -owned parking lot on the
corner of West Clinton and Cayuga Streets directly
west of the Hall of Justice. As now proposed,
this project would be carried out in conjunction
with and as a part of the construction of a new
multi -level parking ramp.
C. Private developer options and proposals will also
be considered. For example, private developers
have already approached the City with regard to
building new or renovating existing space in the
City for Court use.
Consideration of these three options will take into account
the following objectives:
- A new or renovated facility will be constructed consistent
with the facility guidelines standards.
A new or renovated facility will meet all current and
projected space needs and will include such additional space
as necessary to meet the prospective needs of the court on a
long -term basis.
A new or renovated facility should be located as closely as
practicable to the City Police Department (Hall of Justice).
As the distance from the Department increases, so will the
costs of transporting and guarding prisoners, of providing
security to the court and the logistical difficulties
associated with court appearances.
2. Facility Requirements:
A new or renovated court building will include, at a
minimum, the following facilities:
Staff offices for Chief Clerk and a minimum of seven
persons (865 s.f.)
Adequate space for court records and supplies (410
s.f.)
8 `)
20 August 1, 1989
- A Public Counter to insure proper security to the court
and efficient service to the public (100 s.f.)
- Chambers for the two Part -time Judges (200 s.f.)
Separate secure access rest rooms for court personnel
(per code)
Main Courtroom (1200 s.f.)
- Jury Deliberation Room (200 s.f.)
- Two Attorney /Client Conference Rooms (100 s.f. each;
200 s.f. total)
One Prisoner Holding Room (120 s.f.)
- One Secure Attorney /Client Conference Room adjacent to
the Holding Room (50 s.f.)
A Public Waiting Room adjacent to the Courtroom ( 180
s.f.)
Public Rest Rooms (per code)
Handicapped Accessibility throughout
Security Station (160 s.f.)
City Prosecutor's Office (200 s.f.)
3. Mitigating Measures
During the project development period, the following
steps will be taken to relieve existing court facility
problems to the greatest extent possible:
The existing heating, cooling and ventilation
deficiencies, which consist mainly of regulation
problems, will be addressed and remedied by
January 1990.
Fire code restrictions regarding the maximum
number of persons allowed in the courtroom will be
enforced by the court security staff.
The court will take advantage of the new court
records retention policies (expected to be
finalized by Fall, 1989) to eliminate as many old
court records as possible. In addition, the City
will identify possible alternative remote storage
areas for possible court use by December, 1989.
D. Project Schedule.
The City commits itself to meet the needs identified in the
court facility plan in the time period noted below:
Budget for Capital Project Planning
Approval of Capital Project Planning
Capital Project Planning Budget and Site
Selection
Budget for Capital Project Design and
Construction
Approval of Capital Project
Selection of Project Architect
August 1989
December 1989
July 1990
July 1990
December 1990
February 1991
J
I V_�
I V_t
83
21 August 1, 1989
Develop Project Design and Specifications September 1991
Review Documents November 1991
Open Bids - Award Contracts January 1992
Begin Construction March 1992
Complete Construction November 1992
E. Financing:
Because the final project option has not yet been
determined, actual cost figures are not yet available.
Recognizing our commitment to complete the court facility
project within the time frame noted above, the City seeks
approval to obtain all appropriate and eligible interest
reimbursement for any capital construction bonding issued for
this project. In addition the City will pursue the potential
!A.° financing and leasing options presented in Chapter 825 of the
Laws of 1987 through the New York State Dormitory Authority.
Carried (9 -0)
14.3 Privatization Policy for the Wastewater Treatment Plant
and Water Filtration Plant Facilities
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has on its Committee of the
Whole Agenda the subject of "Privatization" of the City's Water
and Wastewater Treatment Plants, and
RESOLVED, That it is hereby established as the policy of the City
of Ithaca that its Wastewater and Water Treatment Plants will not
be turned over in their entirety to private operation, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That the foregoing does not preclude the Board of
Public Works from investigating management alternatives for the
operation of discreet and specialized aspects of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant and Water Filtration Plant operation consistent
with the foregoing policy and contractual obligations.
Discussion followed on the floor on the substitute resolution
that was presented by Board of Public Works Commissioner Reeves.
Alderperson Schlather stated that he did not support the
substitute resolution.
A vote on the original resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.4 State and Federal Section 18 Mass Transit Oneratina
Assistance Agreement
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has submitted a request for a grant
of funds to the New York State Department of Transportation and
the United States Department of Transportation, pursuant to
Section 18 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as
amended, for a project to provide operating assistance funds for
transportation services within the City of Ithaca and partly in
two adjoining municipalities, provided by the City of Ithaca
WHEREAS,
the device of "Privatization" should not
be used to
bypass the
protections provided to our employees by Civil
Service
Law, and
WHEREAS,
whatever problems or opportunities may exist
in the
present
or future operations of the Water and
Wastewater
Treatment
Plants should be dealt with directly,
within the
framework
of the City's continued direct control and
operation,
if at all
possible; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That it is hereby established as the policy of the City
of Ithaca that its Wastewater and Water Treatment Plants will not
be turned over in their entirety to private operation, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That the foregoing does not preclude the Board of
Public Works from investigating management alternatives for the
operation of discreet and specialized aspects of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant and Water Filtration Plant operation consistent
with the foregoing policy and contractual obligations.
Discussion followed on the floor on the substitute resolution
that was presented by Board of Public Works Commissioner Reeves.
Alderperson Schlather stated that he did not support the
substitute resolution.
A vote on the original resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.4 State and Federal Section 18 Mass Transit Oneratina
Assistance Agreement
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has submitted a request for a grant
of funds to the New York State Department of Transportation and
the United States Department of Transportation, pursuant to
Section 18 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as
amended, for a project to provide operating assistance funds for
transportation services within the City of Ithaca and partly in
two adjoining municipalities, provided by the City of Ithaca
a
22
August 1, 1989
Transit System for fixed route, scheduled, open and available to
the general public during the period January 1, 1989 to December
31, 1989 (PIN3798.21.406); now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Mayor John C. Gutenberger be authorized to sign
the agreement(s) between the City of Ithaca and the State of New
York for the above named project, and be it further
RESOLVED, That Mayor John C. Gutenberger is authorized to act on
behalf of the City of Ithaca to proceed and complete this above
named project.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.5 Architectural Review for Possible Day Care Facility_ in
Markles Flats Building
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $3,500 be authorized from
Capital Reserve #25 for design of Capital Improvements, for
preparation of a preliminary architectural review of available
space at the Markles Flats building for Day Care purposes,
contingent upon action to be taken by the Ithaca City School
District at their August 15, 1989 meeting, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Planning Department conduct the selection
process to determine the best qualified architect to perform the
aforementioned review.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.6 Police Department Request to Appoint the Parking
Enforcement Officer
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That Gary Bordoni be appointed to the position of
Parking Enforcement Officer at an annual salary of $13,619.,
which is Grade 7, Step 3 on the CSEA Administrative Unit
Compensation Plan, effective August 7, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.7 Personnel Department Request to Appoint the Personnel
Associate
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That Christa Carsello be appointed to the position of
Personnel Associate at an annual salary of $25,000., effective
August 14, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.8 Personnel Department - Contract for Negotiation Services
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca enter into an agreement with
James Dennis, to provide professional services in the field of
labor negotiations in connection with the negotiation of 1990
collective bargaining agreements (Ithaca Paid Fire Fighters
Association Local 737, and CSEA Administrative Unit Local 855),
at a cost not to exceed $3,500 and $3,000 respectively.
Carried (9 -0)
*
14.9 Personnel Department Transfer of Funds
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the authorized equipment list for the Personnel
Department be amended by adding three filing cabinets, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That $482 be transferred from line A1430 -425, Office
Expense, to A1430 -210, Other Equipment, in order to effect such
purchase.
Carried (9 -0)
r•
23 August 1, 1989
* 14.10 Personnel Department - Dental Program for Executive Unit
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the members of the City Executive Association and
management employees, be allowed to participate in the City
Dental Insurance Plan, with the cost of the insurance premium
paid by the employee.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.11 Audit
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
RESOLVED, That bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract
#14/1989, in the total amount of $19,347.88, be approved for
payment.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.12 Acting Superintendent Appointment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
�i WHEREAS, Larry Fabbroni has been appointed to the position of
Acting Superintendent of Public Works, effective June 17, 1989;
now, therefore, be it
a) RESOLVED, That Larry Fabbroni's annual salary be hereby increased
to $50,808 retroactive to July 17 1989 until such time as a new
Superintendent of Public Works assumes his /her duties.
Carried (9 -0)
*14.13 Amend Equipment List - Finance Department
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the Authorized Equipment List of the Finance
Department be amended to replace one chair for $250.00, and be it
further
(6wo" RESOLVED, That $250.00 be transferred from A1315 -476, Equipment
Maintenance to A1315 -225, Other Equipment, to permit said
replacement.
Carried (9 -0)
Alderperson Schlather announced that the Pay Equity Committee has
been established and three Common Council members will serve on
this committee. They are as follows: Daniel Hoffman
representing Budget and Administration Committee; Carolyn
Peterson representing the Human Services Committee; Ben Nichols
representing the Charter and Ordinance Committee.
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
* 15.1 GIAC /City Contract
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
THIS AGREEMENT is made the 1st day of August, 1989 between
the CITY OF ITHACA and its YOUTH BUREAU and the GREATER ITHACA
ACTIVITIES CENTER, hereinafter referred to as "GIAC."
WHEREAS, GIAC, a not - for - profit corporation was formed for the
purpose of providing a wide variety of educational and
recreational and human service programs for the greater Ithaca
(400e community, and
WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau is the agency of the City of Ithaca
formed for the purpose of operating and maintaining recreational
and youth service programs for the community, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca purchased the former Central School
building at 318 North Albany Street, Ithaca, hereinafter referred
to as "GIAC building ", for the purpose of continuing to house
recreation, youth service, and other community programs, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of GIAC and the City of Ithaca
and its Youth Bureau share the common objectives of jointly
providing these services to the community;
8 (►
24 August 1, 1989
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and
covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows:
1. The City of Ithaca and its Youth Bureau:
a. to be the employer of record of GIAC employees, abiding
by Civil Service rules, the Union contract, issuing pay
checks, and maintaining full City benefits;
b. to operate and maintain the GIAC building;
C. to continue representation on the Board of Directors of
GIAC as called for in the Constitution of that
organization;
d. to accept an assignment of all fees or rental income
due GIAC, by reason of any contracts or agreements, or
rents concerning the use of the GIAC building. All
such sums shall be applied against the sums GIAC agrees
to pay the City of Ithaca under Paragraph 2c of this
Agreement. The Department of Public Works shall review
all contracts for rental income from use of GIAC
building;
e. to be responsible for handling all operating income and
payment of bills, including salaries of employees, in
connection with the operation of the GIAC building
through normal procedures of the City of Ithaca;
f. to meet major facility maintenance and renovation needs
of the GIAC building;
g. to continue the GIAC building's use as a multi - purpose
and multi - cultural center.
2. The GIAC Board:
a. to establish policy for the operation of GIAC programs,
and to work with the Center Coordinators and Youth
Bureau Director in the implementation of the programs.
b. to contribute toward annual operations all sums
received from the United Way and the New York State
Division for Youth, and any other major revenue
sources;
c. to assign and transfer to the City of Ithaca, all of
its rights, title, and interest in and to any and all
fees or rental income now due or to become due GIAC by
reason of any contracts or agreements which make
reference to or concern the use of the facility;
d. to continue to solicit funds from the United Way Board
and other sources;
e. to have a representative of the GIAC Board on the Youth
Bureau Board of Advisors;
f. to set the fees and dues structure for GIAC activities;
g. to set policies for the use of the GIAC building,
assignment of space, and rental contracts which shall
not be inconsistent with any city policies;
h. to prepare and submit annually to the City through City
processes, a proposed budget including recommendations
for staffing levels.
19,
25 August 1, 1989
3. The City of Ithaca and its Youth Bureau and the GIAC jointly:
a. to select, hire and discipline the Coordinator
consistent with 1A.
b. to operate, administer, and maintain recreation, youth
service, multi - cultural, and other community programs
in the GIAC building.
C. to plan major capital improvement projects involving
the GIAC building and grounds, taking into account
program continuity.
d. to share full use and enjoyment of all equipment owned
and controlled by both parties necessary to the
operation of the programs. In the event of the
termination of this agreement, all equipment purchased
by GIAC with non -City funds will remain with GIAC.
ti (All other equipment will remain with the City.)
('`' e. to carry out the program as approved in the budget for
L�_� the budget year. Any changes desired to be made by
$$ffa either party must be approved by both parties.
4. Nothing in the agreement between the Greater Ithaca
Activities Center and the City of Ithaca shall be construed
to limit the Youth Bureau's mandated obligation to review
all expenditures of the Greater Ithaca Activities Center
relating to City of Ithaca Funds.
5. This agreement shall be effective until August 1, 1990 and
shall automatically be renewed annually thereafter unless
(Wool, either party notifies the other in writing of an intention
to terminate three months prior to December 31 of that year.
6. The parties hereto agree to comply with all laws,
governmental regulations and rules applicable to the use of
the premises as described.
Mayor Gutenberger stated that City Attorney Nash had a number of
concerns that were stated in a memo and he asked if those
concerns had been addressed. Alderperson Lytel responded that at
the last Human Services Committee meeting, the memo was reviewed
by GIAC and the committee. Some minor changes and some
clarifications were made.
Discussion followed regarding the agreement. Alderperson Hoffman
asked that this be tabled until questions concerning this
agreement are answered.
Alderperson Schlather agreed to review it in the Budget and
Administration Committee with further review by the City
Attorney.
Motion to Refer to Committee
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the matter of the GIAC /City Contract be referred
to the Budget and Administration Committee for review and report
back to Common Council at its September meeting.
Carried (9 -0)
* 15.2 Markles Flats Building for Day Care
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, it is advisable to explore all options for day care
expansion in the GIAC vicinity, and
WHEREAS, additional investigation appears to indicate that day
care expansion in GIAC may compromise GIAC programs, and
26 August 1, 1989
WHEREAS, the school district has been approached about the use of
the Markles Flats building for day care and initial reaction is
generally favorable; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council requests that the School Board
formally consider allowing the use of the first floor of the
Markles Flats building for day care pending negotiations between
the City and School District and day care provider (Drop -in
Center) regarding operation and provision of such a facility.
Discussion followed on the floor.
Alderperson Lytel proposed the following amendment:
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That a 'be it further Resolved' be added to read as
follows: "RESOLVED, That a committee is hereby established to
conduct the negotiations which will include a representative of
the Human Services Committee, the Director of Planning &
Development, one representative each from the Drop -in Center and
the Greater Ithaca Activities Center, a representative of the
Department of Public Works and the City Controller or Deputy City
Controller."
Discussion followed on the amendment. Alderperson Cummings
stated that at the request of Alderperson Peterson she was
proposing the following amending resolution:
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That the Resolved be changed to read as follows:
"RESOLVED, That Common Council requests the School Board formally
consider allowing the after hours use of Central School for
suitable GIAC programs any'. /or the use of the first floor of the
Markles Flats building for day care or other appropriate GIAC
uses."
Planning and Development Director Van Cort commented that he
thinks this is a very good idea. If the City is going to start
looking at Markles it may not be the best thing to put the day
care in Markles; it may be better to put some other GIAC programs
there. He has had an indication that it may be difficult to
insure Markles, for a variety of reasons, for day care. He
suggested that if we do take this course of action we ask the
architect to study the program we are trying to accommodate and
see where the program best fits. It is not adequate to just ask
if you can put day care in Markles - the answer could be yes -
but it might be much more expensive than leaving the day care in
GIAC and moving another program like BOCES or a GIAC based
program into Markles. you may also want to think about the
financial implications for people who have businesses based in
Markles.
Alderperson Booth remarked that although he is aware of what
Alderperson Peterson was trying to do, he is concerned about
splitting up any GIAC programs at this stage.
Discussion followed on the amendment.
A vote on Alderperson Lytel's Amendment resulted as followed:
Ayes (4) - Cummings, Lytel, Booth, Johnson
Nays (5) - Schlather, Romanowski, Killeen, Nichols, Hoffman
Motion Fails (4 -5)
ry �
27
August 1, 1989
Main Motion
A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Schlather, Nichols, Hoffman, Johnson, Lytel,
Booth, Killeen, Romanowski
Nay (1) - Cummings
Carried (9 -1)
(4wooll The Amending Resolution proposed by Alderperson Cummings for
Alderperson Peterson was withdrawn and not voted on.
Motion to Extend Meeting
By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That this Common Council meeting be extended until
12:00 midnight.
Carried (9 -0)
O01
* 15.3 State Assembly Bill on Job Stabilization
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
(l) WHEREAS, Bill No. 6731 has been introduced in the New York State
1.",
.A Assembly to amend the labor law to "prevent or minimize the
.1 harmful economic and social effects on communities... when
business concerns undertake to terminate or reduce substantially
or relocate business operations. ", and
WHEREAS, such an amendment enhances the City's Plant Closing
Legislation in that a state -wide law protects all communities
equably and prevents businesses from relocating into areas within
the state without such legislation; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council notify State Assemblyman Luster,
State Senator Seward, and Governor Cuomo of its support for such
legislation.
we Carried (9 -0)
* 15.4 Funding Guideline for Human Services Requests
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
WHEREAS, the Human Services Committee has been apprised of a more
than 50% increase in human services funding requests, and
WHEREAS, the Human Services Coalition Review Committee has pared
down the requests, and
WHEREAS, a more precise guideline from Common Council will enable
the Human Services Committee to evaluate these requests; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca human services funding level be
a minimum of $100,248.00 (15% increase over 1989).
Alderperson Lytel explained the reasons for this resolution.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding the allocation.
