Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-1989-11-01C �1 <1 Regular Meeting PRESENT: Mayor Gutenberger Alderpersons (10) COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK 7:00 P.M. November 1, 1989 - Booth, Cummings, Johnson, Nichols, Hoffman, Killeen, Lytel, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather OTHERS PRESENT: City Clerk - Paolangeli City Attorney - Nash City Controller - Cafferillo Planning & Development Director - Van Cort Planning & Development Deputy Director - Mazzarella Commons Coordinator - Deming Police Chief - McEwen Personnel Administrator - Walker Building Commissioner - Datz Acting Supt. of Public Works - Fabbroni City Chamberlain - Parsons Youth Bureau Director - Cohen PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of the September 6, 1989 Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the September 6, 1989 Common Council Meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of the October 4, 1989 Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 4, 1989 Common Council Meeting be tabled until the December 6, 1989 meeting. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of the October 17, 1989 Special Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 17, 1989 Special Common Council Meeting be tabled until the December 6, 1989 meeting. Carried Unanimously SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public Hearing - An Ordinance Amending Sections 30.25 and 30.26 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Resolution to Open Public Hearing By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider amending Sections 30.25 and 30.26 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal (400", Code be declared open. Alderperson Booth explained the amendments that are being proposed. James F. Dwyer - Attorney for Tompkins County Solid Waste Management Plan addressed Common Council in regard to the proposed zoning change. He stated that he believes this zoning change is a reaction to the County citing of the Central Processing Facility on Commercial Avenue. The City is under the impression, he believes, that by changing the zoning and / ` �' November 1, 1989 excluding rubbish handling in this particular area that they could exclude the County. Attorney Dwyer referred to a case in New York State and read the following statute from County Law Section 226(B) entitled "Solid Waste Management Resource Recovery" . "The Legislative Body of any County may appropriate and expend such sums as it may deem proper to provide for the separation, collection, and management of solid waste in such County and for that purpose may acquire, construct, operate and maintain solid waste management facilities, acquire the necessary lands therefore, and purchase, operate and maintain all necessary appliances appurtenant thereto, including collection facilities and such vehicles as may be required for such purposes. (Attorney Dwyer stated that this is the part he wishes to emphasize.) "In selecting a location for any solid waste management facility the County Legislative Body shall take into consideration the present, and any proposed land use character of the area of any proposed location and zoning regulations, if any, applicable to such area." Attorney Dwyer stated that it does not say the County must comply but says the County must consider and we submit the County has considered the present regulation and does not have to comply with anything that may be enacted tonight. However, the County has authorized me to state that they will keep the City continuously informed and supply the City with all materials as they are developed regarding the CPF site. The County, under the Monroe County case in Section 226(B) of the County Law, has no obligation for any Site Plan Review or any compliance with local zoning as far as the Commercial Avenue site is concerned. However, the County wishes to assure the City, regardless of what happens, that it will make data available concerning this site to all departments of city government. Attorney Dwyer gave background information on how the Commercial Avenue site was selected and stated that he is authorized by the Corps of Engineers to state that a letter is being promulgated that will state that the Corps has no jurisdiction over any wet lands on the proposed CPF site. Attorney Dwyer further described other areas that were considered and explained why the location near the Tompkins County Airport was not chosen. He stated that a letter dated November 30, 1988, from FAA to the County that will be made available in the FEIS speaks for itself. He reported that there is another FAA document available that lists airports throughout the country that have a known bird hazard. In the eastern region, Tompkins County is one of those airports. He stated that in addition General Municipal Law, Section 356, applies in connection with citing of solid waste management facilities including landfills near airports. Attorney Dwyer stated that the County seeks to cooperate in this endeavor and that it needs to be a cooperative effort. The County views this action of exclusionary zoning, directed principally at this solid waste project for the benefit for all of the residents of this County, as an action that is totally inconsistent with that cooperation. Resolution to Close Public Hearing By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider An Ordinance Amending Sections 30.25 and 30.26 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code be declared closed. Carried Unanimously lr� �cf�^ 3 November 1, 1989 ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: Unfinished Business Alderperson Romanowski requested that Item 21.1 under Unfinished Business be moved to the Planning and Development Committee items. (aw." No Council member objected. Budget and Administration Committee Alderperson Schlather requested that under Item 17.9 (Fire Department - Possible Resolution) the possible be stricken. No Council member objected. Planning and Development Committee Alderperson Cummings requested that an Executive Session be held 0) in regard to Item 16.2 (Central Processing Facility - Report) . No Council member objected. 19� Budget and Administration Committee Alderperson Hoffman requested the addition of a report on the proposed reorganization of Finance, Purchasing, and Personnel Departments. No Council member objected. MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS: Board of Zoning Appeals Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the appointment of Janis Cochran, 416 South Aurora Street, to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a term to expire on December 31, 1989. Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols RESOLVED, That this Council approves of the appointment of Janis Cochran, 416 South Aurora Street to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a term to expire on December 31, 1989. Carried Unanimously Ithaca Energy Commission Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the appointment of John Potter, RR 1, Box 164 A, Burdett, NY to serve on the Ithaca Energy Commission for a term to expire on December 31, 1989. Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves of the appointment of John Potter, RR 1, Box 164 A, Burdett, NY to serve on the Ithaca Energy Commission for a term to expire on December 31, 1989. Carried Unanimously PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: (400" Festival Lands Transfer Doria Higgins, 2 Hillcrest Drive, representing "Citizens to Save Our Parks" read the following statement to Common Council: "There are three issues to which I'd like to call to your attention tonight -- all concerning possible transfer of the Festival Lands to State Parks to enlarge the marina. First. At the October Common Council meeting a false statement in the resolution concerning transfer of the Festival Lands to State Parks was voted by you to be retained even though Alderman Hoffman offered an amendment to correct that falsehood. The statement in question occurred in the first clause of the resolution and read: "WHEREAS the City of Ithaca and the OPRHP 4 November 1, 1989 entered into an agreement on March 21, 1985..." The fact is the City, meaning Common Council, never voted to enter into the agreement of March 21, 1985 which was an agreement to give the Festival Lands to State Parks in return for leasing the ball fields, and what's more the March 1985 agreement itself specifically stated that it was "subject to the approval of Common Council and the State of New York." We seriously question whether a resolution is legally or even morally binding if one of the basic clauses of the resolution is false. Clearly in this particular instance 5 members of Common Council voted under a misapprehension about the relevant facts. Since the misapprehension involved the giving away of City parkland it is all the more reprehensible. We think that you yourselves should question the legality of that resolution. If you voted for it thinking something in it was so which wasn't so, we think you should ask that the resolution be rescinded. Second. There seems to be a misapprehension that enlarging the marina will bring business to Ithaca. Let us remind you that the same kind of argument was used in promoting the Empire State Games last summer and in spending, if I remember correctly, vast sums of money on them. Yet when the games were over the consensus of the business community was that there was no extra business, there was no profit involved. Sailors and boaters coming to Ithaca to their slips at the marina are not going to buy their potatoes at Tops or their deck varnish at McPhearsons. Most of them will have done their shopping during the week and come to Ithaca with supplies in hand. Let us also bring to your attention that the 1967 tripartite agreement committed the City of Ithaca to supplying 10,000 gallons of water a day to the marina free of charge for forty years and sewage services also free of charge for forty years. The more slips at the marina the more gallons of City water will be consumed. Many national studies are exploding the myth that development brings money to a community. More and more studies show that, on the contrary, development brings added expenses to municipalities without accompanying recompense. Third. The Environmental Protection Agency has recently reported that half of the lake acreage in 34 states is badly polluted or soon to become so. Pollution of Cayuga Lake, of course, is not just a City of Ithaca issue but a matter of concern for all municipalities on our lake shore. But it is an issue which the City should be addressing. We noted in our October 17, 1989 statement to State Parks that the data given Ithaca Common Council by Mr. Mazzella, Director of Finger Lakes State Parks, about boat density on Cayuga Lake was inaccurate and inaccurate on the side of minimizing boat density on the lake. To the extent that decisions of yours concerning this matter were influenced by Mr. Mazzella's data, to that extent your decisions were based on inaccurate information. And finally, let us remind you that we have a really splendid balance at Treman Marina and adjacent park of the Hogs Hole and surrounding meadows as refuge for wildfowl, of a very large and well kept marina, and of the lovely mowed adjacent parkland, a refuge for humans. It is truly a unique spot as it now exists. Why destroy this beautiful place which all can now enjoy just so Fingerlakes Parks can make a few more dollars from a few more boat slips. Andy Mazzella has done a great job down there. Help us preserve his good work by not giving away the Festival Lands to enlarge the marina." Doria Higgins requested that the following article that was published in "The Grapevine, October 25 -31, 1989 be recorded in / 4 7 5 November 1, 1989 the minutes. 'NO' TO MARINA PLAN - by Doria Higgins While there were a number if irregularities at the Oct. 4, 1989, Common Council meeting there was one action that was particularly regrettable. Common Council voted to retain a misrepresentation of fact in the first clause of a resolution concerning the possible transfer of the festival lands at Cass Park to the New York State Office of Parks. The decision by Common Council to retain this misstatement is especially damaging in that it grants a pseudo - legitimacy to an earlier city document that essentially agrees to give away city parkland for unbelievably small recompense. Although Alderman Hoffman presented two amendments, one to remove the clause completely and the second to correct the phrase containing the falsehood, both amendments failed. The clause in question reads in its entirety, "WHEREAS the City of Ithaca and the [N.Y. State] Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation entered into an agreement on March 21, (l. -M 1985, that provided recreational facilities for the City's use." X41 The fact is that the March 21, 1985 agreement was not entered into by the city: it was signed by Mayor Gutenberger and it specifically stated that it was "subject to the approval of Common Council and the State." Common Council never has given that approval, nor has the State. The March 21, 1985 agreement signed by the mayor promised State Parks title to the Festival Lands (15 acres, adjacent to Treman Marina, and appraised at $186,500 in 1985) in exchange for the City having "priority of use" for "scheduled recreational programs" of the ball fields at Buttermilk Falls State Park for five years, with option to renew. The agreement gave State Parks the option to terminate the agreement if they "determined" a "higher and better use" for the ballfield site. The City, however, was not given any option for termination. While a Jan. 2, 1985, Common Council resolution did indeed empower the mayor to sign a license with State Parks "for the use of newly created playing fields adjacent to Buttermilk Falls State Park ", that resolution did not even mention the Festival Lands, much less mention them as recompense for leasing the fields. The mayor was only empowered to sign a license for the use of the fields. Furthermore, the January 1985 resolution itself contained a misstatement of fact. It said, "WHEREAS the City on April 6, 1983 agreed in principle to accept such a license ." But on April 6, 1983, Common Council did not agree "in principle to accept such a license." The April 1983 resolution reads, "The City . . . does hereby express a willingness in principle to negotiate sale . . .