Alderperson Schlather remarked that he could not support this
resolution as it is bad precedent for Council to target the
budget ahead of time with respect to any entity and also we have
no revenue sharing and we have increased capital expenditures.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) - Lytel, Cummings, Booth, Nichols, Johnson,
Killeen
Nays (3) - Romanowski, Hoffman, Schlather
Carried (6 -3)
9 0
W.,
August 1, 1989
* 15.6 Ad Hoc Youth Services Study Committee Recommendations
By Alderperson Romanowski.: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, an Ad Hoc Youth Services Study Committee was created to
propose a solution for an equitable and effective system for
provision of youth services in the County and City, and
WHEREAS, a number of configurations were proposed, examined, and
refined to a single, workable proposal; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council
the Ad Hoc Youth Services Study
informs the County of same.
endorses the recommendations of
Committee as listed below and
RECOMMENDATION
1. Defer consideration of recreation programs for now, and
refer this to the County Youth Board for a recommendation in
1990.
2. The County should take responsibility for providing and
funding youth development programs, to meet needs that are to be
addressed by the County Youth Bureau.
3. Both Youth Bureaus should continue to operate with their
present governance and administrative structures.
4. The County Youth Bureau should add a programming
capability which will be achieved for the present through
contracts for which they have determined a priority need in the
County in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This is to be
a continuation of and improvement on the municipal youth services
central program aid begun in this year. Programs provided by the
County Youth Bureau with central dollars will not necessarily
require a match by the contractor, and will be available to all
youth within the County, regardless of the municipality of
residence.
5. Because the City has been providing services to non -city
residents and has an investment in staff and facilities as well
as demonstrated experience, the County Youth Bureau will examine
the suitability of City youth development programs for meeting
County priorities. Any programs to be contracted for could be
modified, expanded or eliminated upon recommendation of the
County Youth Bureau. The City and County will work together on
the development of contracts between them for programs. The City
will have no obligation to develop a county -wide capability where
it does not wish to, and the County will not be constrained from
contracting with other service providers.
6. The City of Ithaca will have an opportunity to affect
the process both through contract negotiations and through its
representation on the County Youth Bureau and Board of
Representatives. It should fill its seats on the County Youth
Board one of which by a member of the City Youth Bureau Board,
become an integral part of the County process, and participate
fully in the development of the comprehensive plan. The City and
County Youth Bureaus should provide non - voting staff and member
liaisons to each other's board meetings.
7. The City Youth Bureau will retain its ability to
contract for the provision of services to individual
municipalities or other entities.
8. Multi -year contracts may be developed by the County
Youth Board.
9. The municipal grant program (MYSP local) funded in the
County's 1989 budget, should continue.
29
August 1, 1989
10. The County Youth Bureau will establish standards of
effectiveness and accountability, propose a method for monitoring
and evaluating these programs, and will make a recommendation for
needed staff.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the City Controller be and he is hereby directed
(two., to notify all interested municipalities in the County as to their
anticipated contractual obligation in 1990, using the same
formula as for 1989, for recreation programs and those Youth
Development and Recreational Mainstreaming programs which are not
funded by the County, which notification shall be made in writing
no later than September 1, 1989.
Discussion followed on the amendment. Alderperson Booth stated
that he wished the record to be very clear that the County has
only talked about youth services and recreational mainstreaming.
He did not want them to be confused that we are now including
- recreation with this. That has never been a part of the
discussion.
A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Main Motion as Amended
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Weekend Meal Program - Report
Alderperson Lytel reported that the weekend meal program is
serving 120 people a weekend. A copy of the report has been
mailed to the Alderpersons.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
Subdivision Reciulations Amendments - Cash in Lieu of Park Land
Reservation - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the matter of subdivision
regulations amendments have been reviewed by the Planning and
Development Committee and they are sending it back to Charter and
Ordinance to bring to Council.
Downtown Zonina - Buildina Height; Foot of State Street - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that there will be a recommendation
from the Planning Department to the Planning and Development
Committee next month. They hope to bring some changes to Council
to deal with building heights, transitions in the business area
and possible mixed use potential at the foot of State Street.
Rental Housing Task Force Recommendations - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee hopes to have a
resolution for Common Council next month to establish the
permanent Rental Housing Task Force to consider the
recommendations of the Rental Housing Commission and Task Force.
Plannina & Development Department 1990 Work Program - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee is taking
another look at the 1989 Work Program and doing some juggling of
staffing since Glen Goldwyn has left to take another job. A
report to Council will be forthcoming.
Postal Service
Employment
- Report
Coert Bonthius
spoke to
Council regarding the Postal Service
workers being
emphasize that
transferred
44 postal
from
jobs
Ithaca to Elmira. He wished to
is essentially the same as the
Ithaca Gun closing in terms of
money and wages. He urged Council
we
to continue to
press the issue
to keep the jobs in Ithaca.
Weekend Meal Program - Report
Alderperson Lytel reported that the weekend meal program is
serving 120 people a weekend. A copy of the report has been
mailed to the Alderpersons.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
Subdivision Reciulations Amendments - Cash in Lieu of Park Land
Reservation - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the matter of subdivision
regulations amendments have been reviewed by the Planning and
Development Committee and they are sending it back to Charter and
Ordinance to bring to Council.
Downtown Zonina - Buildina Height; Foot of State Street - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that there will be a recommendation
from the Planning Department to the Planning and Development
Committee next month. They hope to bring some changes to Council
to deal with building heights, transitions in the business area
and possible mixed use potential at the foot of State Street.
Rental Housing Task Force Recommendations - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee hopes to have a
resolution for Common Council next month to establish the
permanent Rental Housing Task Force to consider the
recommendations of the Rental Housing Commission and Task Force.
Plannina & Development Department 1990 Work Program - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee is taking
another look at the 1989 Work Program and doing some juggling of
staffing since Glen Goldwyn has left to take another job. A
report to Council will be forthcoming.
30 August 1, 1989
CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE:
Alderperson Booth withdrew reports on Items 17.5, 17.7, 17.8,
17.9, due to the lateness of the hour.
* 17.1 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 55 Entitled 'Fire
Regulations' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
FIRE PREVENTION CODE AMENDMENTS
The following material provides commentary on the proposed
amendments to Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code.
Each item is cross - referenced to the resolution by the letter
designated for each amendment.
A. Section 55.18
The purpose of fire limits is to establish zones in a
community where Type 5 construction, also known as wood frame
construction, is not permitted. Fire limits are most often
established in the downtown and industrial areas, as is the case
in the City of Ithaca.
The purpose of this change is to recognize that the 'B -2b',
'B -2c' and 'B -3' areas (the downtown, or "Commons" area, and the
"Collegetown" areas) have some of the greatest densities of any
in the City.
The recent fire at 105 North Aurora Street emphasizes the
consequences of wood frame construction in a congested downtown
area. The rear wood frame stair enclosure at 105 North Aurora
burned with such intensity and speed, that the rear of 306 -8 East
State Street was igniting as firefighters arrived on the scene.
Adding these two areas to the Fire Limits 'A' designation
applies the somewhat stricter requirements for Fire Limits 'A' to
the downtown business district and the Collegetown zones.
B. Section 55.14.E.16
This amendment legalizes our close regulation of the use of
propane in areas where large numbers of people gather, such as on
the Commons during the Ithaca Festival or at the Farmer's Market.
This close regulation is necessary to insure that the numerous
propane users at these events have safe installations.
C. Section 55.14E.24
Asphalt kettles represent a significant hazard and some
contractors are not intimately familiar with their use or the
degree of hazard that comes with them. Requiring permits in this
way will insure that proper safeguards will be employed prior to
commencement of the work.
D. Section 55.14.F
The need for permit fees can be related to justification for
the building permit fees received by the Building Department. By
recognizing the inherent costs in providing the services
necessary to adequately safeguard the community from the threat
of fire, a fee schedule for permits can be justified as a way of
recovering these costs. The fee schedule concept also applies
the concept of requiring the user of the service to help support
the provision of that service.
E Section 55.17
This amendment is necessary
consistent with the requirements
as referenced above. There i
to make the provision for appeal
of Part 440 - Boards of Review,
s no local authority to waive,
W-n
93
31 August 1, 1989
modify or otherwise excuse application of any portion of the New
York State Uniform Fire Prevention Code, such authority being
reserved for the State Regional Boards of Review.
However, for any local ordinance, to which the Uniform Code
is silent, a local appeals process may still be valid.
(Wwe F. Section 55.22
Lock boxes permit the Fire Department to store building keys
in a secure vault on the premises, rather than carrying them
aboard command vehicles. The Fire Department is then required
only to carry a master key to access the lock boxes. The master
key is carried in a vehicle in a locked cylinder that only
releases the key upon receipt of the proper coded transmission
from dispatch. The officer must call and request dispatch to
transmit the release tone when access to the lock box master key
is required. In this way, security is established and
maintained.
The reason building keys are necessary for use by the Fire
Department has increased dramatically in recent years. Numerous
g =A1 alarms often mean simultaneous, and even triple alarms occurring
at the same time. The ability of the Fire Department to wait,
sometimes 30 to 45 minutes, for a property owner to show up to
allow them into the building has been eliminated. A rapid, safe
and nondestructive method of entering buildings from which a fire
alarm has been received is a necessity. The lock box provides
this.
G. Section 55.23
(400" Current fire prevention statutes do not adequately address
this particular situation. Over the years, various types of
fires and other hazardous Fituations have occurred where
occupants of a building have utilized fire escapes, roofs,
porches and other locations for their barbecue grills, hibachis
and similar appliances. The location alone presents an immediate
problem as frequently these devices are placed in the means of
egress.
Other elements of the problem are related to unattended use,
use of too much igniter fuel, faulty appliances, use by
inebriated persons and similar situations.
H. Section 55.30
Self - explanatory.
I. Section 55.25
The sheer volume of fire alarm and detection system being
installed now has generated fire alarm volumes that would have
been unpredictable just a few years ago. Although existing codes
and standards provide for design and installation standards, not
all elements of necessary design are provided for. Hence the
material proposed above.
This will allow the Fire Department to exert more specific
supervision over system design, installation and operation, in a
manner that should provide greater control over deficient systems
and premises.
J. Section 55.26
This is a brief indicator of the need for a legislative
initiative to address the probability of potentially staggering
costs that may be incurred in responding to a hazardous materials
incident.
wo
K. Section 55.27
August 1, 1989
The presence of guard dogs in a building brings several
concerns to emergency personnel who may be required to force
entry into a building to render aid of some sort. This proposed
section is designed to provide advance notice of the presence of
these animals so that appropriate plans may be made to deal with
the problem ahead of time.
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca wishes to protect the health and
safety of its residents, its employees, and other persons, and
WHEREAS, Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled
'Fire Regulations', regulates actions and activities affecting
the provision and maintenance of fire safety, and
WHEREAS, the existing provisions of Chapter 55 should be amended
in order to more fully provide for fire protection; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That this Common Council does hereby amend said Chapter
55 as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 89 -
Section 1. Amendments to Chapter 55
A. Section 55.18 Fire Limits is hereby amended to read as
follows:
SECTION 55.18 FIRE LIMITS
Fire limits of the City of Ithaca are hereby defined as
follows:
A. Fire limits 'A': Those areas of the City which are
zoned Industrial 'I -1' and Business 'B -2b', 'B -2c' and
'B -3' in the City of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance (Chapter
30 of the Municipal Code).
B. Fire limits 'B': Those areas of the City which are
zoned Business, 'B -4' or 'B -51, in the City of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code).
B. Paragraph 16 of Subdivision E of Section 55.14 Permits
Required is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 55.14 PERMITS REQUIRED
E. The following permits are required:
16. Liquified Petroleum Gases.
Permits and Reports of Installations.
a. (1) A permit shall be obtained for each
installation of liquefied petroleum gas
employing a container or an aggregate of
interconnected containers of over 2,000
gallons water capacity.
(2) A permit shall be obtained for each temporary
or permanent installation of liquefied
petroleum gas, irrespective of size of
containers, made at buildings or gatherings
at which people congregate for civic,
political, educational, religious, social or
recreational purposes. Such buildings shall
include, but not be limited to, schools,
churches, health care occupancies, hotels,
and restaurants, each having a capacity of 20
or more persons. This section shall not
33 August 1, 1989
apply to one o% two family dwellings
utilizing appliances supplied with a single
cylinder not exceeding 20 pounds capacity.
b. ... through the end of paragraph 16 remains
unchanged.
C. Subdivision E of Section 55.14 Permits Required is hereby
(Wel amended by adding the following new paragraph 24 entitled
"Asphalt Kettles ", as follows:
24. Asphalt Kettles.
D. Section 55.14 Permits Required is hereby amended by adding a
new subdivision F entitled "Permit Fees ", as follows:
F. Permit Fees
1. The Fire Chief shall promulgate a permit fee
schedule applicable to the permits required
herein. Fees established in the fee schedule
shall reasonably reflect the cost of receiving,
investigating, processing and issuing each of said
permits.
2. Such schedule, and any changes proposed thereto,
shall be submitted to Common Council for adoption
prior to collection of such fees.
3. The fee schedule shall be posted at the Fire
Chief's office and distributed to any interested
parties.
E. Section 55.17 entitled "Appeals from decisions of Chief of
Fire Department" is hereby amended as follows:
SECTION 55.17 Appeals from decisions of Chief of Fire
(400-e Department
A. For those elements of Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca
Code, or of Chapter 'C' of the New York State Fire
Prevention and Building Code that are addressed by the
New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code, the manner of appeal shall be as specified in
Title 19 NYCRR, "Part 440 - Uniform Code: Boards of
Review" of the Department of State "Rules and
Regulations for Administration and Enforcement of the
New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code ", dated 1/1/85.
a. A permit shall be required for asphalt
kettles. Such permit shall be obtained prior
to issuance of any building permit for the
construction or reconstruction of any roof;
4,
and, prior to operation of the kettle on the
site.
b. A permit shall be obtained for each kettle to
be used even if more than one will be used
at one site.
�1
C. Regulations governing operation and use of
asphalt kettles shall be as specified in Part
1192 of the New York State Uniform Fire
Prevention and Building Code entitled "Flame
Producing Devices ", dated 1/1/84.
D. Section 55.14 Permits Required is hereby amended by adding a
new subdivision F entitled "Permit Fees ", as follows:
F. Permit Fees
1. The Fire Chief shall promulgate a permit fee
schedule applicable to the permits required
herein. Fees established in the fee schedule
shall reasonably reflect the cost of receiving,
investigating, processing and issuing each of said
permits.
2. Such schedule, and any changes proposed thereto,
shall be submitted to Common Council for adoption
prior to collection of such fees.
3. The fee schedule shall be posted at the Fire
Chief's office and distributed to any interested
parties.
E. Section 55.17 entitled "Appeals from decisions of Chief of
Fire Department" is hereby amended as follows:
SECTION 55.17 Appeals from decisions of Chief of Fire
(400-e Department
A. For those elements of Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca
Code, or of Chapter 'C' of the New York State Fire
Prevention and Building Code that are addressed by the
New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code, the manner of appeal shall be as specified in
Title 19 NYCRR, "Part 440 - Uniform Code: Boards of
Review" of the Department of State "Rules and
Regulations for Administration and Enforcement of the
New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code ", dated 1/1/85.
34 August 1, 1989
B. 1. This subdivision shall apply only to those
elements of Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca
Municipal Code that are not addressed or otherwise
covered by the New York State Uniform Fire
Prevention and Building Code.
2. Whenever the Chief of the Fire Department shall
refuse to grant a permit applied for, or when it
is claimed that the provisions of the code do not
apply or that the true intent and meaning of the
code may have been misconstrued or wrongly
interpreted, the applicant may appeal from the
decision of the Chief of the Fire Department to
the Fire Appeals Board within thirty (30) days
from the date of the decision. The Fire Appeals
.Board may affirm, modify or reverse any
determination of the Chief of the Fire Department
made pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter
and /or the Fire Prevention Code.
F. Chapter 55 is hereby amended to add a new section 55.22
Lock Boxes to read as follows:
SECTION 55.22 LOCK BOXES
A. A lock box, for storing building keys, shall be
obtained and affixed on certain premises as
described herein. Such lockbox shall be as
prescribed by the Fire Department and shall be
obtained in the manner established by the Fire
Department.
B. Lock boxes shall be required for all new and
existing buildings, other than one or two family
dwellings, that have fire alarm and /or fire
detection systems that are, or will be, inter-
connected with the Fire Department. Alarm system
interconnects include, but are not limited to,
municipal fire alarm, radio, telephone leased
line, telephone dialer or central station systems.
C. Lock boxes shall be affixed to structures in the
manner detailed by the manufacturer and in the
location established by the Fire Department.
G. Chapter 55 is hereby amended to add a new Section 55.23
entitled "Use of Cooking and /or Heating Appliances ", to read as
follows:
SECTION 55.23 USE OF COOKING AND /OR HEATING APPLIANCES
The use of solid, liquid or gaseous fueled cooking or
heating appliances in, or on, buildings or structures is
hereby regulated as follows:
The use of such appliances is prohibited on porches,
roofs, exterior stairs, fire escapes, balconies and similar
building structures or appurtenances, where such use will
result in exposure of the building or structure to fire,
will impede means of egress or where such use will result
in unstable or otherwise hazardous operation of such
appliances.
H. Chapter 55 is hereby amended by amending Section 55.25
"Penalties for Violation of Noncompliance with Article ", as
follows:
35 August 1, 1989
SECTION 55.30 PENALTIES...
The text of this Section remains unchanged.
I. Chapter 55 is hereby amended by adding a new section
55.25 entitled "Fire Alarm and Detection Systems ", to read as
follows:
SECTION 55.25 FIRE ALARM AND DETECTION SYSTEMS
A. Installation Requirements
1. Fire alarm and detection systems shall be
installed as per the requirements of the New York
State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code,
dated 1/1/84, and referenced standards therefrom.