[of the Festival Lands] in exchange for improvement of lands near Buttermilk Park for ball - playing fields available for city use . . . and for other considerations." The actual wording makes clear that in 1983 the city was only considering the matter, and was not committing itself, and that the consideration was of sale of the Festival Lands, plus negotiations for "other considerations." The October 4, 1989 resolution approved by Council gives a seeming legitimacy to the March 21, 1985, agreement which we think should never have been signed by the mayor in the first place, and which was never - -we think rightfully -- legally ratified by Common Council. i�P 6 November 1, 1989 "Citizens to Save Our Parks" thinks the Festival Lands should remain in city ownership for use by the people of our community, who are, after all, the real owners of the land. We do not think the Festival Lands should be used to enlarge the marina by 29 slips to accommodate 29 boat owners, which is the use State Parks intends for the land. But if the land is to be transferred, it should be done properly with fair value received by the community. The only recourse available to the public when Common Council abuses the public trust is to take Council to a court of law. In lieu of undertaking legal expenses at this time, our group is writing this. It will at least inform the community of these unfortunate facts. Doria Higgins also requested the following be recorded in the minutes: "Comments of Citizens to Save Our Parks at Public Information /Scoping Meeting NYS Parks on October 17, 1989 in Ithaca, New York on the Robert H Treman State Park Redevelopment Plan and the Alan H. Treman State Marine Park Development Plan ". The Possible Water Pollution Of Ca u a Lake Even Without Marina Enlargement And Too High A Boat Density On The Lake. We would like to make it part of the record tonight that there were a number of inaccuracies in Mr. Mazzella's letter of October 25, 1988 to Mayor John Gutenberger, in which he assured the City of Ithaca that there was no danger of water pollution due to the new pier and that the density of boats on the lake was at a very safe level. These inaccuracies are important in that they were part of the basis on which Common Council has made decisions on the matter of transferring the Festival Lands. As you know lake pollution and the dangers of high boat density have become very serious problems in our country. Mr. Mazzella, in his October letter speaks of the water pollution studies by Elizabeth Moran. He says, "We were pleased to find that Ms. Moran has been . . . studying Cayuga Lake . . . since 1985, and in her opinion, the quality of the water is actually improving. This should provide clear and convincing evidence that a seventh pier will not have a detrimental effect on Cayuga Lake." Since her study was designed to examine the effects on the lake of our new sewage plant compared to the earlier dumping of raw sewage into the lake one would hope some improvement would be shown. However, such studies have no bearing on possible pollution from boats. In a letter to us (and another one of the Chair of the City Conservation Advisory Council) she made the clear statement that her study was "not designed and should not be used to address the question of adverse impacts from additional boating facilities." Mr. Mazzella in his letter denied overcrowding on the lake by misstating standards prepared by the New York Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. He quotes that plan as saying "a minimum of 6 acres of water surface is needed for each sail or power boat." In fact the Plan says that "a minimum of 6 to 8 acres per sail and power boat" is needed. Mr. Mazzella, using his figures, estimates that the boat capacity for the 6,000 acres from Ithaca to Taughannock Falls is 1,000 boats. But using the 8 acres "minimum" in the Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan the capacity for that area of the lake is only 750 boats not 1,000. He goes on to say, "It has been reported that there are approximately 800 boats that use this end of the lake as their primary boating area." We telephoned the local boatyards we know of, and the Yacht Club, and Taughannock and Treman Parks and got a total of 972 boats. I rn 7 November 1, 1989 Recreational Designation of Fall Creek Jim Novak, 401 Lake Street addressed Council in regard to the Recreational Designation of Fall Creek and read the following: "I recently heard of what seemed like a nightmare situation for the people of Riverhead, Long Island, as a result of Recreational River designation of the Peconic. What I heard seemed unbelievable, so I decided to find out for myself. I called the editor of their local paper, the legislative assistant to their (awool State Assemblyman, and the environmental legislative assistant to their State Senator. I represented myself as an ordinary citizen who lived in the affected area of a proposed designation. I wanted information about how it worked in a populated area, that I could share with my local government. I can sum up the long conversations I had with these people in three words: "Don't do it!" I would like to share with you some of their actual words. The editor said: "everyone supported it initially, the town board supported it, now they discover that they can't do anything," She went on to say that the mood when this started was "anything environmental was good, now it's just the opposite." The assemblyman's legislative assistant offered This figure does not include the new slips planned (possibly built by this writing) at Noah's Boatyard, Ithaca Boating Center or Mahools which would bring the figure to 1,068 boats. Also not counted in so far are the boat launchings from the ramps at Taughannock and Treman. On June 25, 1989, 125 boats were launched from Treman. Adding this to our total we would have 1,293 boats in the area. Still left out from this total are all privately moored boats and the launchings from Taughannock. But in any event 1,293 boats are 543 more boats than the 750 figure our interpretation of the Outdoor Recreation Plan deemed advisable for safe density. And 1,293 boats are 493 more boats than Mr. Mazzella's estimated 800. And even if those boats aren't all out on the lake at the same time, which indeed they would not be, they are still leaking fuel oils into the lake even when moored. We have spoken to Mr. Brumfield, chief limnologist at DEC about water pollution in lakes. He impressed upon us that there are many ways in which a lake can be polluted other than from fuel 0J oil. Other possible pollutions are: noise; public safety; two _ cycle fuel oil; breaking up of nutrient aquatic plants as the ('9,) boats go through the plants and the pieces then float and reroot; launching of boats from one lake to another carrying with them undesirable detritus from the first lake; disturbance of shoreline because of erosion due to boat wake; boats traveling in shallow water creating turbidity; disturbance of wildlife habitat and the dumping of sanitary wastes into the lake. All of this indicates that enlarging the marina should be very carefully examined in terms of lake pollution. Many local residents, boat owners included, think optimum boat density has already been exceeded. THE Festival Lands Are Park Land By Implied Dedication And State Parks Must Recognize This Designation. The concept that land can be designated as park land by implied dedication if it has been used and known as park land over a period of time is well established in New York State law. This is too complicated a matter to go into tonight. But we do want it noted as part of the record that the Festival Lands (or the Center for the Arts lands) have been known and used as park lands over the years and they have been maintained as park lands by City parks maintenance crews. There is other incontrovertible evidence that this land is park land and that therefore they cannot be transferred to State Parks without a vote of 8 people on Common Council. And your environmental review must be conducted with this fact in mind. Recreational Designation of Fall Creek Jim Novak, 401 Lake Street addressed Council in regard to the Recreational Designation of Fall Creek and read the following: "I recently heard of what seemed like a nightmare situation for the people of Riverhead, Long Island, as a result of Recreational River designation of the Peconic. What I heard seemed unbelievable, so I decided to find out for myself. I called the editor of their local paper, the legislative assistant to their (awool State Assemblyman, and the environmental legislative assistant to their State Senator. I represented myself as an ordinary citizen who lived in the affected area of a proposed designation. I wanted information about how it worked in a populated area, that I could share with my local government. I can sum up the long conversations I had with these people in three words: "Don't do it!" I would like to share with you some of their actual words. The editor said: "everyone supported it initially, the town board supported it, now they discover that they can't do anything," She went on to say that the mood when this started was "anything environmental was good, now it's just the opposite." The assemblyman's legislative assistant offered 8 November 1, 1989 this: " If you pass this you lose control. At the public hearing, hundreds came out. Only two groups were in favor of the DEC lines. A public hearing after a law is enacted is a big joke, the determination will be made in Albany. It is un- American- Condemnation without compensation." "The worst thing they ever did was designate the river." "How could anyone want the State government to impose upon a local people ?" The State Senator's environmental assistant prefaced his remarks by declaring that he and the senator were staunch supporters of the Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Act. I expected to hear the other side of the story, but he said: "The evil is the regulations of the program. The regulations are shortsighted, contradictory and restrictive." "In downtown Riverhead they can't revitalize the area. The regulations lock the community into poverty." "... in effect, the state comes in and zones. Revitalizing a populated area is impossible." "The program [the Act] is good. Part 666 [the regulations] is totally unacceptable. You will lose property rights, it will be a defacto taking." Since his specialty is environmental law, I asked him about our situation with hydropower. He said: "This is not the correct tool to stop hydro; rely on the wetlands act." He went on to say, "Once you get this you will have to have an act of the Legislature to remove it. Don't do it! " I have lived in Fall Creek twenty years. Like many of my neighbors, I am a working man, with a very modest home. Unlike many of them, I own a lot that I and my recent wife are trying to build a home on. I have been assured that I have nothing to worry about, that the line will be drawn around my property and that of others. I question your ability to thwart the intent of a powerful state agency, especially since the regulations allow them to change the boundaries at any time. I don't want to lose my life savings. My neighbors are mostly hard working, mind - their- own - business people who occupy a habitat for humans - a city, and occupy their homes with the simple faith that their government is there to protect them and their community. None of them wants to interfere with the recreational values of Fall Creek. I do not mean to impugn the honesty or motives of the local group sponsoring designation, but I believe every word you or they have heard has come from one source; the author of those regulations, not from anyone who has to live with them. You are dealing with a very powerful state agency whose concerns are not with the needs of this city, its schools, its institutions, or its people: only the river. Extensive recreational access is already provided by Cornell and the City, and permanent pollution control measures are in place. I think you view this as an easy way to stop hydro, with a few minor land use controls thrown in. It should be viewed as a major, drastic, invasive, and severely flawed state land use regulation that, incidentally, will stop hydro. The people of Riverhead were most definitely not expecting what they got. They got drastic land use controls that meant every home, business, lot or land use for a half mile from the river was "grandfathered," meaning it was not in conformance, but could remain only if left exactly as it was. The standard for conformance is two acre residential with a maximum density of one living unit per acre, or river recreational related business, such as boat rentals, of under 10,000 square feet. Period. "Picture that in the City of Ithaca in the area from Cascadilla Creek to Fall Creek, then beyond, well into Cayuga Heights. There are those who will say "that could never happen here." I am not so sure." Ithaca Industrial Park Environmental Review Betsy Darlington, Chair of Conservation Advisory Council addressed Council in regard to Item 16.10 on the Agenda - Ithaca Industrial Park Environmental Review resolution and reported that there are still some environmental questions that need to be 201 9 November 1, 1989 addressed. She stated that she did not know if a DEIS is needed but she thinks there are some points that need to be cleaned up and urged Council not to pass this resolution tonight. Award to Common Council from Conservation Advisory Council Betsy Darlington reported that last Spring the CAC presented an award to Common Council for several items -- Site Plan Review Ordinance, Cluster Ordinance, Smoking Ordinance, and also (4WO-1 starting work on Conservation Overlay Zoning, and Six Mile Creek Protections. The last Chairman of the CAC very kindly and generously made certificates for all the awardees. She presented Council with their certificate. Festival Lands Resolution John Schroeder, 618 Stewart Avenue stated that he was very happy to see the new resolution concerning the marina expansion on the agenda tonight and reported that he feels it is much needed but ci feels that it should not have been necessary to pass a second resolution on this subject. He stated that the details should have been incorporated into one single resolution that could have �.•T been passed by Council. Rental Housing Commission John Schroeder stated that the Rental Housing Commission Resolution on tonight's agenda contains significant changes from what was recommended by the Rental Housing Task Force in July of 1989. 1) There is no longer a tenant majority on the Rental Housing Commission. 2) The Rental Housing Commission will no longer be a trustee of the Proposed Housing Trust Fund. He reported that although he is not sure what the reason is, he thinks it weakens the power of the Commission and will make it less attractive to people who really want to promote more affordable housing in the City. Traffic Congestion Mr. Schroeder also remarked briefly on the Conservation Advisory Council's resolution on relieving traffic congestion. He stated that he would prefer a change in the charges to students who own cars to provide a bus that would be available to the whole community. He feels that this is unfair to students and Cornell has the resources to help fund such a bus service. He also stated that an idea to improve mass transit that is not in the resolution is to better coordinate the separate bus systems that we already have. Mr. Schroeder explained that a uniform schedule of all the bus systems in Tompkins County would be important to relieve the confusion of residents using mass transit in the City. Cultural and Natural Resources Survey Allocation Andrea Fleck Clardy, 616 Cayuga Heights Road, addressed Council in regard to the Budget and Administration Item 17.2, Cultural and Natural Resources Study that has been suggested and she referred to a communication from Richard Driscoll. Ms. Clardy explained that there has been a great deal of troubled history as far as the arts activities of this community are concerned. She reported that there is a cooperative effort of supporters of the arts and businesses who are eager to improve communication. She stated that if we are going to have an arts council that operates successfully it is important that the City contribute to demonstrate cooperation with the County and with local businesses and feels that this is a very appropriate request. She urged Council to give their support. Senior Citizens' Council Valerie Rockney, 304 Linn Street representing the Senior Citizens' Council addressed Council with the need for a new Senior Center in Ithaca and distributed copies of their new brochure and described its contents. She stated that the Senior Center is preparing for a new Senior Center although they do not 21() 10 November 1, 1989 have a new site at this time. Public Transit Item 20 1, Rental Housing Commission Staffing, and Strand Theater Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street addressed Council and stated that he was running for Ray Schlather's seat on Council. Mr. Sayvets reported that he supports the Conservation Advisory Council's resolution Item 20.1 on the Agenda and reported that people are actively working on the issue of making it easier for bicycles as a means of transportation. He feels that shuttle buses are needed up and down the hills in the City with bicycle racks attached. He also spoke in regard to the Rental Housing Commission and the need for more staff. He stated that if there was going to be a staff person dedicated to such a purpose he would suggest that a Planning Department staff member be assigned to the Rental Housing Commission as opposed to hiring a new person. Mr. Sayvetz supported Andrea Clardy's remarks in regard to the Arts and reported that people had tried to save the Strand Theater and it did not work out -- maybe we'll do it right this time. He urged Council's support for citizen's trying to do something for the Strand Theater and stated that it is a very vital part of downtown. RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC: Rental Housing Resolution Alderperson Cummings stated that in regard to the staffing in the Rental Housing Resolution the language of the resolution is intended to allow for the possibility of reallocating existing staff resources. The Planning and Development Committee has discussed an additional staffing commitment but it was the consensus of the Committee not to incorporate it into this resolution. She explained that this resolution is to make sure that there is staff to work with this commission but it does admit to the possibility of reallocating existing resources. Recreational River Designation Alderperson Hoffman thanked Jim Novak for his information in regard to Recreational River Designation and stated that it is a perspective that he had not heard before about the consequences of designation. He reported that he would make a commitment, as Chairperson of the Hydropower Commission, to have the situation investigated where designation has occurred in populated areas and he also believes there should be a public hearing prior to State decision on designation. Alderperson Peterson stated that she would also seek information from Riverhead and other officials in the DEC in regard to designation of recreational lands in populated areas. She feels that it is necessary to have the full picture. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR: Tompkins County Budget Mayor Gutenberger reported that the City staff has been working with Tompkins County staff on the cost of recycling. The County will be seeking reimbursement from City tax payers for recycling costs. He reported that the entire cost for the recycling program, as is in the County budget, is approximately $600,000 and the benefit from the program does not go to the City of Ithaca. The City residents pay the County roughly 25% of the County taxes with no benefit. The City taxpayers pay 100% for the City Recycling Program. The City is requesting Tompkins County to reimburse $160,000 for the City's recycling in 1990. Mayor Gutenberger explained the County's proposed program that will begin in January 1990. The City has requested that the County not impose a tipping fee until a program is in place for implementation of a tipping fee and how to recoup the cost. Alderperson Nichols reported that he attended the County Board meeting tonight and in regard to the tipping fee issue, the Public Works Committee met today and is recommending to the Board " o: 11 November 1, 1989 that they not impose a tipping fee until March 1, 1990. He also reported that the County budget includes the same total income and that means that it will be necessary to increase the tipping fee to bring in the same income. He feels the consensus on the part of members of the Board is that the situation is unfair. The County Recycling program should be covering the costs throughout the County. (400'e Empire State Games Mayor Gutenberger reported favorable reports from the State in regard to the Emp that the Empire Games held the best games held in New that the City is still receiving participants, the visitors and the ire State Games. The reports indicate in Ithaca, has been determined to be York State. Tompkins County Recycling Sticker Program Commissioner of Public Works Reeves reported that the Board of psi Public Works recommends that the County not implement any type of its a sticker program until the procedure and goals are in place. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY: City /Jason Fane Lawsuit Update In response to Alderperson Killeen's question of the status of the lawsuit, City Attorney Nash said that day two of the trial occurred today November 1, 1989 and day three is scheduled for tomorrow. City /Sagan Lawsuit In response to Alderperson Booth's question of the status of the Sagan lawsuit, City Attorney Nash said that suit has been terminated. The ILPC met and reviewed application for alteration permit under the appropriate regulations and granted them a permit for renovations. The lawsuit was stipulated to be discontinued. Unauthorized Satelite Dish in Stewart Park In response to Alderperson Hoffman's question in regard to the satellite dish in Stewart Park, City Attorney Nash said that no action has been taken. Attorney Nash stated that he will not take action until he has been directed by Common Council to do SO. Possible Lawsuit due to Fire Alderperson Romanowski asked City Attorney Nash if the possible lawsuit in regard to a January 1989 fire is based on remarks made by City officials or other circumstances. City Attorney Nash responded that he could not speculate as to the motivations of the lawsuit. He reported that a Notice of Claim has been filed. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: *16.6(a)Industrial Zone Regulations Amendments Determination of No Significant Environmental Impact Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather (400.1 WHEREAS, the matter of amending the regulations pertaining to the I -1 Zoning District is currently being considered by this Common Council, and WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted, including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) , and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an "unlisted" action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), including the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and may be a Type I action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act (EQR Section 36.5 (B) (5)), and 2.011 12 November 1, 1989 WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the environment; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, be and it hereby does adopt as its own the findings and conclusions as set forth on the Short Environmental Assessment Form dated September 28, 1989, and be it further RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency be and it hereby does determine that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental. review is unnecessary under the circumstances, and be it further RESOLVED, that this resolution shall constitute notice of this negative declaration and the City Clerk be and she is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with the attachment, in the City Clerk's office and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. Alderperson Booth stated that the assessment seems to be written with respect to the Route 13 Commercial Avenue Site as opposed to dealing with all industrial use sites and asked Alderperson Cummings if she agreed with that statement. Alderperson Cummings responded that her reading of the assessment is that it did refer to the full range of industrial zones and the intent of the review is to be a generic review of the zoning change. She said her understanding is that the impact is a positive impact in terms of enhanced protection for ground water. Alderperson Booth stated that he thinks this is not in the best interest for the City of Ithaca. Industrial Zones, almost by definition, have businesses that deal with a number of things including toxic chemicals. He stated that he thinks that changing industrial use zoning so that the City doesn't have to deal with rubbish is an unwise thing to do and he is going to vote against this change and the environmental assessment as well. Alderperson Slather stated, for the record, that this environmental assessment indicates the Route 13 corridor and in fact, does apply to all the industrial land in the City. Mayor Gutenberger stated that after years of discussion of how to deal with solid waste, this issue was never discussed until the County proposed the Commercial Avenue site for the baling station. He further stated that if Council thinks that by passing this zoning change the problem will go away then every town and village can pass the same legislation. Alderperson Cummings explained the rationale for this zoning change and stated that in terms of consistency, we do many zoning changes. Many deal with decreasing residential density which surely has a direct effect on the surrounding counties. Alderperson Lytel misrepresentation the processing of true. He further something outrigh that is necessary a very major part stated that he feels that it is a to say that this rezoning is a prohibition on rubbish in the City of Ithaca, as this is not stated that this is not designed to prohibit t but to give it the kind of critical assessment for something that could have a major impact on of the City. Alderperson Johnson stated that it is his understanding that this EAF has not come before the Conservation Advisory Council and said that he would like to hear their comments before he votes. P9- 13 November 1, 1989 Alderperson Johnson offered the following resolution: Motion to Table Resolution By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the resolution on Industrial Zone Regulations Amendments - Determination of No Significant Environmental Impact be tabled. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (4) Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Hoffman, Nays (6) Schlather, Romanowski, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols, Killen Motion Fails Questions followed in regard to the Conservation Advisory Committee review of the Environmental Assessment Form. e Motion to Refer By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the Environmental Assessment Form on the Industrial Zone Amendment be referred to the Conservation Advisory Council for their review and report back to Common Council. Ayes (6)- Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Hoffman Nays (5)- Schlather, Romanowski, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye. Carried Alderperson Cummings noted for the record that she believes Attorney Dwyer who spoke for the County during the Public Hearing portion of the meeting regarding the Industrial Zoning change made several contradictory remarks. The County Administrator in • previous meeting stated there would not be a problem in getting • variance to the bird problem. The appropriate agency that grants the variance is the DEC under contract to the FAA. She also wished to point out that Harry Missirian, Acting Commissioner of Planning for the County indicated in a memo of October 20, 1989 that there was no problem with the resolution on the zoning change. HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: Permanent Homeless Shelter Report Alderperson Peterson reported that the Homeless Shelter Task Force met today, November 1, 1989 at Southside Center in regard to the need for a permanent homeless shelter. Many key items such as procuring a building and funding were discussed. There is a process underway and we all realize that Southside is providing a shelter for the last time during this winter season. Alderperson Nichols stated meeting and feels, for the permanent shelter and that support for it. that the meeting was a positive first time, we are going to have a the County will be the lead agency in Alderperson Killeen reported that today's meeting was well attended by many agencies concerned with the homeless issue and stated two points: 1) there was no question that all people in that room were committed to having a permanent shelter, and, 2) the County clearly has assumed the leadership role. Alderperson Killeen gave a brief history of the work involved in trying to provide a homeless shelter. QN)(► 14 November 1, 1989 *15.2 1990 Human Services Plan Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the City wishes to fund human services, providing that they have met the City's review criteria and the Human Services Coalition process and provide a service as identified under the City of Ithaca Human Services Plan; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the following areas of human services are identified as crucial to the provision of a good quality of life for all Ithacans, and that the City may meet the need for these services through contracts with specific agencies. HUMAN SERVICES PLAN - 1990 1. Emergency food, clothing supplies 2. Temporary shelter 3. Child care 4. Skills development and education 5. Transportation - seniors, disabled 6. Housing assistance for low -mod income 7. Assistance to low income for basic needs 8. Youth services 9. Senior citizens services 10. Crisis and dispute resolution 11. Assistance to persons in distress 12. Preventive and supportive health services Alderperson Peterson explained that the Human Services Committee is now doing a very broad type of plan each year so that the City is able to contract and give funds to Human Service Agencies. Discussion followed. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Drug and Alcohol abuse prevention services be added to the resolution as item 13. Carried Unanimously Discussion followed on the main motion. Alderperson Schlather asked Alderperson Peterson if it is intended by this resolution to restrict its application to the traditional human services as opposed to what we refer to as the non - traditional human services. Alderperson Peterson answered yes. Alderperson Schlather asked City Attorney Nash if this accomplishes what the City wants it to accomplish in terms of laying the foundation for giving money for contracting for such services with respect to the non- human services or do we need a separate resolution to accommodate contacts for the so called non -human service agencies, i.e. SPCA, Arts and Culture, Labor Coalition, etc. Attorney Nash responded that the reason we provided this plan was so that the City could spend money to provide services along the lines of this plan. Some funding by municipalities for public purposes is already provided by State statute. Other things are not specifically authorized and it is better for the City to specifically incorporate providing of those services within a human services plan so that we can justify that the City is contracting for services that it could not otherwise provide within its current employee manpower. W_ 15 November 1, 1989 Alderperson Schlather stated that since the purpose of this resolution is to lay a legal foundation for the funding of these services, we ought to be relying upon the legal expertise of counsel available to us in an advisory capacity. He recommended that the matter be tabled for a month so as to allow the City Attorney to review the items in the list and other contracts that are proposed in the present City budget so as to determine whether or not those other contracts could be added to the list. Motion to Table By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, that the 1990 Human Services Plan Resolution be tabled and referred to the City Attorney for review and guidance. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (3) - Schlather, Romanowski, Hoffman f, Nays (7) - Peterson, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols, Booth, Killeen, Johnson Motion Fails Further discussion followed on the Main Motion. Alderperson Peterson explained to Council that this is the third year the City has had a Human Services Plan and that the plan was discussed with the City Attorney the first year. She stated that the system has not changed with the exception of adding some categories. A vote on the main motion as amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: * 17.2 Funding for Comprehensive Study of Tompkins County Cultural Resources By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the Community Arts Coalition has requested that the City appropriate $5,000 to fund in part, a comprehensive study of the Cultural Resources throughout Tompkins County; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that $5,000 be transferred from Account A1990 Unrestricted Contingency, to Account A1010 -435 Legislative Contractual Services, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Mayor be authorized to enter into a contract with the Community Arts Coalition for such purpose. Discussion followed with Alderpersons Nichols and Hoffman stating that they feel the funding should be coming from the County hotel and room tax. However, they will vote for the resolution. Alderperson Killeen stated that he feels that this is a good use of funds. Alderperson Cummings stated that this an investment in the arts (4wel and economic development and is important. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: * 16.1 Northside City Lands - Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the Northside City Lands Committee has had two meetings. There is an inventory assessment of the land owned by the City on the Northside now being developed to determine what is the reusable value use of the land in terms of where are the underground utilities and the practical "no build" zones. She reported that the Planning and 2 C; 16 November 1, 1989 Development Committee is receiving reports monthly. Alderperson Cummings reported that the P & D Committee is interested in the results of the Board of Public Works plans for consolidation. Mayor Gutenberger reported the Board of Public Works and staff are putting together plans for what that re- organization would look like and related costs. Alderperson Schlather questioned the Trowbridge and Trowbridge Contract of October 27, 1989, for the Northside Land Use and Urban Design Guidelines. Alderperson Cummings responded that this is the contract under which Trowbridge is doing the assessment and mapping of the Northside City Lands. Planning and Development Director VanCort explained the contract to Council. Alderpersons Killeen and Cummings explained the goals of the Northside Ad Hoc Committee. *16.2 Central Processing Facility - Report Alderperson Cummings reminded Council that there will be an Executive Session after tonight's meeting in regard to the Central Processing Facility. Alderperson Cummings reported on the time line for the CPF /SEQR Review Process and will send copies to Council members. *16.3 Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services Funding Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the INHS Funding request will be presented to B & A. Their request is for $80,000 and only $20,000 is covered in the current budget. She explained that there may be additional monies from the Eddygate project pay back for this funding shortfall. *16.4 Alienation - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has begun the process of alienation of park lands located on both the Inlet Island and in Southwest Park, and WHEREAS, alienation of both of these areas has been considered concurrently and both have been included in the same authorizing legislation that has been submitted to the New York Assembly and Senate, and WHEREAS, the technical and political considerations for alienation are different for each of the two affected areas; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Planning and Development staff is hereby directed to separate the Inlet Island and Southwest Park alienation procedures and to prepare and bring before Common Council separate bills authorizing the alienation of all or portions of both Inlet Island and Southwest Park. Alderperson Cummings gave background information on this resolution and explained that this will allow the City greater flexibility. Discussion followed in regard to the length of time this process for alienation has taken. M 17 November 1, 1989 A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (9)- Schlather, Nichols, Cummings, Lytel, Killeen, Peterson, Romanowski, Johnson, Hoffman Nays (1)- Booth Carried * 16.5 Festival Lands Transfer - Environmental Review and Legal Investigations - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the Common Council has decided to undertake environmental review of a proposal to transfer title of the so- called "Festival Lands" to the State of New York, in conjunction with the State's proposed expansion of the marina at Allen Treman State Park and the implementation of a specified plan for the so- called "Hogs Hole" area and the adjacent lake JA shore area, and WHEREAS, the Common Council has designated itself as lead agency for the environmental review of said proposed transfer, and :4 WHEREAS, questions have arisen regarding the ownership and legal �? status of lands in the area under consideration, including but not limited to the question of whether or not the festival lands are park lands and the question of whether part or all of the Treman State Marine Park is owned by the City of Ithaca; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Planning Department is directed to begin the environmental review process for the proposed transfer of the Festival Lands, under the conditions stipulated in the October 4, 1989 Common Council resolution, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca require the State of New York to provide financial and /or technical assistance in the preparation of those parts of the environmental review related to the Marina and recreational area expansion, as allowed by law, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Planning Department is directed to notify other involved agencies of the city's intent to act as lead agency, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney is directed to investigate the ownership and legal status of all property affected by the transfer proposal (including associated agreements regarding the Hogs Hole and lake shore areas), and to make a report to Common Council, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney is directed to determine, in consultation with appropriate State agencies, the degree to which the commitments offered by Finger Lakes State Parks Commission (in Common Council 10/4/89 Agenda Item 17.8 Amended) regarding the Hogs Hole and the mowing policy can be made permanently binding upon the State; likewise, whether commitments to limit future marina expansion and /or development in the lake shore area can be made permanently binding. Alderperson Cummings explained the resolution. Discussion followed on the resolution. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (9) - Nichols, Johnson, Peterson, Hoffman, Romanowski, Schlather, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel Nays (1) - Booth Carried W November 1, 1989 *16.7 Rental Housing Commission - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the Rental Housing Task Force appointed by Common Council has recommended that a permanent Rental Housing Commission be established, and WHEREAS, the Planning and Development Committee and Planning and Development staff have discussed the Task Force's recommendations regarding the membership and responsibilities of a Rental Housing Commission, and WHEREAS, "rental" as used herein shall include all housing which is not owned by one or more of the occupants, and WHEREAS, the Rental Housing Commission will provide a needed forum for the discussion and resolution of rental housing issues; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Common Council hereby creates a Rental Housing Commission for the City of Ithaca in accordance with the following conditions: 1. Membership a. The Commission shall be composed of nine (9) members, at least four of whom are tenants. b. The Mayor with concurrence from Common Council shall appoint the members of the Commission and appoint a chair to the Commission, with members selected from the following categories: The members of Common Council from each ward shall nominate to the Mayor two (2) residents of their respective wards, from which nominees the Mayor shall choose five (5) members of the Commission. Two (2) members of the Commission shall be selected from the staff or board of not -for- profit housing providers. One (1) member of the Commission shall be selected to represent the landlord, property manager, or banking community. One (1) member of the Commission shall be a member of Common Council, to serve as a voting member and liaison to Council. 2. Term of Appointments a. All members of the Commission shall be appointed for three year terms, except that the initial appointments shall be made for three members each at one, two, and three year terms such that every year three seats will become vacant. 3. Responsibilities of the Commission a. Advising Common Council on steps to be taken to improve the accessibility, affordability, and quality of rental housing in the City of Ithaca. b. Advising Common Council on steps to be taken to achieve the goals of the City of Ithaca's housing policy. C. Advising both the Board of Planning and Development and the Board of Zoning Appeals concerning zoning changes and appeals for variances and any potential impacts those changes or appeals might have on rental housing affordability and availability. s11 -19- d. Advising both the Building Department and the Planning Department on the allocation of staff time to, and the design of programs for, the improvement of rental housing conditions, and calling upon the Directors of those departments or their designees to appear as necessary at the (6wel meetings of the Commission. e. Readying for implementation those recommendations of the Rental Housing Task Force which call for further elaboration before implementation. f. Studying further those issues and proposals left to the Commission by the Rental Housing Task Force and such other issues and proposals as it may become necessary to examine. r "` +,� g. Implementing programs or activities related to rental housing, as hereafter directed by the Common Council. ' h. The preparing of requests for funding from Common Council for rental housing activities. 4. Staffing for Commission Activities The Commission shall be staffed with a housing planner and clerical services at a level sufficient to carry out the Commission's responsibilities. Alderperson Cummings gave background information of this resolution. Discussion followed in regard to the appointment procedures for membership. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That under "Membership Item b" the first category shall read: The members of Common Council from each Ward shall nominate to the Mayor two residents of their respective wards, from which nominees the Mayor shall choose one person from each of the five wards. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather, Cummings, Lytel Nays (2) Killeen, Hoffman Carried Alderperson Romanowski stated that he thinks it is very important that all members of this commission be residents of the City of Ithaca. Alderperson Killeen asked that Council consider making 6 out of the 9 slots of the Rental Housing Commission residents. He feels that to require all members be residents may make it difficult to fill the commission. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That under "Membership" Item A - the following language be added : "and all of whom are residents of the City of Ithaca - be added to the resolution. 9 20 November 1, 1989 A vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (7) - Schlather, Booth, Nichols, Cummings, Peterson, Romanowski, Johnson Nays (2) - Killeen, Hoffman (Alderperson Lytel was out of room when vote was taken.) Carried Further discussion followed in regard to staff help for the Commission. Alderperson Schlather stated that he assumes that this resolution is not intended to create another position. Alderperson Cummings responded that the intent is to allocate already existing staff. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, that Item No. 4 "Staffing for Commission Activities" shall read as follows: "The Commission shall be staffed with a planner and clerical services at a level sufficient to carry out the Commission's responsibilities, subject to City budget constraints." Discussion followed on the amendment. Alderperson Nichols stated that we either are committed to properly staffing this Commission or we shouldn't be forming it at this time. Alderperson Killeen stated that staff must be included. This Commission is a key element to affordable housing. Alderperson Cummings stated that the intent of this resolution was not to establish a staff person but rather to say there shall be staff, even if it means taking it out of existing resources. A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (6) - Schlather, Romanowski, Cummings, Booth, Peterson Nays (5) Johnson, Hoffman, Killeen, Lytel, Nichols Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye Carried Main Motion as Amended A vote on the Main Motion as amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 16.8 R 2c Zoning District - Call for Public Hearing By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That Ordinance Number 89 - entitled "An Ordinance Amending Sections 30.3, 30.21, 30.25 and 30.26 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 December 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 D 21 November 1,.1989 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 Unanimously ORDINANCE NO. 89 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 30.3, 30.211 30.25 and 30.26 (awr, 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 that an ordinance amending Sections 30.3, 30.21, 30.25 and 30.26 of Chapter 30 entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code be adopted, as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDING SECTION 30.3, DEFINITIONS. 1. That the definition for "Dwelling, one - family ", Section E_ 30.3(24), shall be amended as follows: [ "Dwelling, one - family" shall mean a building containing not more than one dwelling unit occupied exclusively for residential purposes by an individual or family and not more than one (1) unrelated individual, or by an individual or family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals if owner occupied in R -1 zones. In R -2 and R -3 zones, a one - family dwelling may be occupied by an individual or family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals.) "Dwelling, one - family" shall mean a dwelling unit occupied exclusively for residential purposes by an individual or family and not more than one (1) unrelated individual, or a functional family unit. In the R -1 zones, occupancy by an individual or a family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals is permitted if the dwelling is owner - occupied. In the R -2 and R -3 zones, occupancy by an individual or a family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals is permitted. A one- family dwelling may be constructed in any of the following configurations, as permitted in specific zoning districts: A. One - family detached dwelling - A building containing not more than one dwelling unit. a II.A. One - family detached dwelling. H 22 B. One- family detached dwelling, zero -lot buildinq containing not more than one which is sited so that the side of the or near the side property line of the it is built. I � November 1, 1989 line - A 1welling unit building is on parcel on which Ill II B One - family detached dwelling, zero lot line. C. One - family semi - detached dwelling - A buildinq containing not more than two one - family dwellings, each of which shares a party wall or other common structural elements with the other dwelling unit in the building and which has direct exterior access from the ground floor. All Ill II C One - family semi - detached dwelling. D. One family attached dwelling - A building containing three or more one - family dwellings, each of which shares one or more party walls or structural elements with the other one - family dwellings in the building and which has direct exterior access from the ground floor. A maximum of six (6) one - family dwelling units may be attached to form a single building. p OLIGO L.._..— .._.._..� Ill II D One - family attached dwelling. 23 November 1, 1989 2. That a new definition for "Occupant" be added to Section 30.3 as follows: 104. "Occupant" (in R -2c zones only) A. "Occupant" (in R -2c zones only) shall mean a person that is permitted to occupy a dwelling unit or building in an R -2c zone. The number of such occupants that are permitted to legally occunv a dwellina unit or buildina is based on the amount of of lot size. The minimum amounts of habitable space that are required for occupancy by one or more persons are as follows: 1. In R -2c dwelling units, the maximum number of occupants shall be limited to the number determined on the basis of lot size and on the basis of the floor areas of habitable space, other than kitchens, as shown in the following table: Number of Persons 1 2 3 4 or more a. Sleeping room, 80 120 180 240 plus 60 minimum sq. ft. for each addtl. person b. Dwelling unit (other 150 250 350 450 plus 100 than kitchen), minimum for each addtl. sq. ft. person 2. In any other lodging units permitted in R -2c zones, the maximum number of occupants shall be limited to the number determined on the same basis as for dwelling units. B. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the maximum size of any room in a dwelling unit. Bedrooms that exceed the minimum square footage in the above chart may not sleep more persons unless the appropriate lot size requirements are met. C. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, once an R -2c dwelling unit is constructed and legally occupied, the term "occupant" shall not include additional family members that are added to a household. SECTION 2. AMENDING SECTION 30.21, ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS. 1. That the list of zoning districts in Section 30.21, Establishment of Zoning Districts, be amended to add the following new zoning district, to be inserted after the words 11R -2b Residential" and before the words 11R -3a Residential ": R -2c Residential SECTION 3. AMENDING SECTION 30.25, DISTRICT REGULATIONS. 1. That Section 30.25, District Regulations, be amended by altering the District Regulations Chart as follows: A. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -1 districts, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One - family detached dwelling ". B. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -2 districts, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One - family detached or semi - detached dwelling ". 2).�► 24 November 1, 1989 C. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -2 district, add the following: "8. R -2c only: One - family detached dwelling; zero -lot line." 119. R -2c only: One - family attached dwelling." D. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -3 districts, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached, semi - detached or attached dwelling or two - family dwelling." E. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -U district, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached, semi - detached or attached dwelling or two - family dwelling." F. Under Column 3, Permitted Accessory Uses, for the R -2 districts, add 113. R -2c only: Private garage for not more than six (6) cars per building." G. Under Column 6, Minimum Lot Size, Area in Square Feet, change the following: 1. For the R -la zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling." 2. For the R -1b zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling." 3. For the R -2a zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 4. For the R -2b zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 5. For the R -3a zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 6. For the R -3a zone, add 112. One - family attached dwelling, new const.: 6,000 for first 1 - 3 units + 750 for each add'1 unit plus 500 per room let for profit." 7. For the R -3a zone, renumber existing item 112." to "3.". 8. For the R -3a zone, add 114. One - family attached dwelling, conversion: 7,000 for first 1 - 3 units + 750 for each add'1 unit plus 500 per room let for profit." 9. For the R -3a zone, renumber existing items 113.11, 114. " and " 5. " to 115.111 " 6 . " and 117. " . 10. For the R -3b zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling." 11. For the R -3b zone, add 112. One- family attached dwelling, new const.: 3,500 for first 1 - 3 units + 500 for each add'1 unit plus 300 per room let for profit." 12. For the R -3b zone, renumber existing item 112." to 113.11. 25 November 1, 1989 13. For the R -3b zone, add 114. One - family attached dwelling, conversion: 4,000 for first 1 - 3 units + 500 for each add'1 unit plus 300 per room let for profit." 14. For the R -3b zone, renumber existing items 113.11, "4." a n d " 5 . " to 115.111 " 6 . " and " 7 . " . 15. For the R -U zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 16. For the R -U zone, delete "Two- family dwelling" and add "One- family semi - detached or two - family dwelling ". 17. For the R -U zone, add 113. One - family attached dwelling: 16,500 for first 1 - 3 units plus 1,500 for each add'1 unit." C1' 18. For the R -U zone, renumber existing items 113.11, 1 " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 4 . " , " 5 . " and 116.11. q H. Under Column 6, Minimum Lot Size, Area in Square Feet add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "1. One - family detached dwelling: 3,000 for first occupant, plus 500 for each additional occupant. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 3,000 for first occupant plus 500 for each additional occupant. 3. One - family semi - detached dwelling: 2,500 for first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 2,500 for the first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit plus 500 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit in excess of five (5) occupants. 5. Two - family dwelling: 2,500 for first occupant in each dwelling unit, plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 6. Other uses: 4,000." I. Under Column 7, Minimum Lot Size, Width in Feet at Street Line, change the following: 1. For the R -la zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 2. For the R -1b zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 3. For the R -2a zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 4. For the R -2b zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 5. For the R -3a zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 26 November 1, 1989 6. For the R -3a zone, add 112. One - family attached dwelling: 50." 7. For the R -3a zone, renumber existing items 112.1', " 3 . " and " 4 . " to 113.11f " 4 . " and "5.". 8. For the R -3b zone, delete "One- or two- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 9. For the R -3b zone, add 112. One - family attached dwelling: 40." 10. For the R -3b zone, renumber existing items 112.11, It 3. " and " 4. " to " 3 . " , 114. " and " 5. " . 11. For the R -U zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 12. For the R -U zone, delete "Two- family dwelling" and add "One- family semi - detached or two - family dwelling ". 13. For the R -U zone, add 113. One - family attached dwelling: 125." 14. For the R -U zone, renumber existing items 113.11, 114.11 a nd 115.11 t o " 4 . " , " 5 . " and "6". J. Under Column 7, Minimum Lot Size, Width in Feet at Street Line, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "1. One - family detached dwelling: 40. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 40. 3. One - family semi - detached dwelling: 50. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 50. 5. Two - family dwelling: 50. 6. Other Uses: 40." K. Under Column 8, Maximum Building Height, Number of Stories, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c ": 113" L. Under Column 9, Maximum Building Height, Height in Feet, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c ": 1135". M. Under Column 10, Maximum Percent Lot Coverage By Buildings, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "l. One - family detached dwelling: 35. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 35. 3. One- family semi - detached dwelling: 40. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 50. 5. Two- family dwelling: 40. 6. Other Uses: 35." J 1 ,) N. Under Column 11, Required, add un "10". O. Under Column 12, Least, add under follows: 27 November 1, 1989 Yard Dimensions, Front, Minimum der a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": Yard Dimensions, Side, One Side at a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as "1. One - family detached dwelling: 10. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero lot line: 15. 3. One - family semi - detached dwelling, unattached sides only: 10. 4. One - family attached dwelling, unattached sides only: 10. i J 5. Two - family dwelling: 10. 6. Other uses: 10." i P. Under Column 13, Yard Dimensions, Side, Other Side at Least, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "1. One - family detached dwelling: 5. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 0. 3. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line, on side abutting a non-zero-lot line building or lot: 10. 4. One - family semi - detached dwelling, attached sides: 0. 5. One - family attached dwelling, attached sides: 0. 6. Two - family dwelling: 5. 7. Other uses: 5." Q. Under Column 14, Yard Dimensions, Rear, Percent of Depth, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": "25 ". R. Under Column 15, Yard Dimensions, Rear, Maximum Required in Feet, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": 1150 ". SECTION 4. AMENDING SECTION 30.26, STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND SPECIAL PERMITS. 1. That Section 30.26(B), Special Conditions, pertaining to Group Care Residence, be amended by amending 113. Density controls at individual facility level" as follows: (R -2b] R -2b and R -2c All other provisions in the chart contained in Section 30.26(B) shall remain the same. 99( f., F� . ) November 1, 1989 2. That Section 30.26(C)(4)(iv) be amended as follows: (iv) Specific standards applicable to a school and related buildings in all Residential Districts (R -1, R -la, R -lb, R -2, R -2a, R -2b, R -2c, R -3, R -3a, R -3b, R -U): SECTION 5. 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. Alderperson Cummings explained the proposed changes in this resolution. Discussion followed on the floor in regard to the meaning of "family units" as opposed to "functional family ". Amending Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That 104. "Occupant" (in R -2c zones only) Item 2C be amended to read as follows: Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, once an R.-2c dwelling unit is constructed and legally occupied, the term "occupant" shall not include additional family members or members of a functional family unit that are added to a household. Carried Unanimously Amending Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That under Item D- "one- family attached dwelling" the number of units be reduced from six (6) to four (4) units. Ayes (5) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth, Peterson, Hoffman Nays (6) - Nichols, Johnson, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel Mayor Gutenberger voted Nay Motion Fails A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously *16.9 Route 96 - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has received and reviewed the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the various Route 96 /Octopus alternatives, and WHEREAS, the City has received the New York State Department of Transportation's recommendation that Alternative A be the preferred alternative for this project; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca rejects New York State Department of Transportation's selection of Alternative A for the following reasons: 1) This Alternative would result in the taking or relocation of nine homes on Cliff Street. The destruction of these homes would reduce the supply of housing affordable to low and moderate income households, cause a loss of taxes to the City of Ithaca, and take a very high toll on the individuals and families who would be uprooted by this taking or relocation. 2) A substantial portion of the park land that would be taken by Alternative A - Optional 89 Alignment, has never been developed for park purposes. The City has recognized that some of these lands may have more appropriate use than as park land, and be it further J 29 November 1, 1989 RESOLVED, That the City does hereby endorse Alternative A - Optional 89 Alignment and requests that DOT implement this Alternative at the earliest possible time. The City makes this recommendation for the above stated reasons and because it believes that Alternative A- Optional 89 Alignment preserves the following future options: construction of an emergency vehicle route that connects directly to the hospital, construction of an overpass over the Conrail tracks, separation of Route 89 traffic from Route 96 via a Route 89 connection at Esty Street, and the diversion of traffic off Cliff Street through construction of a northern connection from Route 96 to Route 89, and be it further RESOLVED, That if the Department of Transportation agrees with the City's position as stated in this resolution or if it continues with its Alternative A. proposal,) it fully investigate the feasibility and cost of relocating those homes on Cliff Street slated for removal under the Cliff Street alignment proposed in its Alternative A onto new foundations further back on their existing lots, and locate the sidewalk proposed to run along newly widened Cliff Street at the base of the embankment to be created under said Alternative A alignment, and further that a landscape screen sufficient to buffer the relocated homes from the newly widened Cliff Street be included in the design of the improvements to the street, as sketched in the drawing dated 4�. September 22, 1989, with the further clarification that the cul- de -sac be eliminated and instead connect directly to Route 89 /Park Road. Carried Unanimously *16.10 Ithaca Industrial Park - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is considering the development of a new industrial park known as the Ithaca Industrial Park, and WHEREAS, the Common Council has designated the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency as the lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed industrial park, and WHEREAS, an expanded environmental assessment that concludes that a negative declaration is appropriate has been prepared for the broiect, and WHEREAS, the Conversation Advisory Council has reviewed the environmental assessment and recommended that a draft environmental impact statement be prepared, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency has requested that Common Council provide guidance as to whether further environmental review of this project is desired; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council notify the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency that they recommend that further environmental review of the proposed Ithaca Industrial Park is not necessary. Alderperson Cummings explained this resolution and stated the major point raised by the Conservation Advisory Council had to do with the issues of jobs and the local employment picture, etc. She asked Council if their recommendation was to go to DEIS. Alderperson Booth stated that the Conservation Advisory Council Chair recommended that Council not pass this resolution until their committee makes a determination in regard to a DEIS. Motion to Table By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That the Ithaca Industrial Park resolution be tabled to give the Conservation Advisory Council a chance to review and report back to Council. 