Y ° =cj 2. Fire alarm and detection systems shall be
installed by or under the direct supervision of
licensed electricians, licensed by the City of
Ithaca, or by those demonstrating equivalent
u,5 license reciprocity as provided for in the
Municipal Code.
3. The city electrical inspector shall, upon
application by the installing electrician or the
owner of the premises, make the rough -in
inspection of such system as has been installed to
insure compliance with the provisions of the
National Electrical Code (NFPA 70), the 1987
edition, as it applies to said system.
4. The Fire Department shall, upon application by the
installing electrician or the owner of the
premises, make the rough -in inspection of such
system as has been installed to insure compliance
with the provisions of the New York State Uniform
Fire Prevention and Building Code, dated 1/1/84,
and referenced standards therefrom.
5. Following complete testing of the system by the
installer, the installer shall cause a
certification of system installation and operation
to be executed prior to the Fire Department making
observations of acceptance testing. This
certification shall be made on forms provided by
the Fire Department.
6. The Fire Department shall observe acceptance
testing per the provisions of the Uniform Fire
Prevention and Building Code, dated 1/1/84, and
referenced standards.
B. System Design
1. All fire alarm and /or detection systems shall be
provided with adequate zone reporting capacity to
insure rapid and efficient location of the source
of the alarm by the Fire Department. During plan
review, the Fire Department shall specify zone
reporting assignments for the proposed system.
2. Fire alarm and /or detection system control panels
shall be capable of isolating each zone from the
panel so that defective or impaired devices or
systems causing alarms may be isolated and
repaired without requiring the remainder of the
system to be shut down.
36 August 1, 1989
3. Required Fire Department interconnects shall be
provided either by connection to the municipal
alarm system or by installation of a radio
transmitter alarm system, approved by the Fire
Department. All other fire department
interconnects must be approved by the Fire
Department prior to installation.
C. System Operation
1. Should a fire alarm /detection system cause
numerous false alarms in such a way that the
safety of the occupants, firefighters, or any
other persons or property is imperiled, the Fire
Chief is hereby empowered to order disconnection
of such alarm system until such time as the
problem is resolved. During such time when any
required system is disconnected, alternate
protection shall be provided, as specified by the
Fire Chief, or the building shall be vacated.
2. The owner /operator of any premises with a required
fire alarm /detection system must notify the Fire
Department whenever the system must be made
inoperative for maintenance or repair. The Fire
Department must be re- notified when the system is
restored. In no event is a required system
permitted to be rendered inoperative without
alternative means of protection, acceptable to the
Fire Department, being provided.
J. Chapter 55 in hereby amended by adding a new section
55.26 entitled "Hazardous Materials" to read as follows:
SECTION 55.26 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
All costs incurred by the City of Ithaca, as a result
of operations of its respective departments in
mitigating and /or recovering from a hazardous material
spill, discharge, release or other eventuality
requiring response and action by the City shall be
recoverable by the City of Ithaca. Such costs shall be
recoverable from the owner, agent, shipper or other
party having responsibility for the material(s) causing
the hazardous situation. For the purposes of this
section, hazardous materials" shall have the meaning
provided for in Part 1174 of the New York State Uniform
Fire Prevention and Building Code, dated 1/1/84.
K. Chapter 55 is hereby amended by adding a new section
55.27 entitled "Guard Dogs ", to read as follows:
SECTION 55.27 GUARD DOGS
The owner and /or manager of any non - residential
premises using an unattended guard dog to provide security
shall register with both the Police and Fire Departments.
Such registration shall include the number and breed of
dog(s) in use, the days and times such dog(s) is unattended
on the premises and the name(s) of the owner(s) and /or
handler(s) and methods of contacting them. Additionally,
the registration shall include a floor plan of the premises
with dog patrol areas designated.
The owner /manager of such premises shall file a release
that shall indemnify the City of Ithaca from liability for
harm or damage to the dogs) or the premises caused by any
act or omission on the part of the Police or Fire Department
as a result of the presence of guard dogs on the premises.
0
37 August 1, 1989
The owner /manager of such premises shall notify the
Police and Fire Departments at such time as a guard dog(s)
is no longer employed at, and is removed from, those
premises.
Section 2. Effective Date.
These amendments to Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca
Municipal Code shall take effect immediately upon the publication
of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City
Charter.
Carried (9 -0)
* 17.2 An Ordinance Amendinq Section 30.3(B) Entitled 'Height of
Buildina' of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall transmit forthwith to the
Board of Planning and Development and the Tompkins County
Planning Board a true and exact copy of the proposed ordinance
for its report thereon.
Carried (9 -0)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 30.3(B) ENTITLED 'HEIGHT OF
BUILDING' 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. That Section 30.3(b) entitled 'Height of
Building' is amended as follows:
1147. Height of Building
'Height of a building' shall mean the vertical distance
measured from average finished grade level to the highest level
of a flat or mansard roof, or to the average height of a pitched,
gabled, hip or gambrel roof, excluding bulkheads, housing for
mechanical equipment, towers, and similar constructions not
intended for human occupancy, or necessary equipment carried
above roof level. Where a building contains sections of a roof
of varying heights, the height of a building shall be measured
using that section of the roof that has the highest elevation
from the average finished grade level. The average finished
grade level shall be determined from a datum established by the
average elevation of the finished grade adjoining the exterior
walls of the building."
Municipal Code - Call for Public Hearing
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
RESOLVED, That Ordinance No. 89 - entitled "An Ordinance
( y
Amending Section 30.3(B) of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the
City of Ithaca Municipal Code" be and it hereby is introduced
before the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, and be
it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council shall hold a public hearing in
the matter of the adoption of the aforesaid ordinance to be held
at the Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street,
Ithaca, New York on Wednesday, September 6, 1989 at 7:00 p.m.,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk give notice of such public hearing
by the publication of a notice in the official newspaper,
specifying the time when and the place where such public hearing
will be held, and in general terms describing the proposed
ordinance. Such notice shall be published once at least fifteen
days prior to the public hearing, and ha it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall transmit forthwith to the
Board of Planning and Development and the Tompkins County
Planning Board a true and exact copy of the proposed ordinance
for its report thereon.
Carried (9 -0)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 30.3(B) ENTITLED 'HEIGHT OF
BUILDING' 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. That Section 30.3(b) entitled 'Height of
Building' is amended as follows:
1147. Height of Building
'Height of a building' shall mean the vertical distance
measured from average finished grade level to the highest level
of a flat or mansard roof, or to the average height of a pitched,
gabled, hip or gambrel roof, excluding bulkheads, housing for
mechanical equipment, towers, and similar constructions not
intended for human occupancy, or necessary equipment carried
above roof level. Where a building contains sections of a roof
of varying heights, the height of a building shall be measured
using that section of the roof that has the highest elevation
from the average finished grade level. The average finished
grade level shall be determined from a datum established by the
average elevation of the finished grade adjoining the exterior
walls of the building."
1_U0
38 August 1, 1989
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.
* 17 3 An Ordinance Amending Section 30.33(C) Entitled 'Height
and Open Space' of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of
Ithaca Municipal Code - Call for Public Hearing
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That Ordinance No. 89 - entitled "An Ordinance
Amending Section 30.33(C) of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the
City of Ithaca Municipal Code" be and it hereby is introduced
before the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, and be
it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council shall hold a public hearing in
the matter of the adoption of the aforesaid ordinance to be held
at the Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street,
Ithaca, New York on Wednesday, September 6, 1989 at 7:00 p.m.,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk give notice of such public hearing
by the publication of a notice in the official newspaper,
specifying the time when and the place where such public hearing
will be held, and in general terms describing the proposed
ordinance. Such notice shall be published once at least fifteen
days prior to the public hearing, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall transmit forthwith to the
Board of Planning and Development and the Tompkins County
Planning Board a true and exact copy of the proposed ordinance
for its report thereon.
Carried (9 -0)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 30.33(C) ENTITLED 'HEIGHT AND
OPEN SPACE' 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. That Section 30.33(C) entitled 'Height and Open
Space' is amended as follows:
1130.33(C). Height and Open Space.
In any district, any main building may be erected to a
height in excess of that specified for the district, provided:
1) each required front, side and rear yard is increased one foot
on the ground for each one foot of such additional height; 2) in
all Districts, the number of stories permitted may
not be exceeded; and 3) in each district the number of
additional feet may not exceed 10% of the maximum building height
allowed in that district."
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.
* 17.4 Resolution to Combine Public Hearings for Amendments to
Section 30.3(B) and 30.33(C) of the Zoning Ordinance
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby directs the City Clerk to
schedule one public hearing at its regular September meeting to
consider proposed amendments to Sections 30.3(B) and 30.33(C) of
the Zoning Ordinance.
Carried (9 -0)
0
10
39 August 1, 1989
R -2c Zoning - Report
Alderperson Booth reported the Charter and Ordinance Committee
has looked at the R -2c Zoning. There appear to be two problems
that are going to take longer to work on. The Building
Commissioner is concerned about being readily and easily able to
provide information to people who ask what can be built on their
property. The other problem is what will happen if a room which
is not a bedroom becomes a bedroom and thereby makes that
building a non - conforming building for all other purposes.
(460e Because these things need to be worked on the committee will be
meeting with Thys Van Cort and Paul Mazzarella again.
recognize the right of the individual,
married or single, to be free of unwanted
governmental intrusion into matters so
private as the decision whether to bear a
child.
We believe that women, regardless of age or economic,
social, or ethnic status, have the right to seek and
obtain medically safe, legal abortions under dignified
conditions and at a reasonable cost.
Moreover, we urge elected officials at all levels of
government to support the inalienable and
constitutional right of all individuals to decide when,
whether, and with whom to have a family.
Now, therefore, be it
(4wo" RESOLVED, That the statement proposed by the Coalition for
Reproductive Choice be referred to the Human Services Committee
for study, public input, and possible resolution for Council
action.
Alderperson Nichols stated that he believes it is up to elected
officials to take a stand, even though decisions will be made at
the State and Federal levels. He is asking for pubic input on
this issue to make sure that when Council makes its
recommendations to the State and Federal officials that it comes
after wide public debate. He will be asking the Human Services
Committee to hold a Public Hearing on this issue.
REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS:
Local Air Quality Report for Referral to Proper Committee
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Local Air Quality report be referred to
the
Planning and Development Committee for review and report back
to
Council.
,...
Carried (9-0)
NEW BUSINESS•
for Reproductive Choice
_Coalition
By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the Coalition for Reproductive Choice represents
the
views of many residents of the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the Coalition has asked Common Council to urge State
and
Federal protection of the rights of women to control their
own
bodies, and
WHEREAS, the Coalition has proposed the following statement
for
adoption by Council:
In light of the recent Supreme Court plurality opinion
in Webster V. Reproductive Health Services, which
threatens the American tradition of civil liberties,
we:
recognize the right of the individual,
married or single, to be free of unwanted
governmental intrusion into matters so
private as the decision whether to bear a
child.
We believe that women, regardless of age or economic,
social, or ethnic status, have the right to seek and
obtain medically safe, legal abortions under dignified
conditions and at a reasonable cost.
Moreover, we urge elected officials at all levels of
government to support the inalienable and
constitutional right of all individuals to decide when,
whether, and with whom to have a family.
Now, therefore, be it
(4wo" RESOLVED, That the statement proposed by the Coalition for
Reproductive Choice be referred to the Human Services Committee
for study, public input, and possible resolution for Council
action.
Alderperson Nichols stated that he believes it is up to elected
officials to take a stand, even though decisions will be made at
the State and Federal levels. He is asking for pubic input on
this issue to make sure that when Council makes its
recommendations to the State and Federal officials that it comes
after wide public debate. He will be asking the Human Services
Committee to hold a Public Hearing on this issue.
10`'
40 August 1, 1989
Alderperson Cummings asked Human Services Committee to consider
economic boycott strategies that are available against entities
which fund anti - abortion activities.
Alderperson Romanowski read the following statement into the
record:
"Notwithstanding the statements here tonight there are also City
of Ithaca residents who hold opposing views on those held by the
Coalition for Reproductive Choice. Common Council has always
held its purpose is to enhance and protect the quality of life
for its citizens. They are concerned with such things as
housing for the homeless, the elderly, the low - income people,
they are concerned with child care, meals for the hungry,
concerned with fire and police protection, water quality and on
and on. All these things are dedicated to the preservation of
life.
The tragedy of abortion is that it is a life that is lost. There
has to be a better way. The outcome of this civil war in the
country is that it is going to be fought in the State and Federal
Courts and legislative bodies. To inject this highly divisive
topic into local political bodies is to dilute our effectiveness
on the issues that affect us directly here in the City of Ithaca.
It could mean a civil war right in the local bodies.
I understand and respect the differences of opinion within
society itself on this but I have views directly opposed to those
that a lot of people hold. I would like to have people on their
own write their representatives, to lobby, to loin groups,
whatever their perspective decisions are on this but I can't
support this resolution and I urge other people if they have any
kind of leaning for not supporting abortion as a viable solution
to vote this down also."
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Cummings, Nichols, Booth, Killeen, Lytel,
Johnson, Hoffman, Schlather
Nay (1) - Romanowski
Carried (8 -1)
Adjournment
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 12:05 a.m.
Callista F. Paolangeli
City Clerk
d
John C. Gutenbergei
Mayor V
19.1
W_
COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. August 1, 1989
PRESENT:
Mayor Gutenberger
Alderpersons (9) - Booth, Nichols, Hoffman, Cummings, Lytel,
Johnson, Killeen, Schlather, Romanowski
(Wool ABSENT:
Alderperson Peterson (excused)
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Clerk - Paolangeli
City Controller - Cafferillo
Director, Planning & Development - Van Cort
Personnel Administrator - Walker
Building Commissioner - Datz
Oki FIre Chief - Olmstead
(� Board of Public Works Commissioner - Reeves
i3 Acting Superintendent of Public Works - Fabbroni
Youth Bureau Director - Cohen
Assistant City Attorney - Beers - Schnock
4Z:�. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to
the American flag.
MINUTES:
Approval of Minutes of the July 5, 1989 Common Council Meeting
Alderperson Schlather requested that on page 7, in the fifth
paragraph, the word 'do' be changed to 'design'. It should read
(woe, as follows: "commissioned to design the renovations.....".
Alderperson Schlather stated that on page 34, under
"Adjournment ", it should be noted that the meeting was adjourned
after the Executive Session at 12:00 midnight.
Resolution
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the July 5, 1989 Common Council
meeting be approved with the above corrections.
Carried (9 -0)
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
Budget and Administration Committee
Alderperson Schlather requested the addition of two items -
14.12, a resolution for the appointment of an Acting
Superintendent of Public Works, and 14.13 an amendment to the
authorized equipment list for the Finance Department.
Alderperson Schlather stated that there is also a revised copy of
the Agreement between the City /Community Recreation Center,
Inc. /Ithaca Youth Hockey Association, item 14.2 on the agenda.
MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS:
Youth Bureau Advisory Board
(awe, Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the
appointment of Than Sun, 520 West Buffalo Street, to the Youth
Bureau Advisory Board, with a term to expire December 31, 1991,
and Valerie Walker, 63 Sheraton Drive, with a term to expire
December 31, 1990.
Resolution
By Alderperson Booth:
RESOLVED, That this 0
and Valerie Walker to
to expire December 31,
Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
3uncil approves the appointment of Than Sun
the Youth Bureau Advisory Board with terms
1991 and December 31, 1990, respectively.
Carried (9 -0)
W;
f ,1
2
August 1, 1989
Tompkins County Youth Bureau Board
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the
appointment of Heather Tallman, 317 Richard Place, and Francis
Shattuck, 901 Dryden Road as City Representatives to the Tompkins
County Youth Bureau Board with terms to expire December 31, 1991.
Resolution
By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
RESOLVED, That this Council approves the appointment of Heather
Tallman and Francis Shattuck as City Representatives to the
Tompkins County Youth Bureau Board with terms to expire December
31 1991
Carried (9 -0)
Board of Public Works
Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the
appointment of Joseph Spano, 171 East State Street, to the Board
of Public Works with a term to expire December 31, 1989.
Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That this Council approves the appointment of Joseph
Spano to the Board of Public Works with a term to expire December
31, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
Purchasing Agent Search Committee
Mayor Gutenberger announced that due to the upcoming retirement
of John C. Clynes, Purchasing Agent for the City of Ithaca, he
has appointed the following persons to serve on the Search
Committee for that position:
Jean McPheeters
Michael Sprague
Sheila Ferrari
Alderperson Booth
Alderperson Schlather
Alderperson Killeen
a member of the Energy Commission will be
announced.
Deputy City Clerk Search Committee
Mayor Gutenberger announced that due to the resignation of Betty
F. Poole as Deputy City Clerk for the City of Ithaca, he has
appointed the following persons to serve on the Search Committee
for that position:
Dominick Cafferillo
Callista Paolangeli
Debra Parsons
Jean Swartwood
Alderperson Lytel
Alderperson Johnson
Alderperson Romanowski
Arts and Culture Committee
Mayor Gutenberger stated that he has appointed the following
persons to serve on the Arts and Culture Committee: Jill Hartz,
John Johnson, Jean Deming, and Michael Cannon. A fifth person
will be announced at a later date.
Capital Review Committee
Mayor Gutenberger stated that he has named the following persons
to serve on the Capital Review Committee: Larry Fabbroni,
Dominick Cafferillo, Thys Van Cort, Raymond Schlather, Susan
Cummings, Joseph Daley, Carol Reeves, Susan Blumenthal, Moncrief
Cochran, and the Mayor.
(f e�
3
August 1, 1989
PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
Hydropower
The following persons spoke to Council regarding the Hydropower
issue and expressed their reasons for being against the
development of hydropower at Ithaca Falls:
Sarah Jane Bokaer, Linn Street
Lois Darlington, 409 Lake Street
Margaret Fabrizio, 213 King Street
(4wool Alfredo Rossi, 409 Lake Street
Jeanne Fadula, 615 North Aurora Street
Second Hockey Rink at Cass Park
Doria Higgins, representing 'Citizens to Save Our Parks', stated
that before reading her statement this evening she would like to
make it clear that their group is not opposed, at this time, to a
new hockey rink but they are opposed to the contract that is on
the agenda for Council this evening and they are opposed to the
proposed location for the new rink. Ms. Higgins read the
following statement to Council:
"We respectfully ask you to consider the following four points
when voting tonight on Item 14.2 - -a contract between the City,
the Community Recreational Center, Inc., and the Ithaca Youth
Hockey Association, which would commit the City to start building
a second hockey rink at Cass Park on the site of the present
tennis courts upon payment to the City by CRC of 'at least
$550,000.00.'
1. There is no limit set in this contract upon the eventual cost
of the hockey rink. Item 10 gives the impression of such a limit
but in fact the wording is vague and the intent ambiguous. The
item reads "...the City reserves the right to refuse to go
(awoe forward... if the total cost... should exceed $1,100,000.00." It
says only that the "City reserves the right to refuse to go
forward." It does not say the City will refuse to go forward if
the cost should exceed $1,100,000.00.
Suppose the City has started construction (as the contract says
it must on receipt of $550,000.00) and finds after it has already
spent $550,000.00 or more that the eventual cost will be two
million dollars over the estimated cost. What does the City do
then? Stop construction and simply lose whatever it has already
spent?
2. The itemization of costs as presented in the agreement are of
doubtful accuracy. For instance cost of "Relocation of Tennis
Courts" is given as 11$25,000.00." We spoke yesterday to McGuire
Bennett who built the new tennis courts at La Tourelle and they
said of the cost listed in your proposed contact "It couldn't be
done at that price." They said 11$25,000.00 per court was a
minimum." Which means the relocation of the four tennis courts
would be $100,000.00 at a "minimum" not a mere $25,000.00 as
stated.
Let us be reminded that the original cost estimate for the
administration building of the Youth Bureau was $700,000.00.
ce But, in fact, it cost us seven hundred thousand plus one million.
What makes this overcharge worse is that while there are a few
facilities for youth in that building, it is, as you know,
primarily an administration building.
3. The Site Plan Review Committee has not been asked to review
the proposed location of the rink. The Conservation Advisory
Council has objected to the proposed location of the rink.
Citizens to Save Our Parks and others in the community have
publicly objected to the proposed location.
C ED
4 August 1, 1989
The estimated cost of the new rink is based on its location at
the site of the present tennis courts. A 20 foot high building
at this site, longer than the present tennis courts, will obtrude
unpleasantly on the beauty of the park and most particularly on
the comfort and beauty of the Cass Park pool. For you to bypass
the newly formed Site Plan Review Committee, expressly created by
you to evaluate sitings such as the new rink, and to ignore
recommendations from the CAC would seem to indicate a deliberate
blindfolding of yourselves in this matter.
4. We think it would be a better priority for the City
government, at this time, to complete arrangements to provide
GIAC with a decent pool before spending money to construct a
second hockey rink."
Mr. Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, stated that he thinks the
location of the proposed hockey rink is unwise. He urged Council
to delay action on the issue of the second hockey rink.
Access Unlimited
Larry Roberts, 315 South Albany Street, read the following
statement to Council:
"I represent Access Unlimited, a group of people interested in
disability and access issues in Ithaca and the surrounding areas.
We understand that, finally, the City is taking action to make
Clinton Hall accessible from the rear. Though we are glad this
action is being taken we want to express outrage at longstanding
City inaction in failing to enforce its Building Code.
We want to make it clear that we are unhappy with rear access,
but consider it better than no access. Tonight, we urge your
adoption of a policy for the future prohibiting of rear access in
City buildings. Such access 4_s insulting and demeaning. It is
also problematic in that doors are often locked for security
reasons or blocked for deliveries or otherwise commonly
obstructed.
On July 26, Mayor Gutenberger met with members of Access
Unlimited. We discussed a preliminary list of areas of concern
to us at that time. For your information and attention, we are
passing that list along to you. Please feel free to add to it if
you wish. The Mayor expressed some enthusiasm about setting up
an advisory panel, with staff assistance assigned, to help the
City move forward on issues affecting people with disabilities.
We look forward to working with you to lead Ithaca in the
direction of becoming barrier - free."
Sciencenter on old Sewer Treatment Plant Site
Robert Leathers, 99 East Lake Road, Architect for the new
Sciencenter, addressed the resolution on tonight's agenda on
establishing an Ad Hoc Committee to consider uses for the old
Sewage Treatment Plant site. He gave background information on
the Sciencenter and stated that since they have been displaced
from their location on Tioga Street, they are temporarily located
in Center Ithaca. At that time the Sciencenter set up a
committee to begin a community volunteer process to design,
organize and build a new Sciencenter in Ithaca. The first choice
that the committee has for a permanent home is the old Sewage
Treatment Plant site.
Mr. Leathers stated that they felt that not only would
establishing a Sciencenter at that site provide a fun place for
the family to visit but in addition, it would provide an
educational resource that the neighborhood, the school system,
the whole community would be able to use. He said that in
l)
k
August 1, 1989
addition, they plan to build a neighborhood park on that same
site, and they feel that the center would be a regional magnet
that would attract people from all over the state.
Mr. Leathers further stated that the Sciencenter committee
welcomes the opportunity to work with the City to set up an
agreement whereby they might lease a portion of that site and
establish a dynamic, exciting community center here in Ithaca.
(00" Plant Closing Legislation
Coert Bonthius, 109 West State Street, addressed Council about
the resolution that is on tonight's agenda in support of State
legislation on plant closings. He stated that the Tompkins
County Labor Coalition urges Council to pass the resolution.
Mr. Bonthius also spoke regarding the MacCormick Center. Last
week 44 employees at the Center received notification that their
jobs are being terminated on October 1, 1989. He said that many
r:o of these workers live in Tompkins County and have made a
commitment to the community. Due to budgetary concerns, the
0) State Division for Youth has decided to terminate the positions
and re -hire the same workers at a lower pay grade. While this is
.� not the same as a plant closing, it is a mass lay -off. Mr.
Bonthius urged Common Council to show support for these workers.
Joseph Maratea, 109 West State Street, representing CSEA Local
561 at the MacCormick Center, addressed Council and explained
what has happened at the Center. He said that 18 months ago the
McCormick Center was changed from a secure facility for juveniles
to a limited secure. At that time the NYS Division for Youth
gave the 44 employees that worked directly with these youth
their word that their salaries would not be reduced due to the
changing in the status of the Center. These people were informed
on July 25th of a change in their job status. They were given
until August 7th to let the state know what their intention is as
far as wanting a demotion or taking a lay -off or relocating. The
only offer that the state has made regarding the relocating is to
a facility that is 150 miles away and they have been given 24
days to make up their minds and report to their new job.
Mr. Maratea handed out a resolution that he had drafted and he
urged the Council to strongly oppose such action by the State by
adopting this resolution.
Baling Station
Chris Zikakis, 309 Sunnyview Lane, spoke on the issue of the
baling station at the Commercial Avenue site. He urged Council
not to delay their decision for another month. He asked Council
to vote tonight to pass a resolution proclaiming their
opposition to the Commercial Avenue site for a baling station.
The following persons voiced their concerns regarding a Baling
Station at the Commercial Avenue site:
Fred Remilard, Elmira Road - Representing McDonald's
Restaurant
Tim McGuire, Meadow Street - Representing McGuire Ford
Steve Homerada, Elmira Road - Representing Southern Tier
Pizza Hut
Gordon Chambers, Meadow Street - Representing PIP Printing
Bruce Abbott, Manager West Village Apartments
Jeanne Fadula, North Aurora Street, spoke in support of the
plant closing legislation. She also urged Council to renew their
commitment to energy conservation and waste reduction.
Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, voiced concerns regarding location
of the baling station and also urged Council to delay action on
the resolution on tonight's agenda regarding the Hockey Rink at
Cass Park.
(11 1
6 August 1, 1989
Markles Flat for Day Care
David Scovronick, 403 North Plain Street, owner of Ithaca
Soyfoods, stated that his business is located in the Markles Flat
building and he has grave concerns about the possibility of
moving the Day Care Center to that location. He said that at
this point having to move his business would incur a severe
economic hardship upon him to the extent that there would be the
chance that he might not be able to continue in business. He
asked that other sites, as well as the Markles Flat building, be
considered for day care.
Reproductive Choice
Shelley Drazen, 118 East Fall Street, representing the Center for
Reproductive Choice, urged Council to support the resolution
regarding reproductive choice on tonight's agenda.
Development of the Treman Marina and Surroundinq Area
Rick Bonney, Ornithologist, Barnes Hill, Newfield, read the
following statement to Council:
"When the first white settlers arrived in the Finger Lakes, the
southern end of Cayuga Lake was one vast wetland, teaming with
birds, water fowl, and wading birds. These days, after 150 years
or so of rather relentless civilization the wetland at the south
end of the lake has been reduced to a vestige, a tiny little
area, wetland and grassland known as Hogs' Hole. Most of that
area is owned by the State and doesn't have a whole lot to do
with the people around the table tonight but there is a small
part there that is owned by the City. It is called the Festival
Land.
Andrew Mazzella, Commissioner of Finger Lakes State Parks, has
asked that the city transfer the Festival Lands to the State so
that the State can develop them by adding to the Marina one more
pier, putting in a road and some parking lots. I think it is a
terrible idea; I think probably the birds do too and I would
really like to present to you the idea that this land should be
retained by the City because if it turns into a marina and a road
and a parking lot, one of these parking lots is located very,
very close to the boundary of the wetland that the State is
calling Hogs' Hole. I think it would impact very negatively on
the birds that are there. But more than that, that whole area
has potential for being restored to one large wetland, much like
it used to be 150 years ago.
I was talking with some people at DEC today, Mazzella's parent
organization. There is money available for municipalities to
restore wetlands and it might even be possible to look into the
feasibility of cooperating with the State to try to get some
money from the State to develop the wetland there which would be
much more ecologically advantageous than a picnic ground.
In the interest of brevity, I would like to hand out a statement
to Council members."
RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC:
MacCormick Center Issue
Alderperson Lytel stated that he would like to add the resolution
to the agenda under New Business that was presented by Joseph
Maratea, regarding the MacCormick Center.
The resolution was not added to the agenda due to Alderperson
Booth's objection.
69
7 August 1, 1989
REPORT OF CITY BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS
Board of Public Works
Commissioner Reeves reported on the following:
Traffic Island -- Mitchell and State Streets - On July 26,
the Board of Public Works passed a resolution to place a traffic
island at the corner of State and Mitchell Streets on a trial
basis. Further discussion on this matter will be held at the
(00" Committee of the Whole meeting on August 9th to discuss with the
Transit Supervisor concerns of unscheduled transit stops in that
area. Comm. Reeves stated that one of her concerns is
notifiying the residents in the area of the pending change. She
asked if the Alderpersons from that area have specific ideas
about how to go about notification of the residents in the area,
the Board would appreciate their feedback on this. She further
remarked that there is a drawing available in the Traffic
Engineer's Office showing different proposals. The Board of
00, Public Works favored Plan B -1.
Future Use of City Owned Property - Comm. Reeves stated that
�lrS in regard to agenda item 16.3, the Board of Public Works and the
Department of Public Works are in the process of reviewing the
`j operations for a report. Until this review process is complete,
the old Sewage Treatment Plant site has not been declared surplus
and will not be turned over for general City use until a long -
range plan is developed.
Privatization Policy for the Wastewater Treatment Plant and
Water Filtration Plant Facilities - Comm. Reeves said that
in regard to item 14.3 on the agenda, she would like to propose
friendly amendments and she handed out copies of the proposed
amendments to Council members. She said that the Board of Public
(600,01 Works never sought to bypass anyone's protections, breach any
promises or good faith or to resolve any problems by looking at
privatization. The Board, had it been allowed to look at
privatization, wanted to see what opportunities might be
available to either the City or to its employees at those
facilities. She stated that the negative approach was not the
Boards. She urged a positive vote on the amendments that she
presented.
Aucxust Schedule for the Board of Public Works Meetinas -
Comm. Reeves stated that the August schedule for the Board of
Public Works has been changed. The meeting on August 2 has been
cancelled. The Committee of the Whole will meet on August 9 and
August 23, and the Board's regular meetings will be held on
August 16 and August 30.
Tompkins County Local Emergency Planning Committee
Fire Chief Olmstead addressed the Council as the City's
representative to the Tompkins County Local Emergency Committee.
He handed out information on the committee and explained what the
emergency planning effort is.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR:
Letter from Board of Representatives
(400011 Mayor Gutenberger read the following
from James A. Mason, Chairperson,
Representatives, dated August 1, 1989,
letter that was sent to him
Tompkins County Board of
into the record:
"It is my understanding that a resolution concerning the siting
of the Tompkins County Solid Waste Management Center has been
placed on the agenda for the August 1 Common Council meeting.
I had discussed this matter with the Chair of that Committee last
week and it was my understanding that the Committee was not going
to bring this resolution forward until they had an opportunity to
review the draft Environmental Impact Statement and other data
that is to be available within the next two weeks.
70
L-11
Much of the information about
presented to the community by the
is misleading and erroneous.
misunderstanding about what the
what it will look like, and what
will be.
August 1, 1989
the proposed facility being
Elmira Road business community
There is a very serious
facility is, how it operates,
its impacts on the environment
Since the County had previously agreed to make a presentation to
the Planning and Development Committee and other interested
Council members on August 23, I would respectfully request that
action on the resolution be deferred until your next Common
Council meeting. This will provide an opportunity for Council
members and the community to hear the facts, review the dEIS, and
reach a more informed decision.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter."
Smoking Regulations
Mayor Gutenberger referred to the most recent bulletin that he
has received from the New York State Conference of Mayors and
said that there is a warning in there which says that only
municipalities that have smoking regulations which are more
stringent than this legislation shall avoid being pre - empted. He
asked Alderperson Booth if his committee has gone through the
document to make sure that our local ordinance is more stringent
or at least equal to the State's and if not, we should probably
do so.
Alderperson Booth said that he is reviewing the document now.
Our ordinance is stronger in some places and not as strong in
others.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
Jason Fane Lawsuit
Assistant City Attorney Beers - Schnock reported that the City has
received a decision on 705 East Buffalo Street, dated July 31,
1989. Judge Sherman denied the motion to dismiss and the trial
is set for August 17, 1989.
Fall Creek Designation
Alderperson Nichols asked if there could be a report to Council
from the City Attorney as to what the City's legal situation is
in regard to the Fall Creek designation and the 401C approval.
Asst. Atty. Beers - Schnock stated that it is her understanding
that the matter has been under consideration by the City
Attorney and she will check with him.
Mayor Gutenberger said that the requests for answers in writing
have been sent out to the Federal and State governments by the
City Attorney. To his knowledge, no answers have yet been
received.
Recess
Common Council recessed at 8:40 p.m. and reconvened in regular
session at 8:55 p.m.
Fall Creek Designation
Mayor Gutenberger read the following letter into the record from
the Department of Environmental Conservation, date stamped July
14, 1989, which was handed to him during the recess by Assistant
City Attorney Beers - Schnock:
"Dear Mr. Nash:
This is to respond to your letter of April 21, 1989 requesting
information on the effect designation of Fall Creek into the New
York State Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers System Act, (the
Act) with regard to new hydro developments.
71
OJ
Designation would preclude State
certification for a hydro project
Should the department deny a 401,
covered by Uniform Procedures Act
option for appeal of a denial.
August 1, 1989
approval of any new 401
at the Ithaca Falls site.
there is an appeal mechanism
and an Article 78 is another
In response to your numbered questions:
1. Diversion in [6NYCRR Part 666.18(a) (2) (2)] means any
physical removal of the river water from the natural
stream bed. To draw water from above the dam, run it
through a turbine and then release it back into the
river would constitute a diversion unless the turbine
was located in an existing dam.
2. The reference in 666.4 to past impoundment and or
diversion does not preclude designation of river
(I segments that are impounded at the time of designation
or once were impounded, [(6 NYCRR Sec.666.18(a) (2)
(4) ] .
3. Rivers are only designated by legislative amendments of
the Act, [ECL 15- 2715].
4. The Department has an established policy of denying 401
Certificates to hydro projects that would violate the
letter and or the purposes and policies of the Act. I
refer you to 6 NYCRR, Sec. 608.7 as well.
I trust this clarification will allow the City to move
forward with confidence.
Sincerely,
Thomas C. Jorling"
Mayor Gutenberger stated that the City Attorney would be going
through the communication to determine its meaning.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
* 16.2 Central Processing Facilitv at Commercial Avenue
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
WHEREAS, the County's proposed Central Processing Facility at
Commercial Avenue would be immediately adjacent to one of
Ithaca's major new retail areas, which also include dining
establishments, lodgings, and recreational facilities, and
WHEREAS, the Central Processing Facility would also impact two
neighboring parks, Buttermilk State Park on Route 13 and the
proposed City /Town Park along the Cayuga Inlet, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca currently has proposed a capital
project to plan and design the abutting undeveloped Southwest
area as a mixed use residential and commercial neighborhood,
providing much needed affordable housing and job opportunities,
(4w, and
WHEREAS, this location is also a highly visible entry to the
city, and
WHEREAS, it will not be possible to mitigate all of the negative
effects of this facility, including overwhelming size and
appearance and possible noise and odor, and
WHEREAS, there is not enough space available to adequately
separate it from these densely populated retail, residential,
and recreational areas, and
WHEREAS, there are far more appropriate, compatible, job and tax
generating uses competing for this site, and
7?
10
August 1, 1989
WHEREAS, the location of the Central Processing Facility at the
Commercial Avenue site would not be consistent with the City's
Master Plan and would be a violation of the City's Zoning
Ordinance; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca strongly
requests that the Tompkins County Board of Representatives
discontinue consideration of Commercial Avenue as a site for the
County Central Processing Facility.