212 `-, 30 November 1, 1989 A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather, Killeen, Hoffman Nays (2)- Cummings, Lytel Carried UNFINISHED AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: *21.1 Central Processing Facility - Commercial Avenue Resolution By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Central Processing Facility (CPF) located on the Commercial Avenue site in the City of Ithaca revealed serious concerns relating to wet land status, odor, ground water contamination, toxic storage, traffic impact and other ecological problems not satisfactorily addressed nor mitigated, and WHEREAS, the DEIS failed to properly identify, the scope of the total program, the magnitude of the amount of land needed for present and future use and the ultimate agency or private operator of the proposed facility, and WHEREAS, the DEIS indicated the intense negative impact of the CPF on neighboring businesses and property owners and effectively forestalls the City of Ithaca's ability to use this area and nearby areas to address its housing and recreational needs, and WHEREAS, the Spencer Road residential neighborhood has expressed its opposition to the proposed Commercial Avenue site for the CPF and is presenting a petition indicating this opposition, and WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Construction Management Committee has not properly examined the feasibility nor inquired from all the pertinent State and Federal Government agencies for a definitive ruling on the use of the airport site for its CPF; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca wishes again to state its adamant opposition to the locating of the CPF at the Commercial Avenue site and calls upon the Tompkins County Construction Management Committee to cease any further consideration of this area for the CPF. Alderperson Romanowski explained the resolution and stated that there are some items on alternative sites that have been dismissed without being addressed adequately. Alderperson Booth stated that the DEIS for the Central Processing Facility is clearly deficient and he has written them a long memo urging them to re -issue the DEIS. However, he is not prepared at this time to conclude that the facility should not be located at that site. Alderperson Cummings presented a petition from the residents on Spencer Road opposing the proposed Central Processing Facility Site that read as follows: "We the Undersigned wish it to be known that we believe we would suffer severe negative impacts if the proposed Central Processing Facility were located on nearby Commercial Avenue. We strongly feel that every thing possible must be done to find a more appropriate and isolated site in the County where fewer residents and businesses will be so immediately affected by the Central Processing Facility odor, noise and traffic. She further reported that there were many residents unaware of the proposed location. A copy of the petition will be sent to the City Clerk. 0 31 November 1, 1989 A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (7) Nichols, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel Nays (3) Johnson, Booth, Hoffman Carried BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE *17.1 Deputy Police Chief Position - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, that John A. Ecklund be appointed to the position of Deputy Police Chief at an annual salary of $44,698, effective November 6, 1989, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Deputy Police Chief position be assigned to the Managerial Compensation Plan at the salary range $31,087 - $46,017. Carried Unanimously Mayor Gutenberger reported that John A. Ecklund will be sworn into office at 11:30 a.m. on November 6, 1989 and the public, press and Council are invited. "a4 *17.3 Funding for GIAC Renovations - Resolution p By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the GIAC Renovations Client Committee and the Department of Planning and Development have been authorized to initiate the architect selection process for the GIAC Building Renovations; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Mayor be authorized to execute an agreement with a selected architectural firm, for the preparation of a schematic design of such renovations, at an amount not to exceed $10,000, and be it further RESOLVED, That Capital Project #226 GIAC Renovations, be and is hereby established at a maximum cost of $500,000, and be it further RESOLVED, That the authorized down payment of $25,000 be transferred from Account A1990 Restricted Contingency to Capital Project #226 GIAC Renovations, with the balance of $475,000 to be derived from the issuance of serial bonds. Alderperson Booth asked Alderperson Hoffman what the B & A Committee believes this architect is going to do. Alderperson Hoffman responded that the intent is for an architect to carefully, in a comprehensive manner, study the available space and how it can be allocated for the programs now housed in this space. Alderperson Lytel stated that the City cannot make progress until we can determine if both programs space needs can be provided at GIAC. He further stated that we absolutely need the architect to make this kind of determination. Alderperson Nichols responded that there are two issues involved here. One of them is how the Drop -In- Center and GIAC can work together and establish a better relationship. The other is a serious question of whether the plans that GIAC has for its future and its needs will accommodate an expanded daycare facility. Alderperson Nichols stated that he is concerned with the sum of $500,000 because part of the reason for this figure was that it included the cost of the day care. There are many specific requirements to be a licensed day care facility. However if there is not going to be a licensed day care facility in the GIAC building, he thinks the sum should be considerably less than $500,000 so that the City can use those funds to get another day care facility established. 32 November 1, 1989 Alderperson Schlather stated that he also has concerns in regard to spending $500,000 if that sum does not include providing expanded day care. City Controller Cafferillo explained that if the City is going to go ahead with the $10,000 allocation, ($1,000 was allocated at last month's meeting) we would have to take $11,000 from the $25,000 in restricted contingency, then if the project goes forward that $11,000 would become a part of the down payment and would be transferred to the capital project when established. He further explained that the City would need to transfer $11,000 from restricted contingency to the Planning Department on a temporary basis then transfer those costs to the capital project when established. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Nichols RESOLVED, That the last two Resolveds be deleted and that a further Resolved to read as follows be added. RESOLVED, That an additional $10,000 be transferred from restricted contingency Account #A1990 to Planning Department Contractual Services line. Ayes (9) - Nays (1) - Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather, Hoffman, Cummings, Lytel Killeen A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows; Carried Ayes (8) - Nichols, Johnson, Peterson, Hoffman, Romanowski, Schlather, Cummings, Lytel Nays (2) - Booth, Killeen Carried *17.4 Youth Bureau - Upgrade Recreation Specialist By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Killeen RESOLVED, That the position of Recreation Specialist currently held by Nancy Pace be reclassified to Recreation Supervisor, at an annual salary of $18,146, which is Step One on the CSEA Administrative Unit Compensation Plan. Carried Unanimously *17.5 Youth Bureau - Increase Petty Cash _Fund Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Youth Bureau's authorized petty cash fund be increased from $175.00 to $350.00 for efficiency of operations. Carried Unanimously *17.6 Commons Advisor - Authorize Release of Unrestricted Contingency Funds for Preparation of a City Facilities and Service Booklet - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That $2,317 be transferred from A1990 Unrestricted Contingency to Account A8510 -450 Commons Advisory Advertising, for the preparation of a City Facilities and Services booklet. Carried Unanimously *17.7 Finance Department - Authorize city Chamberlain to Purchase all Lands at the 1989 City Tax Sale - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That pursuant to Ithaca City Charter Section 4.6 (E) the City Chamberlain is hereby authorized and directed on behalf of the City of Ithaca to purchase all lands at the 1989 City Tax Sale, without competitive bidding, for the gross amount due. Carried Unanimously J I W-� � rJ iD 33 November 1, 1989 *17.8 Engineering Department - Amend Equipment List - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the authorized Equipment List for the Engineering Department be amended to include a new Blue Print Machine, and be it further RESOLVED, That the funding for such acquisition be distributed as *17.11 Reorganization of Finance Department Alderperson Hoffman reported that there is a proposed reorganization of the Finance, Purchasing, and Personnel Departments. He explained that this is a report and stated that it is important that the public understand what is being proposed in terms of the effect on the budget. City Controller Cafferillo briefly described the proposed reorganization as a consolidation of the finance, purchasing, and personnel functions into one single administrative unit. He stated that Budget and Administration feels that the merger would permit more effective use of City personnel while reducing the present level of staffing from 26 to 23 positions. The related net projected 1990 reduction in spending would be approximately $80,000. City Controller Cafferillo reported that detailed information is available. (400.1 Alderperson Schlather reported that Budget and Administration Committee will start their budget sessions on November 2, 1989 and a memo has been sent to Council listing important items to be discussed. follows: A. General Fund A1440 -210 Engineering Office Equipment $500 B. Water Fund F8311 -210 Administrative Office Equipment $500 C. Sewer Fund G8111 -210 Administrative Office Equipment $500 D. Joint Activity Fund J8150 -210 Treatment Plant Office Equipment $500 Carried Unanimously *17.9 Fire Department Personnel - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Marcia E. Lynch be provisionally appointed 4.•. to the position of Volunteer Coordinator (part- time, 20 hours per week) for the Ithaca Fire Department at an annual salary of $10,753, effective November 6, 1989. Fire Chief Olmstead explained to Council the process used for filling the position of Volunteer Coordinator. Carried Unanimously *17.10 Audit By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract #20/1989, in the total amount of $22,876.19 be approved for payment. Carried Unanimously *17.11 Reorganization of Finance Department Alderperson Hoffman reported that there is a proposed reorganization of the Finance, Purchasing, and Personnel Departments. He explained that this is a report and stated that it is important that the public understand what is being proposed in terms of the effect on the budget. City Controller Cafferillo briefly described the proposed reorganization as a consolidation of the finance, purchasing, and personnel functions into one single administrative unit. He stated that Budget and Administration feels that the merger would permit more effective use of City personnel while reducing the present level of staffing from 26 to 23 positions. The related net projected 1990 reduction in spending would be approximately $80,000. City Controller Cafferillo reported that detailed information is available. (400.1 Alderperson Schlather reported that Budget and Administration Committee will start their budget sessions on November 2, 1989 and a memo has been sent to Council listing important items to be discussed. 34 November 1, 1989 CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE: *18.1 An Ordinance Amending Cha ter 31 Entitled "Subdivision Re ulations" Exactions for Park Land Pur oses) of the Cit of Ithaca Municipal Code - Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen ORDINANCE NO. 89 - AN ORDINANCE OFETHENCITYAOFEITHACANMUNICDIPAL "SUBDIVISION REGULATION BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 31 entitled "Subdivision Regulations" is amended as follows: 1. That the existing section o 31.48 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with "Section 31.48 Park, Open Space and Recreation Areas A. The plat shall show all areas proposed to be set aside for park, open space or recreation areas. The plat_ shall show the size, character and location of such park, open space or recreation areas, including features such as trees, rock outcrops, streams or ponds. B. The Board of Planning and Development may require that up to ten (10) percent of the gross area of the proposed plat be reserved for park, open space or recreation purposes. The Board shall approve the size, shape and location of all areas proposed to be reserved for park, open space or recreation purposes. C. If the Board determines that a suitable park, open space or recreation area of adequate size cannot be properly located in any such plat or is otherwise not approval may then City condition of as approval o P follows: 1. In the R -1 and R -2 zones, one thousand dollars($1,000) per building lot within the subdivision. 2. In the R -3, C -SU and B zones, one thousand dollars ($1,000) per three thousand (3,000) square feet of land area within the subdivision. 3. In the R -U zone, one thousand dollars ($1,000) per ten thousand (10,000) square feet of land area within the subdivision. Such payment shall be paid to the City of Ithaca at the time of final plat approval, and no plat shall be signed by the authorized officer of the Board until such payment is made. All such payments shall be held ce by the City of Ithaca in a dedicated Park, open Spaused and Recreation Area Improvement Fund, and only for the following purposes: 1. The acquisition of land that is suitable for a permanent public park, open space or recreation area that is so located that it will serve primarily the general neighborhood in which the plat is located. I W- � 35 November 1, 1989 2. The improvement of public park, open space or recreation areas which serve primarily the general neighborhood in which the plat is located, provided that the need for such improvements is established by the Board of Planning and Development or by the Board of Public Works. D. The Board of Planning and Development shall waive the requirement that either park, open space or recreation land be reserved or that a payment be made to the City of Ithaca if either of the following conditions exists: 1. The subdivision of land does not create additional building lots which meet the applicable area and lot width requirements contained in the City of Ithaca's Zoning Ordinance, (e.g. boundary line adjustments); or, +j 2. In the R -1, R -2 or R -3 zones, the parcel of land to be subdivided is divided into not more than two (2) building lots, provided that such waiver shall not be applied to the same parcel of land, or s subdivided parts thereof, more than one time in r any ten (10) year period." SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City Charter. Alderperson Booth explained the amendment. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (6) Schlather, Lytel, Hoffman, Booth, Johnson, Peterson (Cummings, Nichols, Romanowski and Killeen were out of the room when vote was taken). Carried INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE: Mayor Gutenberger reported that the Intergovernmental Relations Committee met in regard to the disposition of Fire Station #5 and discussions are taking place. REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS: Conservation Advisory Council *20.1 Resolution to Common Council from the Conservation Advisory Council on Relieving Traffic Congestion Alderperson Johnson introduced the following resolution for referral. WHEREAS, traffic congestion and parking in the City of Ithaca have become major problems, and WHEREAS, every community bears a responsibility to reduce the causes of global warming -- brought on in large measure by automobile exhaust, and (600" WHEREAS, there are several ways the City could relieve these problems; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City adopt a multi - pronged attack on these problems, including the following specific suggested solutions: 1. the City urge Cornell to charge students for owning cars and put the money collected into a fund for subsidizing a free bus system for all members of the public; 36 November 1, 1989 2. the City work with the County to immediately start working on ways to improve mass transit, including looking into costs and feasibility of light rail systems; 3. the City encourage Cornell, Ithaca College, TC3, the hospital, and other large traffic generators to construct park - and -ride facilities in Varna, on South hill (in the Town of Danby or Ithaca), in Lansing, and on West Hill (in the Town of Ithaca or Ulysses). 