Alderperson Cummings urged the Council to vote on the resolution
this evening. She referred to the request made by the Tompkins
County Board of Representatives to defer action pending
additional information to be made available in the dEIS.
However, the dEIS is only one of the several factors that the
City ought to be considering. She said that we are a community,
an urban area, of extremely limited available space. Processing,
and compressing of garbage within an urban area is not an
appropriate land use, particularly in a community where we don't
have the space to adequately buffer and protect surrounding
residential and retail facilities.
Alderperson Cummings further stated that there is some vacant
land available next to this proposed site. However, this is a
precious piece of land. It is a resource that we have all
looked at and talked about as the site for future affordable
housing and for job opportunities for our citizens. She said
that these people on the flats have in the past, for many years,
dealt with landfill sites next to their homes and their
businesses. She reminded Council what the community looked like
when landfill was there and she said that this area has indeed
done its fair share in accommodating and hosting solid waste
materials.
Alderperson Cummings said that it is critical that the City send
a message to the County that the City believes it is not the best
possible location for such a facility.
Alderperson Booth stated that he would like to know the meaning
of the eighth 'Whereas' clause. He said that he has always
understood that this is going to be located in an industrial
zone.
Discussion followed on the Zoning Ordinance and what uses might
be permitted in different zones. Planning Director Van Cort
answered questions from Council.
Alderperson Schlather suggested that the words 'and it would be a
violation of the City's Zoning Ordinance' be stricken from the
last 'Whereas' of the resolution. Alderperson Cummings accepted
that as a friendly amendment.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That there be a second RESOLVED to read as follows:
"That the Common Council requests the Board of Representatives to
immediately conduct full environmental review, and legal review
as necessary, in connection with the so- called Mancini and
Airport sites as alternatives to the Commercial Avenue site."
Discussion followed as to whether the amendment should be tied
into the original resolution or a resolution by itself.
Alderperson Schlather stated that the reason he wants to tie 'it
into the original resolution is because of the time schedule. He
said that it is very clear that notwithstanding the best
intentions of the County Board of Representatives, and they have
certainly acted in good faith throughout this process, there
just will not be enough time to begin serious consideration of
alternative sites. The County is on a time track that requires
that we have something in place by August 1990 and there is not .
It
Irn
11
August 1, 1989
enough time for the City to do the full environmental review
that is necessary at other sites. The County may, in fact, end
up at the Commercial Avenue site not because it is ecologically
sound, but simply because time wise it is chronologically
expedient.
Alderperson Schlather further stated that because the reasons for
not locating at that site are so obvious and so significant from
(WO." the City's standpoint, we have to take the somewhat unprecedented
step of asking the County to abandon this process before we dig
the hole any deeper. It seems to him that the die will be cast
and we will be stuck with a baling station at this site for lack
of a better alternative; we will be stuck with it by default.
an alternative resolution to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That
(two.' the Intergovernmental Relations Committee and Planning staff give
every possible assistance to County officials in the study of
alternate sites for the Central Processing Facility."
Alderperson Schlather said that his concern with Alderperson
Nichols' amendment is he does not think it goes far enough. The
County has already done a very exhausted preliminary study as to
certain sites. The next step to be taken is to begin the
environmental review.
Mayor Gutenberger again asked Alderperson Schlather to separate
his amendment from the original resolution. Alderperson
Schlather asked to hear from other members of Council on the
amendment.
Alderperson Killeen remarked that he thinks the idea of a baling
station at Commercial Avenue is a bad idea. In view of the
discussions, the great concerns and his belief that the
Commercial Avenue is not good he is increasingly convinced that
there is not a site in the City that has been looked at thus far
that is acceptable. The whole concept of loading up the County
seat with the County's trash is inconceivable to him. He agrees
with Alderperson Schlather's amendment. He would specify two
sites, but perhaps add the phrasing 'but not be limited to the
following sites'.
Alderperson Schlather offered the following language for his
amendment: "RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests the Board
of Representatives to immediately conduct full environmental
review, and legal review as necessary, of alternative sites
including but not limited the so- called Mancini site and the
Airport site."
Alderperson Booth stated that
thinks for the Common Council
County to look at sites that
politically not supportable.
Further discussion followed on
in regard to the amendment he
to send a message that urges the
are not in the City of Ithaca is
the amendment.
73
Discussion continued on the amendment.
Alderperson Hoffman said that the City might want to give
the
-`�
County a little more latitude and suggest that at least
two
alternative sites should be explored economically
and
environmentally, but he does not feel comfortable suggesting
only
13 i
these two sites when there may be a third site they find
more
attractive.
Alderperson Nichols stated that he agrees with Alderperson
Schlather in regard to the need for speed in this action and
the
fact that it is vitally important in terms of time
that
alternate sites be explored immediately. However, if
this
amendment were adopted he would have questions about voting
for
the motion. He thinks we should put this amendment aside
and
argue about the location in another format but include something
positive about alternate sites without naming them. He suggested
an alternative resolution to read as follows: "RESOLVED, That
(two.' the Intergovernmental Relations Committee and Planning staff give
every possible assistance to County officials in the study of
alternate sites for the Central Processing Facility."
Alderperson Schlather said that his concern with Alderperson
Nichols' amendment is he does not think it goes far enough. The
County has already done a very exhausted preliminary study as to
certain sites. The next step to be taken is to begin the
environmental review.
Mayor Gutenberger again asked Alderperson Schlather to separate
his amendment from the original resolution. Alderperson
Schlather asked to hear from other members of Council on the
amendment.
Alderperson Killeen remarked that he thinks the idea of a baling
station at Commercial Avenue is a bad idea. In view of the
discussions, the great concerns and his belief that the
Commercial Avenue is not good he is increasingly convinced that
there is not a site in the City that has been looked at thus far
that is acceptable. The whole concept of loading up the County
seat with the County's trash is inconceivable to him. He agrees
with Alderperson Schlather's amendment. He would specify two
sites, but perhaps add the phrasing 'but not be limited to the
following sites'.
Alderperson Schlather offered the following language for his
amendment: "RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests the Board
of Representatives to immediately conduct full environmental
review, and legal review as necessary, of alternative sites
including but not limited the so- called Mancini site and the
Airport site."
Alderperson Booth stated that
thinks for the Common Council
County to look at sites that
politically not supportable.
Further discussion followed on
in regard to the amendment he
to send a message that urges the
are not in the City of Ithaca is
the amendment.
73
4
12
August 1, 1989
A vote on the amendment resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Cummings, Nichols, Lytel, Johnson, Schlather,
Romanowski, Killeen, Hoffman
Nay (1) - Booth
Carried (8 -1)
Discussion followed on the Resolution as Amended.
Y'
Alderperson Hoffman suggested friendly amendments to the
Resolution and they were accepted by Alderpersons Cummings and
Lytel, as makers of the motion.
Alderperson Romanowski stated that he has consistently opposed
having the Central Processing Facility in this particular area,
in fact, anywhere along Route 13 in the City, would not be
acceptable to him.
Alderperson Johnson stated that he does not think that it is
procrastination to get all the information that is available
about this; rather it is acting responsibly to get as much
information as possible. He personally does not want a Central
Processing Facility on Commercial Avenue. He would like to see a
resolution to implore the County to do a dEIS on the alternative
sites so that they won't be left with just this one.
Alderperson Booth stated that while he is not delighted with the
Commercial Avenue site he believes that at this stage it is
feasible and he is willing to wait for the environmental,,,review.
He said the County has been open with the City and A,AAf acted in
good faith. The Council should remember that the County has the
power to locate this facility where they want to locate it,
since it is a governmental facility. The City generates a lot of
garbage and he believes it is irresponsible for the City to say
we don't want this kind of facility in the City of Ithaca.
Alderperson Hoffman remarked that he believes Alderperson Booth's
comments are well taken. He believes we should respect the
environmental review process and hear what this process has to
say. He does not like being asked to vote on this before all the
information is in.
Alderperson Lytel stated that on the question of whether or not
the City is willing to do their part to wrestle with the problem,
he thinks that clearly we are. What we have seen in this process
is a real escalation in the space demand for this facility to a
point where it does not fit this space. Nor does it fit the
parcels that remain within the City of Ithaca. What is at issue
here is that this is a proposed use that simply is not
compatible with urban density.
Main Motion As Amended
The Main Motion as Amended is as follows:
WHEREAS, the County's proposed Central Processing Facility at
Commercial Avenue would be immediately adjacent to one of
Ithaca's major new retail areas, which also include dining
establishments, lodgings, and recreational facilities, and
WHEREAS, the Central Processing Facility may also impact two
neighboring parks, Buttermilk State Park on Route 13 and the
proposed City /Town Park along the Cayuga Inlet, and
WHEREAS, there is currently under consideration a proposed
capital project to plan and design the abutting undeveloped
Southwest area as a mixed use residential and commercial
neighborhood, providing much needed affordable housing and job
opportunities, and
13 August 1, 1989
WHEREAS, this location is also a highly visible entry to the
city, and
WHEREAS, it will not be possible to mitigate all of the negative
effects of this facility, and
WHEREAS, there is not enough space available to adequately
separate it from these already developed retail, residential,
and recreational areas, and
WHEREAS, there are far more appropriate, compatible, job and tax
generating uses competing for this site, and
WHEREAS, the location of the Central Processing Facility at the
Commercial Avenue site would not be consistent with the City's
Master Plan; Now, therefore, be it
Cki RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca strongly
requests that the Tompkins County Board of Representatives
discontinue consideration of Commercial Avenue as a site for the
County Central Processing Facility, and be it further
as
E!j RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests the Board of
L Representatives to immediately conduct full environmental review
and legal review as necessary of alternative sites, including but
not limited to the so- called Mancini site and the Airport site.
Alderperson Hoffman asked Mayor Gutenberger if he would support
abstentions for lack of information. Mayor Gutenberger
responded, no. Unless someone has a personal stake in the
financial outcome of this particular resolution, the Mayor would
(Woe not accept an abstention.
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) - Schlather, Nichols, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel,
Romanowski
Nays (3) - Hoffman, Booth, Johnson
Carried (6 -3)
Mayor's Veto Message
Mayor Gutenberger stated that he has only vetoed, in 5 1/2 years,
two resolutions passed by Common Council and those were both on
process. First, he is disappointed in the sense that this Common
Council has passed numerous rules demanding of the public, that
for various actions the public wants to take, they must come
forward with projects, and plans well thought out and go through
an environmental review process which this City of Ithaca, we as
the lawmakers, have set up. We expect the public to go through
this whether it is Site Plan Review, Environmental Review or
SEQR. We demand the public go through a process before a
decision is made to grant a building permit or before a decision
is made to reject a building permit or the various types of
permits that are required by us, the government.
Mayor Gutenberger said that he is very disappointed that with
(400", this action on a 6 - 3 vote, this Common Council has pre - judged
and ignored the environmental review process. We are in effect
saying that we know the answers before the environmental review
process is completed. He thinks the Council must be fair to the
public when they come forward. We cannot pre -judge any project.
We have to abide by the rules that government has established.
Mayor Gutenberger further stated he is also disappointed that, as
was mentioned earlier, to vote against this was lip service to
SEQR. He thinks that voting this in is lip service to the
environmental review. You are pre - judging or making judgments
and ignoring the environmental review process. You should make
judgments based upon information - if you believe in the system.
If you believe in the environmental review process, which you
7 f;
14
August 1, 1989
have put in place, then you have to stand ready to decide on the
results of that environmental review process, or it is a sham.
It was said last night, to not support the rejection of this
site, could be harmful to a person's political future. He said
he is going to say right now, that the failure to hold ourselves
accountable to the laws that we enact is more harmful to the
public than any single individual's political future. We have to
have faith in our laws, and the public has to have faith in us to
make decisions based upon the information and facts. We have
not done that tonight.
This resolution is hereby vetoed.
Alderperson Cummings stated there is an amendment in the form of
a 'Resolved' requesting that the County consider additional sites
simultaneously. She stated she would like to again put that
forward.
Mayor Gutenberger stated that the Chair will entertain the re-
introduction of that resolution.
Resolution
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests the Board of
Representatives to immediately conduct full environmental review,
and legal review as necessary, of alternative sites including
but not but limited to the so- called Mancini site and the Airport
site.
Alderperson Cummings pointed out
before the Council tonight was
issues beyond the subject of
specific site. She said the
environmental review or just 01
address the much broader issue of
in the City.
that the resolution which was
a resolution which addressed
environmental review on that
real concern has been that
ze site does not allow us to
whether such a facility belongs
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
* 16.1a Hydropower - Investigation of Underground Hydro Plant at
Ithaca Falls
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
WHEREAS, the environmental impact of an underground hydropower
plant at Ithaca Falls may be significantly less than for an
above ground facility; and
WHEREAS, Common Council must have additional information and
financial estimates in order to determine the desirability and
feasibility of proceeding with an underground design; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that Common Council directs Planning Department staff
to investigate the underground hydro plant concept and to elicit
engineering proposals for preliminary designs, for consideration
by Common Council at its October 1989 meeting.
Discussion followed on the feasibility of an underground hydro
plant. Requests for Proposals are being sent out by Planner
Helen Jones.
Alderperson Killeen asked the location of other underground
hydro plants. Alderperson Hoffman replied that Watervliet, New
York and Troy, New York both have underground facilities.
77
15 August 1, 1989
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Nichols, Hoffman, Johnson, Romanowski, Lytel,
Cummings, Killeen, Schlather
Nay (1) - Booth
Carried (8 -1)
* 16.1b Hydropower - Van Natta Dam - Request for Supplemental
Extension
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, negotiations with private developers are currently
underway for construction and operation of the Van Natta Dam
hydropower project, and
WHEREAS, it is possible that as result of said negotiations the
Exemption issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on
the project will be transferred to the preferred developer, and
WHEREAS, negotiations and finalization of a development agreement
are not likely to be completed early enough to permit project
construction to be begun prior to the March 1990 deadline; now,
�? therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby direct staff to request
a supplemental extension of the deadline for beginning
construction on the project.
Carried (9 -0)
* 16.3 Future Use of City Owned Property
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has received several requests for the
(Ww", use, sale or lease of property owned by the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, one of the properties in question includes the former
site of the sewage treatment plant and other adjacent property
that is currently being used by the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, in order to effectively respond to these requests it
will be necessary to resolve such issues as whether the City of
Ithaca should continue to use these parcels, what alternate plans
must be made to move the current City functions, what other uses
are appropriate for these parcels, by what process should they be
made available to other users and what compensation the City
would expect to receive in return for making them available; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to
appoint an ad hoc committee to discuss and make recommendations
to the Common Council concerning the future use of the former
sewage treatment plant site, the adjacent City -owned lands, and
other City parcels that the City may wish to consider selling.
These recommendations should address, but not be limited to, the
issues raised above, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the ad hoc committee shall be composed of members
(4010" from each of the following municipal bodies:
Common Council (2 members) ( Alderperson Killeen
volunteered to serve on committee)
Board of Public Works (2 members)
Planning and Development Board (1 member)
and be it further
RESOLVED, That staff services be provided by the Director of
Planning and Development, the acting Superintendent of Public
Works, and the City Engineer, and be it further
78
16
RESOLVED, That the recommendation of
regarding the above issues shall
committee as soon as possible.
August 1, 1989
the Board of Public Works
be given to the ad hoc
Carried (9 -0)
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
* 15.5 Clinton Hall Accessibility
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, for over two years the Human Services Committee has
attempted to resolve handicapped access problems in the Clinton
Hall building, and
WHEREAS, the Human Services Committee has learned that access for
the handicapped is still incomplete, including the locking of the
back entrance door through which a handicapped person must enter,
and
WHEREAS, the failure to provide acceptable and adequate
accessibility to Clinton Hall for the handicapped has precluded
the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Clinton Hall;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council directs the Building Commissioner
and City Attorney to take appropriate legal action to address the
violation of occupancy of a building without a proper
certificate, which is due to not meeting requirements for
handicapped accessibility.
Alderperson Lytel referred to a letter from Building Commissioner
Datz to Joseph Ciaschi, owner of the building, dated July 27,
1989 directing that the work be done by August 11, 1989. If the
order is not followed by that date, the matter will be turned
over to the City Attorney for prosecution in City Court.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That there be a further RESOLVED to read as follows:
That it shall be City policy to make every effort to establish
procedures so that a building plan that provides only rear access
for physically handicapped persons not be accepted as meeting the
requirements for access ".
Discussion followed on the amendment. Building Commissioner Datz
responded to questions from Council members.
A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Main Motion as Amended
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
* 14.2 City /Community Recreation Center, Inc. /Ithaca Youth
Hockey Association Second Ice Rink Agreement
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Mayor be authorized to execute the agreement
between the City and Community Recreation Center, Inc. and Ithaca
Youth Hockey Association, Inc., for the construction and
operation of an ice rink, related improvements, equipment
acquisition and the relocation of tennis courts adjacent to the
existing Cass Park Ice Skating Rink.
Discussion followed on the agreement.
Alderperson Booth stated that he feels the contract is
substantially different than what was presented to Council in the
beginning. He is also concerned that as site review goes forward
this may well result in a negative answer. He is concerned about
any food concessions being removed from the City Youth Bureau and
fd �7
17 August 1, 1989
he also believes the Youth Bureau Board should be asked to
comment on this agreement. Because of these and other concerns
he does not feel ready to vote on the resolution tonight.
Alderperson Nichols commented that he shares the concerns of
Alderperson Booth. He is also concerned because there does not
seem to be any commitment beyond the initial $550,000 by the
Community Recreational Center.
Alderperson Schlather explained that the project, as it is now,
is different than when it was originally presented. The bottom
line is the cost of the project has gone up substantially and the
CRC has raised as much as they can raise.
Discussion followed on using a surcharge on the hourly rate for
ice time to retire the debt.
0i Alderperson Killeen stated that he is reluctant to use City money
to build a second ice rink when we already have an ice rink and
GO to
there are so many compelling forces for City money.
Alderperson Lytel commented that he believes taking advantage of
(t.t private fund raising for establishing a permanent facility that
will be available to all and will be financed out of a user sur-
charge is the sort of thing the City should be encouraging.
Alderperson Hoffman said he does not believe it will pay for
itself in the way others think it will. He does not like the
idea of imposing an increased hourly sur- charge for users of the
old rink.
(60'e Youth Bureau Director Cohen responded to questions from Council.
Further discussion followed.
Motion to Table
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the City /Community Recreation Center, Inc. /Ithaca
Youth Hockey Association Second Ice Rink Agreement be tabled.
Ayes (8) - Killeen, Lytel, Nichols, Cummings, Booth,
Schlather, Romanowski, Johnson
Nay (1) - Hoffman
Carried (8 -1)
Alderperson Nichols asked that the Youth Bureau Advisory Board
give Council a written opinion on this proposal.
* 14.1 City Court Facility Plan
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
WHEREAS, the Ithaca City Court is currently housed on the fourth
floor of the Hall of Justice building, located at 120 East
Clinton Street in Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 825 of the Laws of 1987,
Representatives of the State Office of Court Administration have
(W00.1 identified various deficiencies in the existing City Court
Facilities, and
WHEREAS, Chapter 825 requires that the City adopt a Court
Facility Plan, which addresses various capital improvement
options intended to alleviate said deficiencies, no later than
August 7, 1989; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the following Court Facility Plan be, and is
hereby adopted for submission to the Chief Administrative Judge
of the Office of Court Administration, by the aforementioned
date.
80
ku
August 1, 1989
SECTION VI: ITHACA CITY COURT
COURT FACILITY PLAN
A. Facilities.
Ithaca City Court is currently housed in the Hall of
Justice, located at 120 East Clinton Street in Ithaca. This
building was constructed in 1936, and was originally built
as the headquarters for a private business.
The City Court occupies all of the fourth floor of the
building, with the exception of one office designated for use by
the City Prosecutor. The remainder of the building houses the
various offices of the Ithaca City Police Department.
B. Existing and Projected Facility Needs:
1. A review of the current court space in light of the
facility guidelines reveals the following .existinc{
deficiencies:
_ - The Hearing Room is too small ( +179 sq. ft.) , and
has heating and cooling system deficiencies. On
many mornings the maximum fire capacity of the
courtroom is exceeded.
The court lacks any attorney /client conference
rooms. At least two are needed ( +200 sq. ft.).
- The current prisoner holding room is too small
( +23 sq. ft.), and lacks heating, cooling and
ventilation.
The Judge's Chambers, while 23 sq. ft. less in
area than the guidelines would suggest, would
otherwise be acceptable were it not for the
continual heating and cooling problems.
- The Judges and staff lack private rest room
facilities ( +250 sq. ft.).
- The support staff offices currently lack
sufficient public counter and general work area
( +222 sq.ft.).
- The Chief Clerk Office is overcrowded, and
additional space is required ( +67 sq. ft.).
The Court has a serious record storage problem.
Because of this, the Jury Room which, other than
ventilation problems, would be large enough to be
adequate, is the home to numerous file cabinets
and storage boxes. Before each jury trial it is
necessary to clear adequate access passageways so
that jurors may be seated at the table ( +200
sq.ft.).
2. Projected court needs include the following:
The long -term need for a secure attorney /client
conference room adjacent to the holding facility
( +50 sq. ft.).
A public waiting area is needed for the court.
Utilization of hallway space for waiting is
inappropriate. ( +180 sq.ft.).
W_
I Wn
81
19 August 1, 1989
An addition 190 sq. ft. to house the projected
additional two staff persons during the planning
period.
An additional 100 sq. ft. for long -term
copy /supply and storage needs.
C. Facility Plans:
As noted above, the City Court shares the Hall of Justice
with the Ithaca Police Department. As with the Court, the
Department suffers from a serious lack of needed space. This
fact has effectively precluded the City's ability to obtain
additional space for the court in the Hall of Justice. The
decision has been made, therefore, that any short- and long- term
relief for the court must come through either new construction or
renovation of another existing facility.
The City has limited the options to be considered as noted
below:
1. Facility Options
The following facility options are to be considered:
a. Construction of an addition to the Hall of Justice
which will house the City Court facilities.
b. Construction of a new City Court facility on the
site of a current City -owned parking lot on the
corner of West Clinton and Cayuga Streets directly
west of the Hall of Justice. As now proposed,
this project would be carried out in conjunction
with and as a part of the construction of a new
multi -level parking ramp.
C. Private developer options and proposals will also
be considered. For example, private developers
have already approached the City with regard to
building new or renovating existing space in the
City for Court use.
Consideration of these three options will take into account
the following objectives:
- A new or renovated facility will be constructed consistent
with the facility guidelines standards.
A new or renovated facility will meet all current and
projected space needs and will include such additional space
as necessary to meet the prospective needs of the court on a
long -term basis.
A new or renovated facility should be located as closely as
practicable to the City Police Department (Hall of Justice).
As the distance from the Department increases, so will the
costs of transporting and guarding prisoners, of providing
security to the court and the logistical difficulties
associated with court appearances.
2. Facility Requirements:
A new or renovated court building will include, at a
minimum, the following facilities:
Staff offices for Chief Clerk and a minimum of seven
persons (865 s.f.)
Adequate space for court records and supplies (410
s.f.)
8 `)
20 August 1, 1989
- A Public Counter to insure proper security to the court
and efficient service to the public (100 s.f.)
- Chambers for the two Part -time Judges (200 s.f.)
Separate secure access rest rooms for court personnel
(per code)
Main Courtroom (1200 s.f.)
- Jury Deliberation Room (200 s.f.)
- Two Attorney /Client Conference Rooms (100 s.f. each;
200 s.f. total)
One Prisoner Holding Room (120 s.f.)
- One Secure Attorney /Client Conference Room adjacent to
the Holding Room (50 s.f.)
A Public Waiting Room adjacent to the Courtroom ( 180
s.f.)
Public Rest Rooms (per code)
Handicapped Accessibility throughout
Security Station (160 s.f.)
City Prosecutor's Office (200 s.f.)
3. Mitigating Measures
During the project development period, the following
steps will be taken to relieve existing court facility
problems to the greatest extent possible:
The existing heating, cooling and ventilation
deficiencies, which consist mainly of regulation
problems, will be addressed and remedied by
January 1990.
Fire code restrictions regarding the maximum
number of persons allowed in the courtroom will be
enforced by the court security staff.
The court will take advantage of the new court
records retention policies (expected to be
finalized by Fall, 1989) to eliminate as many old
court records as possible. In addition, the City
will identify possible alternative remote storage
areas for possible court use by December, 1989.
D. Project Schedule.
The City commits itself to meet the needs identified in the
court facility plan in the time period noted below:
Budget for Capital Project Planning
Approval of Capital Project Planning
Capital Project Planning Budget and Site
Selection
Budget for Capital Project Design and
Construction
Approval of Capital Project
Selection of Project Architect
August 1989
December 1989
July 1990
July 1990
December 1990
February 1991
J
I V_�
I V_t
83
21 August 1, 1989
Develop Project Design and Specifications September 1991
Review Documents November 1991
Open Bids - Award Contracts January 1992
Begin Construction March 1992
Complete Construction November 1992
E. Financing:
Because the final project option has not yet been
determined, actual cost figures are not yet available.
Recognizing our commitment to complete the court facility
project within the time frame noted above, the City seeks
approval to obtain all appropriate and eligible interest
reimbursement for any capital construction bonding issued for
this project. In addition the City will pursue the potential
!A.° financing and leasing options presented in Chapter 825 of the
Laws of 1987 through the New York State Dormitory Authority.
Carried (9 -0)
14.3 Privatization Policy for the Wastewater Treatment Plant
and Water Filtration Plant Facilities
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has on its Committee of the
Whole Agenda the subject of "Privatization" of the City's Water
and Wastewater Treatment Plants, and
RESOLVED, That it is hereby established as the policy of the City
of Ithaca that its Wastewater and Water Treatment Plants will not
be turned over in their entirety to private operation, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That the foregoing does not preclude the Board of
Public Works from investigating management alternatives for the
operation of discreet and specialized aspects of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant and Water Filtration Plant operation consistent
with the foregoing policy and contractual obligations.
Discussion followed on the floor on the substitute resolution
that was presented by Board of Public Works Commissioner Reeves.
Alderperson Schlather stated that he did not support the
substitute resolution.
A vote on the original resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.4 State and Federal Section 18 Mass Transit Oneratina
Assistance Agreement
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has submitted a request for a grant
of funds to the New York State Department of Transportation and
the United States Department of Transportation, pursuant to
Section 18 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as
amended, for a project to provide operating assistance funds for
transportation services within the City of Ithaca and partly in
two adjoining municipalities, provided by the City of Ithaca
WHEREAS,
the device of "Privatization" should not
be used to
bypass the
protections provided to our employees by Civil
Service
Law, and
WHEREAS,
whatever problems or opportunities may exist
in the
present
or future operations of the Water and
Wastewater
Treatment
Plants should be dealt with directly,
within the
framework
of the City's continued direct control and
operation,
if at all
possible; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That it is hereby established as the policy of the City
of Ithaca that its Wastewater and Water Treatment Plants will not
be turned over in their entirety to private operation, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That the foregoing does not preclude the Board of
Public Works from investigating management alternatives for the
operation of discreet and specialized aspects of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant and Water Filtration Plant operation consistent
with the foregoing policy and contractual obligations.
Discussion followed on the floor on the substitute resolution
that was presented by Board of Public Works Commissioner Reeves.
Alderperson Schlather stated that he did not support the
substitute resolution.
A vote on the original resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.4 State and Federal Section 18 Mass Transit Oneratina
Assistance Agreement
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has submitted a request for a grant
of funds to the New York State Department of Transportation and
the United States Department of Transportation, pursuant to
Section 18 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as
amended, for a project to provide operating assistance funds for
transportation services within the City of Ithaca and partly in
two adjoining municipalities, provided by the City of Ithaca
a
22
August 1, 1989
Transit System for fixed route, scheduled, open and available to
the general public during the period January 1, 1989 to December
31, 1989 (PIN3798.21.406); now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Mayor John C. Gutenberger be authorized to sign
the agreement(s) between the City of Ithaca and the State of New
York for the above named project, and be it further
RESOLVED, That Mayor John C. Gutenberger is authorized to act on
behalf of the City of Ithaca to proceed and complete this above
named project.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.5 Architectural Review for Possible Day Care Facility_ in
Markles Flats Building
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That an amount not to exceed $3,500 be authorized from
Capital Reserve #25 for design of Capital Improvements, for
preparation of a preliminary architectural review of available
space at the Markles Flats building for Day Care purposes,
contingent upon action to be taken by the Ithaca City School
District at their August 15, 1989 meeting, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Planning Department conduct the selection
process to determine the best qualified architect to perform the
aforementioned review.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.6 Police Department Request to Appoint the Parking
Enforcement Officer
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That Gary Bordoni be appointed to the position of
Parking Enforcement Officer at an annual salary of $13,619.,
which is Grade 7, Step 3 on the CSEA Administrative Unit
Compensation Plan, effective August 7, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.7 Personnel Department Request to Appoint the Personnel
Associate
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That Christa Carsello be appointed to the position of
Personnel Associate at an annual salary of $25,000., effective
August 14, 1989.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.8 Personnel Department - Contract for Negotiation Services
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca enter into an agreement with
James Dennis, to provide professional services in the field of
labor negotiations in connection with the negotiation of 1990
collective bargaining agreements (Ithaca Paid Fire Fighters
Association Local 737, and CSEA Administrative Unit Local 855),
at a cost not to exceed $3,500 and $3,000 respectively.
Carried (9 -0)
*
14.9 Personnel Department Transfer of Funds
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the authorized equipment list for the Personnel
Department be amended by adding three filing cabinets, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That $482 be transferred from line A1430 -425, Office
Expense, to A1430 -210, Other Equipment, in order to effect such
purchase.
Carried (9 -0)
r•
23 August 1, 1989
* 14.10 Personnel Department - Dental Program for Executive Unit
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the members of the City Executive Association and
management employees, be allowed to participate in the City
Dental Insurance Plan, with the cost of the insurance premium
paid by the employee.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.11 Audit
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
RESOLVED, That bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract
#14/1989, in the total amount of $19,347.88, be approved for
payment.
Carried (9 -0)
* 14.12 Acting Superintendent Appointment
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
�i WHEREAS, Larry Fabbroni has been appointed to the position of
Acting Superintendent of Public Works, effective June 17, 1989;
now, therefore, be it
a) RESOLVED, That Larry Fabbroni's annual salary be hereby increased
to $50,808 retroactive to July 17 1989 until such time as a new
Superintendent of Public Works assumes his /her duties.
Carried (9 -0)
*14.13 Amend Equipment List - Finance Department
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski
RESOLVED, That the Authorized Equipment List of the Finance
Department be amended to replace one chair for $250.00, and be it
further
(6wo" RESOLVED, That $250.00 be transferred from A1315 -476, Equipment
Maintenance to A1315 -225, Other Equipment, to permit said
replacement.
Carried (9 -0)
Alderperson Schlather announced that the Pay Equity Committee has
been established and three Common Council members will serve on
this committee. They are as follows: Daniel Hoffman
representing Budget and Administration Committee; Carolyn
Peterson representing the Human Services Committee; Ben Nichols
representing the Charter and Ordinance Committee.
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
* 15.1 GIAC /City Contract
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
THIS AGREEMENT is made the 1st day of August, 1989 between
the CITY OF ITHACA and its YOUTH BUREAU and the GREATER ITHACA
ACTIVITIES CENTER, hereinafter referred to as "GIAC."
WHEREAS, GIAC, a not - for - profit corporation was formed for the
purpose of providing a wide variety of educational and
recreational and human service programs for the greater Ithaca
(400e community, and
WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau is the agency of the City of Ithaca
formed for the purpose of operating and maintaining recreational
and youth service programs for the community, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca purchased the former Central School
building at 318 North Albany Street, Ithaca, hereinafter referred
to as "GIAC building ", for the purpose of continuing to house
recreation, youth service, and other community programs, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of GIAC and the City of Ithaca
and its Youth Bureau share the common objectives of jointly
providing these services to the community;
8 (►
24 August 1, 1989
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and
covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows:
1. The City of Ithaca and its Youth Bureau:
a. to be the employer of record of GIAC employees, abiding
by Civil Service rules, the Union contract, issuing pay
checks, and maintaining full City benefits;
b. to operate and maintain the GIAC building;
C. to continue representation on the Board of Directors of
GIAC as called for in the Constitution of that
organization;
d. to accept an assignment of all fees or rental income
due GIAC, by reason of any contracts or agreements, or
rents concerning the use of the GIAC building. All
such sums shall be applied against the sums GIAC agrees
to pay the City of Ithaca under Paragraph 2c of this
Agreement. The Department of Public Works shall review
all contracts for rental income from use of GIAC
building;
e. to be responsible for handling all operating income and
payment of bills, including salaries of employees, in
connection with the operation of the GIAC building
through normal procedures of the City of Ithaca;
f. to meet major facility maintenance and renovation needs
of the GIAC building;
g. to continue the GIAC building's use as a multi - purpose
and multi - cultural center.
2. The GIAC Board:
a. to establish policy for the operation of GIAC programs,
and to work with the Center Coordinators and Youth
Bureau Director in the implementation of the programs.
b. to contribute toward annual operations all sums
received from the United Way and the New York State
Division for Youth, and any other major revenue
sources;
c. to assign and transfer to the City of Ithaca, all of
its rights, title, and interest in and to any and all
fees or rental income now due or to become due GIAC by
reason of any contracts or agreements which make
reference to or concern the use of the facility;
d. to continue to solicit funds from the United Way Board
and other sources;
e. to have a representative of the GIAC Board on the Youth
Bureau Board of Advisors;
f. to set the fees and dues structure for GIAC activities;
g. to set policies for the use of the GIAC building,
assignment of space, and rental contracts which shall
not be inconsistent with any city policies;
h. to prepare and submit annually to the City through City
processes, a proposed budget including recommendations
for staffing levels.
19,
25 August 1, 1989
3. The City of Ithaca and its Youth Bureau and the GIAC jointly:
a. to select, hire and discipline the Coordinator
consistent with 1A.
b. to operate, administer, and maintain recreation, youth
service, multi - cultural, and other community programs
in the GIAC building.
C. to plan major capital improvement projects involving
the GIAC building and grounds, taking into account
program continuity.
d. to share full use and enjoyment of all equipment owned
and controlled by both parties necessary to the
operation of the programs. In the event of the
termination of this agreement, all equipment purchased
by GIAC with non -City funds will remain with GIAC.
ti (All other equipment will remain with the City.)
('`' e. to carry out the program as approved in the budget for
L�_� the budget year. Any changes desired to be made by
$$ffa either party must be approved by both parties.
4. Nothing in the agreement between the Greater Ithaca
Activities Center and the City of Ithaca shall be construed
to limit the Youth Bureau's mandated obligation to review
all expenditures of the Greater Ithaca Activities Center
relating to City of Ithaca Funds.
5. This agreement shall be effective until August 1, 1990 and
shall automatically be renewed annually thereafter unless
(Wool, either party notifies the other in writing of an intention
to terminate three months prior to December 31 of that year.
6. The parties hereto agree to comply with all laws,
governmental regulations and rules applicable to the use of
the premises as described.
Mayor Gutenberger stated that City Attorney Nash had a number of
concerns that were stated in a memo and he asked if those
concerns had been addressed. Alderperson Lytel responded that at
the last Human Services Committee meeting, the memo was reviewed
by GIAC and the committee. Some minor changes and some
clarifications were made.
Discussion followed regarding the agreement. Alderperson Hoffman
asked that this be tabled until questions concerning this
agreement are answered.