4. the City urge the large traffic generators to subsidize a public transit system that would be free to all and would run more frequently, to more places, and at predictable times. (Cornell could, for example, divert the huge funds proposed for new parking lots on or near campus, to the public transit fund.) 5. the City and County work together on setting up a ride -share program. Comments: As we delay, congestion, air pollution, global warming, and loss of open space to parking lots only become worse. It should be noted that Mt. Holyoke, Smith, Amherst, Hampshire College, and the U. of Mass. jointly subsidize a bus system that is free for everyone, provides services within and between the five towns, and is heavily used by the public. The County Planning Department may be able to help resolve these problems, and we urge the City to seek this help. (Resolution approved unanimously, October 16, 1989.) Motion to Refer By Alderperson Johnson: RESOLVED, that the resole referred to the Planning Planning and Development Seconded by Alderperson Booth .ition on Relieving Traffic Congestion be and Development Committee and the Board for their review. Carried Unanimously NEW BUSINESS: *22.1 ZBB: A Budget Policy Guideline - Resolution By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Booth WHEREAS, Ithaca's public services' demands and legitimate social needs are rapidly out pacing available revenues, and WHEREAS, governmental fiscal practices of past decades now suggest that newer models of financial management are required for the successful delivery of public services in the 1990's, and WHEREAS, the City is searching for new revenue sources including additions to the tax base by returning public lands to private lands and administrative reforms in tax rate equalization, and WHEREAS, ZBB (Zero Based Budgeting) is a financial management policy which deals with the problem of expenditure growth out racing revenue generation by examining each activity from a fresh perspective each year; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca consider adopting a policy of annual ZBB practice, modified as appropriate for those actions which are already obligated on an incremental basis, and be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution be referred to the Budget and Administration Committee for their deliberation and action at its November meeting. Carried Unanimously r_: I 37 November 1, 1989 EXECUTIVE SESSION: By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Common Council adjourn into Executive Session to discuss the Central Processing Facility possible litigation. ADJOURNMENT: Council came out of Executive Session and the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Callista F. Paolangeli City Clerk John C. Gutenberger Mayor C �1 <1 Regular Meeting PRESENT: Mayor Gutenberger Alderpersons (10) COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK 7:00 P.M. November 1, 1989 - Booth, Cummings, Johnson, Nichols, Hoffman, Killeen, Lytel, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather OTHERS PRESENT: City Clerk - Paolangeli City Attorney - Nash City Controller - Cafferillo Planning & Development Director - Van Cort Planning & Development Deputy Director - Mazzarella Commons Coordinator - Deming Police Chief - McEwen Personnel Administrator - Walker Building Commissioner - Datz Acting Supt. of Public Works - Fabbroni City Chamberlain - Parsons Youth Bureau Director - Cohen PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. MINUTES: Approval of Minutes of the September 6, 1989 Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the September 6, 1989 Common Council Meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of the October 4, 1989 Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 4, 1989 Common Council Meeting be tabled until the December 6, 1989 meeting. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of the October 17, 1989 Special Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 17, 1989 Special Common Council Meeting be tabled until the December 6, 1989 meeting. Carried Unanimously SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public Hearing - An Ordinance Amending Sections 30.25 and 30.26 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Resolution to Open Public Hearing By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider amending Sections 30.25 and 30.26 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal (400", Code be declared open. Alderperson Booth explained the amendments that are being proposed. James F. Dwyer - Attorney for Tompkins County Solid Waste Management Plan addressed Common Council in regard to the proposed zoning change. He stated that he believes this zoning change is a reaction to the County citing of the Central Processing Facility on Commercial Avenue. The City is under the impression, he believes, that by changing the zoning and / ` �' November 1, 1989 excluding rubbish handling in this particular area that they could exclude the County. Attorney Dwyer referred to a case in New York State and read the following statute from County Law Section 226(B) entitled "Solid Waste Management Resource Recovery" . "The Legislative Body of any County may appropriate and expend such sums as it may deem proper to provide for the separation, collection, and management of solid waste in such County and for that purpose may acquire, construct, operate and maintain solid waste management facilities, acquire the necessary lands therefore, and purchase, operate and maintain all necessary appliances appurtenant thereto, including collection facilities and such vehicles as may be required for such purposes. (Attorney Dwyer stated that this is the part he wishes to emphasize.) "In selecting a location for any solid waste management facility the County Legislative Body shall take into consideration the present, and any proposed land use character of the area of any proposed location and zoning regulations, if any, applicable to such area." Attorney Dwyer stated that it does not say the County must comply but says the County must consider and we submit the County has considered the present regulation and does not have to comply with anything that may be enacted tonight. However, the County has authorized me to state that they will keep the City continuously informed and supply the City with all materials as they are developed regarding the CPF site. The County, under the Monroe County case in Section 226(B) of the County Law, has no obligation for any Site Plan Review or any compliance with local zoning as far as the Commercial Avenue site is concerned. However, the County wishes to assure the City, regardless of what happens, that it will make data available concerning this site to all departments of city government. Attorney Dwyer gave background information on how the Commercial Avenue site was selected and stated that he is authorized by the Corps of Engineers to state that a letter is being promulgated that will state that the Corps has no jurisdiction over any wet lands on the proposed CPF site. Attorney Dwyer further described other areas that were considered and explained why the location near the Tompkins County Airport was not chosen. He stated that a letter dated November 30, 1988, from FAA to the County that will be made available in the FEIS speaks for itself. He reported that there is another FAA document available that lists airports throughout the country that have a known bird hazard. In the eastern region, Tompkins County is one of those airports. He stated that in addition General Municipal Law, Section 356, applies in connection with citing of solid waste management facilities including landfills near airports. Attorney Dwyer stated that the County seeks to cooperate in this endeavor and that it needs to be a cooperative effort. The County views this action of exclusionary zoning, directed principally at this solid waste project for the benefit for all of the residents of this County, as an action that is totally inconsistent with that cooperation. Resolution to Close Public Hearing By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider An Ordinance Amending Sections 30.25 and 30.26 Entitled 'Zoning' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code be declared closed. Carried Unanimously lr� �cf�^ 3 November 1, 1989 ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: Unfinished Business Alderperson Romanowski requested that Item 21.1 under Unfinished Business be moved to the Planning and Development Committee items. (aw." No Council member objected. Budget and Administration Committee Alderperson Schlather requested that under Item 17.9 (Fire Department - Possible Resolution) the possible be stricken. No Council member objected. Planning and Development Committee Alderperson Cummings requested that an Executive Session be held 0) in regard to Item 16.2 (Central Processing Facility - Report) . No Council member objected. 19� Budget and Administration Committee Alderperson Hoffman requested the addition of a report on the proposed reorganization of Finance, Purchasing, and Personnel Departments. No Council member objected. MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS: Board of Zoning Appeals Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the appointment of Janis Cochran, 416 South Aurora Street, to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a term to expire on December 31, 1989. Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols RESOLVED, That this Council approves of the appointment of Janis Cochran, 416 South Aurora Street to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a term to expire on December 31, 1989. Carried Unanimously Ithaca Energy Commission Mayor Gutenberger requested approval of Council for the appointment of John Potter, RR 1, Box 164 A, Burdett, NY to serve on the Ithaca Energy Commission for a term to expire on December 31, 1989. Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That this Council approves of the appointment of John Potter, RR 1, Box 164 A, Burdett, NY to serve on the Ithaca Energy Commission for a term to expire on December 31, 1989. Carried Unanimously PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: (400" Festival Lands Transfer Doria Higgins, 2 Hillcrest Drive, representing "Citizens to Save Our Parks" read the following statement to Common Council: "There are three issues to which I'd like to call to your attention tonight -- all concerning possible transfer of the Festival Lands to State Parks to enlarge the marina. First. At the October Common Council meeting a false statement in the resolution concerning transfer of the Festival Lands to State Parks was voted by you to be retained even though Alderman Hoffman offered an amendment to correct that falsehood. The statement in question occurred in the first clause of the resolution and read: "WHEREAS the City of Ithaca and the OPRHP 4 November 1, 1989 entered into an agreement on March 21, 1985..." The fact is the City, meaning Common Council, never voted to enter into the agreement of March 21, 1985 which was an agreement to give the Festival Lands to State Parks in return for leasing the ball fields, and what's more the March 1985 agreement itself specifically stated that it was "subject to the approval of Common Council and the State of New York." We seriously question whether a resolution is legally or even morally binding if one of the basic clauses of the resolution is false. Clearly in this particular instance 5 members of Common Council voted under a misapprehension about the relevant facts. Since the misapprehension involved the giving away of City parkland it is all the more reprehensible. We think that you yourselves should question the legality of that resolution. If you voted for it thinking something in it was so which wasn't so, we think you should ask that the resolution be rescinded. Second. There seems to be a misapprehension that enlarging the marina will bring business to Ithaca. Let us remind you that the same kind of argument was used in promoting the Empire State Games last summer and in spending, if I remember correctly, vast sums of money on them. Yet when the games were over the consensus of the business community was that there was no extra business, there was no profit involved. Sailors and boaters coming to Ithaca to their slips at the marina are not going to buy their potatoes at Tops or their deck varnish at McPhearsons. Most of them will have done their shopping during the week and come to Ithaca with supplies in hand. Let us also bring to your attention that the 1967 tripartite agreement committed the City of Ithaca to supplying 10,000 gallons of water a day to the marina free of charge for forty years and sewage services also free of charge for forty years. The more slips at the marina the more gallons of City water will be consumed. Many national studies are exploding the myth that development brings money to a community. More and more studies show that, on the contrary, development brings added expenses to municipalities without accompanying recompense. Third. The Environmental Protection Agency has recently reported that half of the lake acreage in 34 states is badly polluted or soon to become so. Pollution of Cayuga Lake, of course, is not just a City of Ithaca issue but a matter of concern for all municipalities on our lake shore. But it is an issue which the City should be addressing. We noted in our October 17, 1989 statement to State Parks that the data given Ithaca Common Council by Mr. Mazzella, Director of Finger Lakes State Parks, about boat density on Cayuga Lake was inaccurate and inaccurate on the side of minimizing boat density on the lake. To the extent that decisions of yours concerning this matter were influenced by Mr. Mazzella's data, to that extent your decisions were based on inaccurate information. And finally, let us remind you that we have a really splendid balance at Treman Marina and adjacent park of the Hogs Hole and surrounding meadows as refuge for wildfowl, of a very large and well kept marina, and of the lovely mowed adjacent parkland, a refuge for humans. It is truly a unique spot as it now exists. Why destroy this beautiful place which all can now enjoy just so Fingerlakes Parks can make a few more dollars from a few more boat slips. Andy Mazzella has done a great job down there. Help us preserve his good work by not giving away the Festival Lands to enlarge the marina." Doria Higgins requested that the following article that was published in "The Grapevine, October 25 -31, 1989 be recorded in / 4 7 5 November 1, 1989 the minutes. 'NO' TO MARINA PLAN - by Doria Higgins While there were a number if irregularities at the Oct. 4, 1989, Common Council meeting there was one action that was particularly regrettable. Common Council voted to retain a misrepresentation of fact in the first clause of a resolution concerning the possible transfer of the festival lands at Cass Park to the New York State Office of Parks. The decision by Common Council to retain this misstatement is especially damaging in that it grants a pseudo - legitimacy to an earlier city document that essentially agrees to give away city parkland for unbelievably small recompense. Although Alderman Hoffman presented two amendments, one to remove the clause completely and the second to correct the phrase containing the falsehood, both amendments failed. The clause in question reads in its entirety, "WHEREAS the City of Ithaca and the [N.Y. State] Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation entered into an agreement on March 21, (l. -M 1985, that provided recreational facilities for the City's use." X41 The fact is that the March 21, 1985 agreement was not entered into by the city: it was signed by Mayor Gutenberger and it specifically stated that it was "subject to the approval of Common Council and the State." Common Council never has given that approval, nor has the State. The March 21, 1985 agreement signed by the mayor promised State Parks title to the Festival Lands (15 acres, adjacent to Treman Marina, and appraised at $186,500 in 1985) in exchange for the City having "priority of use" for "scheduled recreational programs" of the ball fields at Buttermilk Falls State Park for five years, with option to renew. The agreement gave State Parks the option to terminate the agreement if they "determined" a "higher and better use" for the ballfield site. The City, however, was not given any option for termination. While a Jan. 2, 1985, Common Council resolution did indeed empower the mayor to sign a license with State Parks "for the use of newly created playing fields adjacent to Buttermilk Falls State Park ", that resolution did not even mention the Festival Lands, much less mention them as recompense for leasing the fields. The mayor was only empowered to sign a license for the use of the fields. Furthermore, the January 1985 resolution itself contained a misstatement of fact. It said, "WHEREAS the City on April 6, 1983 agreed in principle to accept such a license ." But on April 6, 1983, Common Council did not agree "in principle to accept such a license." The April 1983 resolution reads, "The City . . . does hereby express a willingness in principle to negotiate sale . . .