Alderperson Schlather agreed to review it in the Budget and
Administration Committee with further review by the City
Attorney.
Motion to Refer to Committee
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the matter of the GIAC /City Contract be referred
to the Budget and Administration Committee for review and report
back to Common Council at its September meeting.
Carried (9 -0)
* 15.2 Markles Flats Building for Day Care
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
WHEREAS, it is advisable to explore all options for day care
expansion in the GIAC vicinity, and
WHEREAS, additional investigation appears to indicate that day
care expansion in GIAC may compromise GIAC programs, and
26 August 1, 1989
WHEREAS, the school district has been approached about the use of
the Markles Flats building for day care and initial reaction is
generally favorable; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council requests that the School Board
formally consider allowing the use of the first floor of the
Markles Flats building for day care pending negotiations between
the City and School District and day care provider (Drop -in
Center) regarding operation and provision of such a facility.
Discussion followed on the floor.
Alderperson Lytel proposed the following amendment:
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That a 'be it further Resolved' be added to read as
follows: "RESOLVED, That a committee is hereby established to
conduct the negotiations which will include a representative of
the Human Services Committee, the Director of Planning &
Development, one representative each from the Drop -in Center and
the Greater Ithaca Activities Center, a representative of the
Department of Public Works and the City Controller or Deputy City
Controller."
Discussion followed on the amendment. Alderperson Cummings
stated that at the request of Alderperson Peterson she was
proposing the following amending resolution:
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel
RESOLVED, That the Resolved be changed to read as follows:
"RESOLVED, That Common Council requests the School Board formally
consider allowing the after hours use of Central School for
suitable GIAC programs any'. /or the use of the first floor of the
Markles Flats building for day care or other appropriate GIAC
uses."
Planning and Development Director Van Cort commented that he
thinks this is a very good idea. If the City is going to start
looking at Markles it may not be the best thing to put the day
care in Markles; it may be better to put some other GIAC programs
there. He has had an indication that it may be difficult to
insure Markles, for a variety of reasons, for day care. He
suggested that if we do take this course of action we ask the
architect to study the program we are trying to accommodate and
see where the program best fits. It is not adequate to just ask
if you can put day care in Markles - the answer could be yes -
but it might be much more expensive than leaving the day care in
GIAC and moving another program like BOCES or a GIAC based
program into Markles. you may also want to think about the
financial implications for people who have businesses based in
Markles.
Alderperson Booth remarked that although he is aware of what
Alderperson Peterson was trying to do, he is concerned about
splitting up any GIAC programs at this stage.
Discussion followed on the amendment.
A vote on Alderperson Lytel's Amendment resulted as followed:
Ayes (4) - Cummings, Lytel, Booth, Johnson
Nays (5) - Schlather, Romanowski, Killeen, Nichols, Hoffman
Motion Fails (4 -5)
ry �
27
August 1, 1989
Main Motion
A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Schlather, Nichols, Hoffman, Johnson, Lytel,
Booth, Killeen, Romanowski
Nay (1) - Cummings
Carried (9 -1)
(4wooll The Amending Resolution proposed by Alderperson Cummings for
Alderperson Peterson was withdrawn and not voted on.
Motion to Extend Meeting
By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That this Common Council meeting be extended until
12:00 midnight.
Carried (9 -0)
O01
* 15.3 State Assembly Bill on Job Stabilization
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
(l) WHEREAS, Bill No. 6731 has been introduced in the New York State
1.",
.A Assembly to amend the labor law to "prevent or minimize the
.1 harmful economic and social effects on communities... when
business concerns undertake to terminate or reduce substantially
or relocate business operations. ", and
WHEREAS, such an amendment enhances the City's Plant Closing
Legislation in that a state -wide law protects all communities
equably and prevents businesses from relocating into areas within
the state without such legislation; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council notify State Assemblyman Luster,
State Senator Seward, and Governor Cuomo of its support for such
legislation.
we Carried (9 -0)
* 15.4 Funding Guideline for Human Services Requests
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
WHEREAS, the Human Services Committee has been apprised of a more
than 50% increase in human services funding requests, and
WHEREAS, the Human Services Coalition Review Committee has pared
down the requests, and
WHEREAS, a more precise guideline from Common Council will enable
the Human Services Committee to evaluate these requests; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca human services funding level be
a minimum of $100,248.00 (15% increase over 1989).
Alderperson Lytel explained the reasons for this resolution.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding the allocation.
Alderperson Schlather remarked that he could not support this
resolution as it is bad precedent for Council to target the
budget ahead of time with respect to any entity and also we have
no revenue sharing and we have increased capital expenditures.
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) - Lytel, Cummings, Booth, Nichols, Johnson,
Killeen
Nays (3) - Romanowski, Hoffman, Schlather
Carried (6 -3)
9 0
W.,
August 1, 1989
* 15.6 Ad Hoc Youth Services Study Committee Recommendations
By Alderperson Romanowski.: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
WHEREAS, an Ad Hoc Youth Services Study Committee was created to
propose a solution for an equitable and effective system for
provision of youth services in the County and City, and
WHEREAS, a number of configurations were proposed, examined, and
refined to a single, workable proposal; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council
the Ad Hoc Youth Services Study
informs the County of same.
endorses the recommendations of
Committee as listed below and
RECOMMENDATION
1. Defer consideration of recreation programs for now, and
refer this to the County Youth Board for a recommendation in
1990.
2. The County should take responsibility for providing and
funding youth development programs, to meet needs that are to be
addressed by the County Youth Bureau.
3. Both Youth Bureaus should continue to operate with their
present governance and administrative structures.
4. The County Youth Bureau should add a programming
capability which will be achieved for the present through
contracts for which they have determined a priority need in the
County in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This is to be
a continuation of and improvement on the municipal youth services
central program aid begun in this year. Programs provided by the
County Youth Bureau with central dollars will not necessarily
require a match by the contractor, and will be available to all
youth within the County, regardless of the municipality of
residence.
5. Because the City has been providing services to non -city
residents and has an investment in staff and facilities as well
as demonstrated experience, the County Youth Bureau will examine
the suitability of City youth development programs for meeting
County priorities. Any programs to be contracted for could be
modified, expanded or eliminated upon recommendation of the
County Youth Bureau. The City and County will work together on
the development of contracts between them for programs. The City
will have no obligation to develop a county -wide capability where
it does not wish to, and the County will not be constrained from
contracting with other service providers.
6. The City of Ithaca will have an opportunity to affect
the process both through contract negotiations and through its
representation on the County Youth Bureau and Board of
Representatives. It should fill its seats on the County Youth
Board one of which by a member of the City Youth Bureau Board,
become an integral part of the County process, and participate
fully in the development of the comprehensive plan. The City and
County Youth Bureaus should provide non - voting staff and member
liaisons to each other's board meetings.
7. The City Youth Bureau will retain its ability to
contract for the provision of services to individual
municipalities or other entities.
8. Multi -year contracts may be developed by the County
Youth Board.
9. The municipal grant program (MYSP local) funded in the
County's 1989 budget, should continue.
29
August 1, 1989
10. The County Youth Bureau will establish standards of
effectiveness and accountability, propose a method for monitoring
and evaluating these programs, and will make a recommendation for
needed staff.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson
RESOLVED, That the City Controller be and he is hereby directed
(two., to notify all interested municipalities in the County as to their
anticipated contractual obligation in 1990, using the same
formula as for 1989, for recreation programs and those Youth
Development and Recreational Mainstreaming programs which are not
funded by the County, which notification shall be made in writing
no later than September 1, 1989.
Discussion followed on the amendment. Alderperson Booth stated
that he wished the record to be very clear that the County has
only talked about youth services and recreational mainstreaming.
He did not want them to be confused that we are now including
- recreation with this. That has never been a part of the
discussion.
A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Main Motion as Amended
A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows:
Carried (9 -0)
Weekend Meal Program - Report
Alderperson Lytel reported that the weekend meal program is
serving 120 people a weekend. A copy of the report has been
mailed to the Alderpersons.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
Subdivision Reciulations Amendments - Cash in Lieu of Park Land
Reservation - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the matter of subdivision
regulations amendments have been reviewed by the Planning and
Development Committee and they are sending it back to Charter and
Ordinance to bring to Council.
Downtown Zonina - Buildina Height; Foot of State Street - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that there will be a recommendation
from the Planning Department to the Planning and Development
Committee next month. They hope to bring some changes to Council
to deal with building heights, transitions in the business area
and possible mixed use potential at the foot of State Street.
Rental Housing Task Force Recommendations - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee hopes to have a
resolution for Common Council next month to establish the
permanent Rental Housing Task Force to consider the
recommendations of the Rental Housing Commission and Task Force.
Plannina & Development Department 1990 Work Program - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee is taking
another look at the 1989 Work Program and doing some juggling of
staffing since Glen Goldwyn has left to take another job. A
report to Council will be forthcoming.
Postal Service
Employment
- Report
Coert Bonthius
spoke to
Council regarding the Postal Service
workers being
emphasize that
transferred
44 postal
from
jobs
Ithaca to Elmira. He wished to
is essentially the same as the
Ithaca Gun closing in terms of
money and wages. He urged Council
we
to continue to
press the issue
to keep the jobs in Ithaca.
Weekend Meal Program - Report
Alderperson Lytel reported that the weekend meal program is
serving 120 people a weekend. A copy of the report has been
mailed to the Alderpersons.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
Subdivision Reciulations Amendments - Cash in Lieu of Park Land
Reservation - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the matter of subdivision
regulations amendments have been reviewed by the Planning and
Development Committee and they are sending it back to Charter and
Ordinance to bring to Council.
Downtown Zonina - Buildina Height; Foot of State Street - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that there will be a recommendation
from the Planning Department to the Planning and Development
Committee next month. They hope to bring some changes to Council
to deal with building heights, transitions in the business area
and possible mixed use potential at the foot of State Street.
Rental Housing Task Force Recommendations - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee hopes to have a
resolution for Common Council next month to establish the
permanent Rental Housing Task Force to consider the
recommendations of the Rental Housing Commission and Task Force.
Plannina & Development Department 1990 Work Program - Report
Alderperson Cummings reported that the committee is taking
another look at the 1989 Work Program and doing some juggling of
staffing since Glen Goldwyn has left to take another job. A
report to Council will be forthcoming.
30 August 1, 1989
CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE:
Alderperson Booth withdrew reports on Items 17.5, 17.7, 17.8,
17.9, due to the lateness of the hour.
* 17.1 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 55 Entitled 'Fire
Regulations' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
FIRE PREVENTION CODE AMENDMENTS
The following material provides commentary on the proposed
amendments to Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code.
Each item is cross - referenced to the resolution by the letter
designated for each amendment.
A. Section 55.18
The purpose of fire limits is to establish zones in a
community where Type 5 construction, also known as wood frame
construction, is not permitted. Fire limits are most often
established in the downtown and industrial areas, as is the case
in the City of Ithaca.
The purpose of this change is to recognize that the 'B -2b',
'B -2c' and 'B -3' areas (the downtown, or "Commons" area, and the
"Collegetown" areas) have some of the greatest densities of any
in the City.
The recent fire at 105 North Aurora Street emphasizes the
consequences of wood frame construction in a congested downtown
area. The rear wood frame stair enclosure at 105 North Aurora
burned with such intensity and speed, that the rear of 306 -8 East
State Street was igniting as firefighters arrived on the scene.
Adding these two areas to the Fire Limits 'A' designation
applies the somewhat stricter requirements for Fire Limits 'A' to
the downtown business district and the Collegetown zones.
B. Section 55.14.E.16
This amendment legalizes our close regulation of the use of
propane in areas where large numbers of people gather, such as on
the Commons during the Ithaca Festival or at the Farmer's Market.
This close regulation is necessary to insure that the numerous
propane users at these events have safe installations.
C. Section 55.14E.24
Asphalt kettles represent a significant hazard and some
contractors are not intimately familiar with their use or the
degree of hazard that comes with them. Requiring permits in this
way will insure that proper safeguards will be employed prior to
commencement of the work.
D. Section 55.14.F
The need for permit fees can be related to justification for
the building permit fees received by the Building Department. By
recognizing the inherent costs in providing the services
necessary to adequately safeguard the community from the threat
of fire, a fee schedule for permits can be justified as a way of
recovering these costs. The fee schedule concept also applies
the concept of requiring the user of the service to help support
the provision of that service.
E Section 55.17
This amendment is necessary
consistent with the requirements
as referenced above. There i
to make the provision for appeal
of Part 440 - Boards of Review,
s no local authority to waive,
W-n
93
31 August 1, 1989
modify or otherwise excuse application of any portion of the New
York State Uniform Fire Prevention Code, such authority being
reserved for the State Regional Boards of Review.
However, for any local ordinance, to which the Uniform Code
is silent, a local appeals process may still be valid.
(Wwe F. Section 55.22
Lock boxes permit the Fire Department to store building keys
in a secure vault on the premises, rather than carrying them
aboard command vehicles. The Fire Department is then required
only to carry a master key to access the lock boxes. The master
key is carried in a vehicle in a locked cylinder that only
releases the key upon receipt of the proper coded transmission
from dispatch. The officer must call and request dispatch to
transmit the release tone when access to the lock box master key
is required. In this way, security is established and
maintained.
The reason building keys are necessary for use by the Fire
Department has increased dramatically in recent years. Numerous
g =A1 alarms often mean simultaneous, and even triple alarms occurring
at the same time. The ability of the Fire Department to wait,
sometimes 30 to 45 minutes, for a property owner to show up to
allow them into the building has been eliminated. A rapid, safe
and nondestructive method of entering buildings from which a fire
alarm has been received is a necessity. The lock box provides
this.
G. Section 55.23
(400" Current fire prevention statutes do not adequately address
this particular situation. Over the years, various types of
fires and other hazardous Fituations have occurred where
occupants of a building have utilized fire escapes, roofs,
porches and other locations for their barbecue grills, hibachis
and similar appliances. The location alone presents an immediate
problem as frequently these devices are placed in the means of
egress.
Other elements of the problem are related to unattended use,
use of too much igniter fuel, faulty appliances, use by
inebriated persons and similar situations.
H. Section 55.30
Self - explanatory.
I. Section 55.25
The sheer volume of fire alarm and detection system being
installed now has generated fire alarm volumes that would have
been unpredictable just a few years ago. Although existing codes
and standards provide for design and installation standards, not
all elements of necessary design are provided for. Hence the
material proposed above.
This will allow the Fire Department to exert more specific
supervision over system design, installation and operation, in a
manner that should provide greater control over deficient systems
and premises.
J. Section 55.26
This is a brief indicator of the need for a legislative
initiative to address the probability of potentially staggering
costs that may be incurred in responding to a hazardous materials
incident.
wo
K. Section 55.27
August 1, 1989
The presence of guard dogs in a building brings several
concerns to emergency personnel who may be required to force
entry into a building to render aid of some sort. This proposed
section is designed to provide advance notice of the presence of
these animals so that appropriate plans may be made to deal with
the problem ahead of time.
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca wishes to protect the health and
safety of its residents, its employees, and other persons, and
WHEREAS, Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled
'Fire Regulations', regulates actions and activities affecting
the provision and maintenance of fire safety, and
WHEREAS, the existing provisions of Chapter 55 should be amended
in order to more fully provide for fire protection; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That this Common Council does hereby amend said Chapter
55 as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 89 -
Section 1. Amendments to Chapter 55
A. Section 55.18 Fire Limits is hereby amended to read as
follows:
SECTION 55.18 FIRE LIMITS
Fire limits of the City of Ithaca are hereby defined as
follows:
A. Fire limits 'A': Those areas of the City which are
zoned Industrial 'I -1' and Business 'B -2b', 'B -2c' and
'B -3' in the City of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance (Chapter
30 of the Municipal Code).
B. Fire limits 'B': Those areas of the City which are
zoned Business, 'B -4' or 'B -51, in the City of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code).
B. Paragraph 16 of Subdivision E of Section 55.14 Permits
Required is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 55.14 PERMITS REQUIRED
E. The following permits are required:
16. Liquified Petroleum Gases.
Permits and Reports of Installations.
a. (1) A permit shall be obtained for each
installation of liquefied petroleum gas
employing a container or an aggregate of
interconnected containers of over 2,000
gallons water capacity.
(2) A permit shall be obtained for each temporary
or permanent installation of liquefied
petroleum gas, irrespective of size of
containers, made at buildings or gatherings
at which people congregate for civic,
political, educational, religious, social or
recreational purposes. Such buildings shall
include, but not be limited to, schools,
churches, health care occupancies, hotels,
and restaurants, each having a capacity of 20
or more persons. This section shall not
33 August 1, 1989
apply to one o% two family dwellings
utilizing appliances supplied with a single
cylinder not exceeding 20 pounds capacity.
b. ... through the end of paragraph 16 remains
unchanged.
C. Subdivision E of Section 55.14 Permits Required is hereby
(Wel amended by adding the following new paragraph 24 entitled
"Asphalt Kettles ", as follows:
24. Asphalt Kettles.
D. Section 55.14 Permits Required is hereby amended by adding a
new subdivision F entitled "Permit Fees ", as follows:
F. Permit Fees
1. The Fire Chief shall promulgate a permit fee
schedule applicable to the permits required
herein. Fees established in the fee schedule
shall reasonably reflect the cost of receiving,
investigating, processing and issuing each of said
permits.
2. Such schedule, and any changes proposed thereto,
shall be submitted to Common Council for adoption
prior to collection of such fees.
3. The fee schedule shall be posted at the Fire
Chief's office and distributed to any interested
parties.
E. Section 55.17 entitled "Appeals from decisions of Chief of
Fire Department" is hereby amended as follows:
SECTION 55.17 Appeals from decisions of Chief of Fire
(400-e Department
A. For those elements of Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca
Code, or of Chapter 'C' of the New York State Fire
Prevention and Building Code that are addressed by the
New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code, the manner of appeal shall be as specified in
Title 19 NYCRR, "Part 440 - Uniform Code: Boards of
Review" of the Department of State "Rules and
Regulations for Administration and Enforcement of the
New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code ", dated 1/1/85.
a. A permit shall be required for asphalt
kettles. Such permit shall be obtained prior
to issuance of any building permit for the
construction or reconstruction of any roof;
4,
and, prior to operation of the kettle on the
site.
b. A permit shall be obtained for each kettle to
be used even if more than one will be used
at one site.
�1
C. Regulations governing operation and use of
asphalt kettles shall be as specified in Part
1192 of the New York State Uniform Fire
Prevention and Building Code entitled "Flame
Producing Devices ", dated 1/1/84.
D. Section 55.14 Permits Required is hereby amended by adding a
new subdivision F entitled "Permit Fees ", as follows:
F. Permit Fees
1. The Fire Chief shall promulgate a permit fee
schedule applicable to the permits required
herein. Fees established in the fee schedule
shall reasonably reflect the cost of receiving,
investigating, processing and issuing each of said
permits.
2. Such schedule, and any changes proposed thereto,
shall be submitted to Common Council for adoption
prior to collection of such fees.
3. The fee schedule shall be posted at the Fire
Chief's office and distributed to any interested
parties.
E. Section 55.17 entitled "Appeals from decisions of Chief of
Fire Department" is hereby amended as follows:
SECTION 55.17 Appeals from decisions of Chief of Fire
(400-e Department
A. For those elements of Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca
Code, or of Chapter 'C' of the New York State Fire
Prevention and Building Code that are addressed by the
New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code, the manner of appeal shall be as specified in
Title 19 NYCRR, "Part 440 - Uniform Code: Boards of
Review" of the Department of State "Rules and
Regulations for Administration and Enforcement of the
New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code ", dated 1/1/85.
34 August 1, 1989
B. 1. This subdivision shall apply only to those
elements of Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca
Municipal Code that are not addressed or otherwise
covered by the New York State Uniform Fire
Prevention and Building Code.
2. Whenever the Chief of the Fire Department shall
refuse to grant a permit applied for, or when it
is claimed that the provisions of the code do not
apply or that the true intent and meaning of the
code may have been misconstrued or wrongly
interpreted, the applicant may appeal from the
decision of the Chief of the Fire Department to
the Fire Appeals Board within thirty (30) days
from the date of the decision. The Fire Appeals
.Board may affirm, modify or reverse any
determination of the Chief of the Fire Department
made pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter
and /or the Fire Prevention Code.
F. Chapter 55 is hereby amended to add a new section 55.22
Lock Boxes to read as follows:
SECTION 55.22 LOCK BOXES
A. A lock box, for storing building keys, shall be
obtained and affixed on certain premises as
described herein. Such lockbox shall be as
prescribed by the Fire Department and shall be
obtained in the manner established by the Fire
Department.
B. Lock boxes shall be required for all new and
existing buildings, other than one or two family
dwellings, that have fire alarm and /or fire
detection systems that are, or will be, inter-
connected with the Fire Department. Alarm system
interconnects include, but are not limited to,
municipal fire alarm, radio, telephone leased
line, telephone dialer or central station systems.
C. Lock boxes shall be affixed to structures in the
manner detailed by the manufacturer and in the
location established by the Fire Department.
G. Chapter 55 is hereby amended to add a new Section 55.23
entitled "Use of Cooking and /or Heating Appliances ", to read as
follows:
SECTION 55.23 USE OF COOKING AND /OR HEATING APPLIANCES
The use of solid, liquid or gaseous fueled cooking or
heating appliances in, or on, buildings or structures is
hereby regulated as follows:
The use of such appliances is prohibited on porches,
roofs, exterior stairs, fire escapes, balconies and similar
building structures or appurtenances, where such use will
result in exposure of the building or structure to fire,
will impede means of egress or where such use will result
in unstable or otherwise hazardous operation of such
appliances.
H. Chapter 55 is hereby amended by amending Section 55.25
"Penalties for Violation of Noncompliance with Article ", as
follows:
35 August 1, 1989
SECTION 55.30 PENALTIES...
The text of this Section remains unchanged.
I. Chapter 55 is hereby amended by adding a new section
55.25 entitled "Fire Alarm and Detection Systems ", to read as
follows:
SECTION 55.25 FIRE ALARM AND DETECTION SYSTEMS
A. Installation Requirements
1. Fire alarm and detection systems shall be
installed as per the requirements of the New York
State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code,
dated 1/1/84, and referenced standards therefrom.
Y ° =cj 2. Fire alarm and detection systems shall be
installed by or under the direct supervision of
licensed electricians, licensed by the City of
Ithaca, or by those demonstrating equivalent
u,5 license reciprocity as provided for in the
Municipal Code.
3. The city electrical inspector shall, upon
application by the installing electrician or the
owner of the premises, make the rough -in
inspection of such system as has been installed to
insure compliance with the provisions of the
National Electrical Code (NFPA 70), the 1987
edition, as it applies to said system.
4. The Fire Department shall, upon application by the
installing electrician or the owner of the
premises, make the rough -in inspection of such
system as has been installed to insure compliance
with the provisions of the New York State Uniform
Fire Prevention and Building Code, dated 1/1/84,
and referenced standards therefrom.
5. Following complete testing of the system by the
installer, the installer shall cause a
certification of system installation and operation
to be executed prior to the Fire Department making
observations of acceptance testing. This
certification shall be made on forms provided by
the Fire Department.
6. The Fire Department shall observe acceptance
testing per the provisions of the Uniform Fire
Prevention and Building Code, dated 1/1/84, and
referenced standards.
B. System Design
1. All fire alarm and /or detection systems shall be
provided with adequate zone reporting capacity to
insure rapid and efficient location of the source
of the alarm by the Fire Department. During plan
review, the Fire Department shall specify zone
reporting assignments for the proposed system.
2. Fire alarm and /or detection system control panels
shall be capable of isolating each zone from the
panel so that defective or impaired devices or
systems causing alarms may be isolated and
repaired without requiring the remainder of the
system to be shut down.
36 August 1, 1989
3. Required Fire Department interconnects shall be
provided either by connection to the municipal
alarm system or by installation of a radio
transmitter alarm system, approved by the Fire
Department. All other fire department
interconnects must be approved by the Fire
Department prior to installation.
C. System Operation
1. Should a fire alarm /detection system cause
numerous false alarms in such a way that the
safety of the occupants, firefighters, or any
other persons or property is imperiled, the Fire
Chief is hereby empowered to order disconnection
of such alarm system until such time as the
problem is resolved. During such time when any
required system is disconnected, alternate
protection shall be provided, as specified by the
Fire Chief, or the building shall be vacated.
2. The owner /operator of any premises with a required
fire alarm /detection system must notify the Fire
Department whenever the system must be made
inoperative for maintenance or repair. The Fire
Department must be re- notified when the system is
restored. In no event is a required system
permitted to be rendered inoperative without
alternative means of protection, acceptable to the
Fire Department, being provided.
J. Chapter 55 in hereby amended by adding a new section
55.26 entitled "Hazardous Materials" to read as follows:
SECTION 55.26 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
All costs incurred by the City of Ithaca, as a result
of operations of its respective departments in
mitigating and /or recovering from a hazardous material
spill, discharge, release or other eventuality
requiring response and action by the City shall be
recoverable by the City of Ithaca. Such costs shall be
recoverable from the owner, agent, shipper or other
party having responsibility for the material(s) causing
the hazardous situation. For the purposes of this
section, hazardous materials" shall have the meaning
provided for in Part 1174 of the New York State Uniform
Fire Prevention and Building Code, dated 1/1/84.
K. Chapter 55 is hereby amended by adding a new section
55.27 entitled "Guard Dogs ", to read as follows:
SECTION 55.27 GUARD DOGS
The owner and /or manager of any non - residential
premises using an unattended guard dog to provide security
shall register with both the Police and Fire Departments.
Such registration shall include the number and breed of
dog(s) in use, the days and times such dog(s) is unattended
on the premises and the name(s) of the owner(s) and /or
handler(s) and methods of contacting them. Additionally,
the registration shall include a floor plan of the premises
with dog patrol areas designated.
The owner /manager of such premises shall file a release
that shall indemnify the City of Ithaca from liability for
harm or damage to the dogs) or the premises caused by any
act or omission on the part of the Police or Fire Department
as a result of the presence of guard dogs on the premises.
0
37 August 1, 1989
The owner /manager of such premises shall notify the
Police and Fire Departments at such time as a guard dog(s)
is no longer employed at, and is removed from, those
premises.
Section 2. Effective Date.
These amendments to Chapter 55 of the City of Ithaca
Municipal Code shall take effect immediately upon the publication
of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City
Charter.
Carried (9 -0)
* 17.2 An Ordinance Amendinq Section 30.3(B) Entitled 'Height of
Buildina' of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall transmit forthwith to the
Board of Planning and Development and the Tompkins County
Planning Board a true and exact copy of the proposed ordinance
for its report thereon.
Carried (9 -0)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 30.3(B) ENTITLED 'HEIGHT OF
BUILDING' 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. That Section 30.3(b) entitled 'Height of
Building' is amended as follows:
1147. Height of Building
'Height of a building' shall mean the vertical distance
measured from average finished grade level to the highest level
of a flat or mansard roof, or to the average height of a pitched,
gabled, hip or gambrel roof, excluding bulkheads, housing for
mechanical equipment, towers, and similar constructions not
intended for human occupancy, or necessary equipment carried
above roof level. Where a building contains sections of a roof
of varying heights, the height of a building shall be measured
using that section of the roof that has the highest elevation
from the average finished grade level. The average finished
grade level shall be determined from a datum established by the
average elevation of the finished grade adjoining the exterior
walls of the building."
Municipal Code - Call for Public Hearing
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols
RESOLVED, That Ordinance No. 89 - entitled "An Ordinance
( y
Amending Section 30.3(B) of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the
City of Ithaca Municipal Code" be and it hereby is introduced
before the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, and be
it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council shall hold a public hearing in
the matter of the adoption of the aforesaid ordinance to be held
at the Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street,
Ithaca, New York on Wednesday, September 6, 1989 at 7:00 p.m.,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk give notice of such public hearing
by the publication of a notice in the official newspaper,
specifying the time when and the place where such public hearing
will be held, and in general terms describing the proposed
ordinance. Such notice shall be published once at least fifteen
days prior to the public hearing, and ha it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall transmit forthwith to the
Board of Planning and Development and the Tompkins County
Planning Board a true and exact copy of the proposed ordinance
for its report thereon.
Carried (9 -0)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 30.3(B) ENTITLED 'HEIGHT OF
BUILDING' 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. That Section 30.3(b) entitled 'Height of
Building' is amended as follows:
1147. Height of Building
'Height of a building' shall mean the vertical distance
measured from average finished grade level to the highest level
of a flat or mansard roof, or to the average height of a pitched,
gabled, hip or gambrel roof, excluding bulkheads, housing for
mechanical equipment, towers, and similar constructions not
intended for human occupancy, or necessary equipment carried
above roof level. Where a building contains sections of a roof
of varying heights, the height of a building shall be measured
using that section of the roof that has the highest elevation
from the average finished grade level. The average finished
grade level shall be determined from a datum established by the
average elevation of the finished grade adjoining the exterior
walls of the building."
1_U0
38 August 1, 1989
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.
* 17 3 An Ordinance Amending Section 30.33(C) Entitled 'Height
and Open Space' of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of
Ithaca Municipal Code - Call for Public Hearing
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
RESOLVED, That Ordinance No. 89 - entitled "An Ordinance
Amending Section 30.33(C) of Chapter 30 Entitled 'Zoning' of the
City of Ithaca Municipal Code" be and it hereby is introduced
before the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, and be
it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council shall hold a public hearing in
the matter of the adoption of the aforesaid ordinance to be held
at the Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street,
Ithaca, New York on Wednesday, September 6, 1989 at 7:00 p.m.,
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk give notice of such public hearing
by the publication of a notice in the official newspaper,
specifying the time when and the place where such public hearing
will be held, and in general terms describing the proposed
ordinance. Such notice shall be published once at least fifteen
days prior to the public hearing, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall transmit forthwith to the
Board of Planning and Development and the Tompkins County
Planning Board a true and exact copy of the proposed ordinance
for its report thereon.
Carried (9 -0)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 30.33(C) ENTITLED 'HEIGHT AND
OPEN SPACE' 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. That Section 30.33(C) entitled 'Height and Open
Space' is amended as follows:
1130.33(C). Height and Open Space.
In any district, any main building may be erected to a
height in excess of that specified for the district, provided:
1) each required front, side and rear yard is increased one foot
on the ground for each one foot of such additional height; 2) in
all Districts, the number of stories permitted may
not be exceeded; and 3) in each district the number of
additional feet may not exceed 10% of the maximum building height
allowed in that district."
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.
* 17.4 Resolution to Combine Public Hearings for Amendments to
Section 30.3(B) and 30.33(C) of the Zoning Ordinance
By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby directs the City Clerk to
schedule one public hearing at its regular September meeting to
consider proposed amendments to Sections 30.3(B) and 30.33(C) of
the Zoning Ordinance.
Carried (9 -0)
0
10
39 August 1, 1989
R -2c Zoning - Report
Alderperson Booth reported the Charter and Ordinance Committee
has looked at the R -2c Zoning. There appear to be two problems
that are going to take longer to work on. The Building
Commissioner is concerned about being readily and easily able to
provide information to people who ask what can be built on their
property. The other problem is what will happen if a room which
is not a bedroom becomes a bedroom and thereby makes that
building a non - conforming building for all other purposes.
(460e Because these things need to be worked on the committee will be
meeting with Thys Van Cort and Paul Mazzarella again.
recognize the right of the individual,
married or single, to be free of unwanted
governmental intrusion into matters so
private as the decision whether to bear a
child.
We believe that women, regardless of age or economic,
social, or ethnic status, have the right to seek and
obtain medically safe, legal abortions under dignified
conditions and at a reasonable cost.
Moreover, we urge elected officials at all levels of
government to support the inalienable and
constitutional right of all individuals to decide when,
whether, and with whom to have a family.
Now, therefore, be it
(4wo" RESOLVED, That the statement proposed by the Coalition for
Reproductive Choice be referred to the Human Services Committee
for study, public input, and possible resolution for Council
action.
Alderperson Nichols stated that he believes it is up to elected
officials to take a stand, even though decisions will be made at
the State and Federal levels. He is asking for pubic input on
this issue to make sure that when Council makes its
recommendations to the State and Federal officials that it comes
after wide public debate. He will be asking the Human Services
Committee to hold a Public Hearing on this issue.
REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS:
Local Air Quality Report for Referral to Proper Committee
By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen
RESOLVED, That the Local Air Quality report be referred to
the
Planning and Development Committee for review and report back
to
Council.
,...
Carried (9-0)
NEW BUSINESS•
for Reproductive Choice
_Coalition
By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather
WHEREAS, the Coalition for Reproductive Choice represents
the
views of many residents of the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the Coalition has asked Common Council to urge State
and
Federal protection of the rights of women to control their
own
bodies, and
WHEREAS, the Coalition has proposed the following statement
for
adoption by Council:
In light of the recent Supreme Court plurality opinion
in Webster V. Reproductive Health Services, which
threatens the American tradition of civil liberties,
we:
recognize the right of the individual,
married or single, to be free of unwanted
governmental intrusion into matters so
private as the decision whether to bear a
child.
We believe that women, regardless of age or economic,
social, or ethnic status, have the right to seek and
obtain medically safe, legal abortions under dignified
conditions and at a reasonable cost.
Moreover, we urge elected officials at all levels of
government to support the inalienable and
constitutional right of all individuals to decide when,
whether, and with whom to have a family.
Now, therefore, be it
(4wo" RESOLVED, That the statement proposed by the Coalition for
Reproductive Choice be referred to the Human Services Committee
for study, public input, and possible resolution for Council
action.
Alderperson Nichols stated that he believes it is up to elected
officials to take a stand, even though decisions will be made at
the State and Federal levels. He is asking for pubic input on
this issue to make sure that when Council makes its
recommendations to the State and Federal officials that it comes
after wide public debate. He will be asking the Human Services
Committee to hold a Public Hearing on this issue.
10`'
40 August 1, 1989
Alderperson Cummings asked Human Services Committee to consider
economic boycott strategies that are available against entities
which fund anti - abortion activities.
Alderperson Romanowski read the following statement into the
record:
"Notwithstanding the statements here tonight there are also City
of Ithaca residents who hold opposing views on those held by the
Coalition for Reproductive Choice. Common Council has always
held its purpose is to enhance and protect the quality of life
for its citizens. They are concerned with such things as
housing for the homeless, the elderly, the low - income people,
they are concerned with child care, meals for the hungry,
concerned with fire and police protection, water quality and on
and on. All these things are dedicated to the preservation of
life.
The tragedy of abortion is that it is a life that is lost. There
has to be a better way. The outcome of this civil war in the
country is that it is going to be fought in the State and Federal
Courts and legislative bodies. To inject this highly divisive
topic into local political bodies is to dilute our effectiveness
on the issues that affect us directly here in the City of Ithaca.
It could mean a civil war right in the local bodies.
I understand and respect the differences of opinion within
society itself on this but I have views directly opposed to those
that a lot of people hold. I would like to have people on their
own write their representatives, to lobby, to loin groups,
whatever their perspective decisions are on this but I can't
support this resolution and I urge other people if they have any
kind of leaning for not supporting abortion as a viable solution
to vote this down also."
A vote on the resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (8) - Cummings, Nichols, Booth, Killeen, Lytel,
Johnson, Hoffman, Schlather
Nay (1) - Romanowski
Carried (8 -1)
Adjournment
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 12:05 a.m.
Callista F. Paolangeli
City Clerk
d
John C. Gutenbergei
Mayor V
19.1
W_