[of the Festival Lands] in exchange for improvement of lands near Buttermilk Park for ball - playing fields available for city use . . . and for other considerations." The actual wording makes clear that in 1983 the city was only considering the matter, and was not committing itself, and that the consideration was of sale of the Festival Lands, plus negotiations for "other considerations." The October 4, 1989 resolution approved by Council gives a seeming legitimacy to the March 21, 1985, agreement which we think should never have been signed by the mayor in the first place, and which was never - -we think rightfully -- legally ratified by Common Council. i�P 6 November 1, 1989 "Citizens to Save Our Parks" thinks the Festival Lands should remain in city ownership for use by the people of our community, who are, after all, the real owners of the land. We do not think the Festival Lands should be used to enlarge the marina by 29 slips to accommodate 29 boat owners, which is the use State Parks intends for the land. But if the land is to be transferred, it should be done properly with fair value received by the community. The only recourse available to the public when Common Council abuses the public trust is to take Council to a court of law. In lieu of undertaking legal expenses at this time, our group is writing this. It will at least inform the community of these unfortunate facts. Doria Higgins also requested the following be recorded in the minutes: "Comments of Citizens to Save Our Parks at Public Information /Scoping Meeting NYS Parks on October 17, 1989 in Ithaca, New York on the Robert H Treman State Park Redevelopment Plan and the Alan H. Treman State Marine Park Development Plan ". The Possible Water Pollution Of Ca u a Lake Even Without Marina Enlargement And Too High A Boat Density On The Lake. We would like to make it part of the record tonight that there were a number of inaccuracies in Mr. Mazzella's letter of October 25, 1988 to Mayor John Gutenberger, in which he assured the City of Ithaca that there was no danger of water pollution due to the new pier and that the density of boats on the lake was at a very safe level. These inaccuracies are important in that they were part of the basis on which Common Council has made decisions on the matter of transferring the Festival Lands. As you know lake pollution and the dangers of high boat density have become very serious problems in our country. Mr. Mazzella, in his October letter speaks of the water pollution studies by Elizabeth Moran. He says, "We were pleased to find that Ms. Moran has been . . . studying Cayuga Lake . . . since 1985, and in her opinion, the quality of the water is actually improving. This should provide clear and convincing evidence that a seventh pier will not have a detrimental effect on Cayuga Lake." Since her study was designed to examine the effects on the lake of our new sewage plant compared to the earlier dumping of raw sewage into the lake one would hope some improvement would be shown. However, such studies have no bearing on possible pollution from boats. In a letter to us (and another one of the Chair of the City Conservation Advisory Council) she made the clear statement that her study was "not designed and should not be used to address the question of adverse impacts from additional boating facilities." Mr. Mazzella in his letter denied overcrowding on the lake by misstating standards prepared by the New York Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. He quotes that plan as saying "a minimum of 6 acres of water surface is needed for each sail or power boat." In fact the Plan says that "a minimum of 6 to 8 acres per sail and power boat" is needed. Mr. Mazzella, using his figures, estimates that the boat capacity for the 6,000 acres from Ithaca to Taughannock Falls is 1,000 boats. But using the 8 acres "minimum" in the Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan the capacity for that area of the lake is only 750 boats not 1,000. He goes on to say, "It has been reported that there are approximately 800 boats that use this end of the lake as their primary boating area." We telephoned the local boatyards we know of, and the Yacht Club, and Taughannock and Treman Parks and got a total of 972 boats. I rn 7 November 1, 1989 Recreational Designation of Fall Creek Jim Novak, 401 Lake Street addressed Council in regard to the Recreational Designation of Fall Creek and read the following: "I recently heard of what seemed like a nightmare situation for the people of Riverhead, Long Island, as a result of Recreational River designation of the Peconic. What I heard seemed unbelievable, so I decided to find out for myself. I called the editor of their local paper, the legislative assistant to their (awool State Assemblyman, and the environmental legislative assistant to their State Senator. I represented myself as an ordinary citizen who lived in the affected area of a proposed designation. I wanted information about how it worked in a populated area, that I could share with my local government. I can sum up the long conversations I had with these people in three words: "Don't do it!" I would like to share with you some of their actual words. The editor said: "everyone supported it initially, the town board supported it, now they discover that they can't do anything," She went on to say that the mood when this started was "anything environmental was good, now it's just the opposite." The assemblyman's legislative assistant offered This figure does not include the new slips planned (possibly built by this writing) at Noah's Boatyard, Ithaca Boating Center or Mahools which would bring the figure to 1,068 boats. Also not counted in so far are the boat launchings from the ramps at Taughannock and Treman. On June 25, 1989, 125 boats were launched from Treman. Adding this to our total we would have 1,293 boats in the area. Still left out from this total are all privately moored boats and the launchings from Taughannock. But in any event 1,293 boats are 543 more boats than the 750 figure our interpretation of the Outdoor Recreation Plan deemed advisable for safe density. And 1,293 boats are 493 more boats than Mr. Mazzella's estimated 800. And even if those boats aren't all out on the lake at the same time, which indeed they would not be, they are still leaking fuel oils into the lake even when moored. We have spoken to Mr. Brumfield, chief limnologist at DEC about water pollution in lakes. He impressed upon us that there are many ways in which a lake can be polluted other than from fuel 0J oil. Other possible pollutions are: noise; public safety; two _ cycle fuel oil; breaking up of nutrient aquatic plants as the ('9,) boats go through the plants and the pieces then float and reroot; launching of boats from one lake to another carrying with them undesirable detritus from the first lake; disturbance of shoreline because of erosion due to boat wake; boats traveling in shallow water creating turbidity; disturbance of wildlife habitat and the dumping of sanitary wastes into the lake. All of this indicates that enlarging the marina should be very carefully examined in terms of lake pollution. Many local residents, boat owners included, think optimum boat density has already been exceeded. THE Festival Lands Are Park Land By Implied Dedication And State Parks Must Recognize This Designation. The concept that land can be designated as park land by implied dedication if it has been used and known as park land over a period of time is well established in New York State law. This is too complicated a matter to go into tonight. But we do want it noted as part of the record that the Festival Lands (or the Center for the Arts lands) have been known and used as park lands over the years and they have been maintained as park lands by City parks maintenance crews. There is other incontrovertible evidence that this land is park land and that therefore they cannot be transferred to State Parks without a vote of 8 people on Common Council. And your environmental review must be conducted with this fact in mind. Recreational Designation of Fall Creek Jim Novak, 401 Lake Street addressed Council in regard to the Recreational Designation of Fall Creek and read the following: "I recently heard of what seemed like a nightmare situation for the people of Riverhead, Long Island, as a result of Recreational River designation of the Peconic. What I heard seemed unbelievable, so I decided to find out for myself. I called the editor of their local paper, the legislative assistant to their (awool State Assemblyman, and the environmental legislative assistant to their State Senator. I represented myself as an ordinary citizen who lived in the affected area of a proposed designation. I wanted information about how it worked in a populated area, that I could share with my local government. I can sum up the long conversations I had with these people in three words: "Don't do it!" I would like to share with you some of their actual words. The editor said: "everyone supported it initially, the town board supported it, now they discover that they can't do anything," She went on to say that the mood when this started was "anything environmental was good, now it's just the opposite." The assemblyman's legislative assistant offered 8 November 1, 1989 this: " If you pass this you lose control. At the public hearing, hundreds came out. Only two groups were in favor of the DEC lines. A public hearing after a law is enacted is a big joke, the determination will be made in Albany. It is un- American- Condemnation without compensation." "The worst thing they ever did was designate the river." "How could anyone want the State government to impose upon a local people ?" The State Senator's environmental assistant prefaced his remarks by declaring that he and the senator were staunch supporters of the Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Act. I expected to hear the other side of the story, but he said: "The evil is the regulations of the program. The regulations are shortsighted, contradictory and restrictive." "In downtown Riverhead they can't revitalize the area. The regulations lock the community into poverty." "... in effect, the state comes in and zones. Revitalizing a populated area is impossible." "The program [the Act] is good. Part 666 [the regulations] is totally unacceptable. You will lose property rights, it will be a defacto taking." Since his specialty is environmental law, I asked him about our situation with hydropower. He said: "This is not the correct tool to stop hydro; rely on the wetlands act." He went on to say, "Once you get this you will have to have an act of the Legislature to remove it. Don't do it! " I have lived in Fall Creek twenty years. Like many of my neighbors, I am a working man, with a very modest home. Unlike many of them, I own a lot that I and my recent wife are trying to build a home on. I have been assured that I have nothing to worry about, that the line will be drawn around my property and that of others. I question your ability to thwart the intent of a powerful state agency, especially since the regulations allow them to change the boundaries at any time. I don't want to lose my life savings. My neighbors are mostly hard working, mind - their- own - business people who occupy a habitat for humans - a city, and occupy their homes with the simple faith that their government is there to protect them and their community. None of them wants to interfere with the recreational values of Fall Creek. I do not mean to impugn the honesty or motives of the local group sponsoring designation, but I believe every word you or they have heard has come from one source; the author of those regulations, not from anyone who has to live with them. You are dealing with a very powerful state agency whose concerns are not with the needs of this city, its schools, its institutions, or its people: only the river. Extensive recreational access is already provided by Cornell and the City, and permanent pollution control measures are in place. I think you view this as an easy way to stop hydro, with a few minor land use controls thrown in. It should be viewed as a major, drastic, invasive, and severely flawed state land use regulation that, incidentally, will stop hydro. The people of Riverhead were most definitely not expecting what they got. They got drastic land use controls that meant every home, business, lot or land use for a half mile from the river was "grandfathered," meaning it was not in conformance, but could remain only if left exactly as it was. The standard for conformance is two acre residential with a maximum density of one living unit per acre, or river recreational related business, such as boat rentals, of under 10,000 square feet. Period. "Picture that in the City of Ithaca in the area from Cascadilla Creek to Fall Creek, then beyond, well into Cayuga Heights. There are those who will say "that could never happen here." I am not so sure." Ithaca Industrial Park Environmental Review Betsy Darlington, Chair of Conservation Advisory Council addressed Council in regard to Item 16.10 on the Agenda - Ithaca Industrial Park Environmental Review resolution and reported that there are still some environmental questions that need to be 201 9 November 1, 1989 addressed. She stated that she did not know if a DEIS is needed but she thinks there are some points that need to be cleaned up and urged Council not to pass this resolution tonight. Award to Common Council from Conservation Advisory Council Betsy Darlington reported that last Spring the CAC presented an award to Common Council for several items -- Site Plan Review Ordinance, Cluster Ordinance, Smoking Ordinance, and also (4WO-1 starting work on Conservation Overlay Zoning, and Six Mile Creek Protections. The last Chairman of the CAC very kindly and generously made certificates for all the awardees. She presented Council with their certificate. Festival Lands Resolution John Schroeder, 618 Stewart Avenue stated that he was very happy to see the new resolution concerning the marina expansion on the agenda tonight and reported that he feels it is much needed but ci feels that it should not have been necessary to pass a second resolution on this subject. He stated that the details should have been incorporated into one single resolution that could have �.•T been passed by Council. Rental Housing Commission John Schroeder stated that the Rental Housing Commission Resolution on tonight's agenda contains significant changes from what was recommended by the Rental Housing Task Force in July of 1989. 1) There is no longer a tenant majority on the Rental Housing Commission. 2) The Rental Housing Commission will no longer be a trustee of the Proposed Housing Trust Fund. He reported that although he is not sure what the reason is, he thinks it weakens the power of the Commission and will make it less attractive to people who really want to promote more affordable housing in the City. Traffic Congestion Mr. Schroeder also remarked briefly on the Conservation Advisory Council's resolution on relieving traffic congestion. He stated that he would prefer a change in the charges to students who own cars to provide a bus that would be available to the whole community. He feels that this is unfair to students and Cornell has the resources to help fund such a bus service. He also stated that an idea to improve mass transit that is not in the resolution is to better coordinate the separate bus systems that we already have. Mr. Schroeder explained that a uniform schedule of all the bus systems in Tompkins County would be important to relieve the confusion of residents using mass transit in the City. Cultural and Natural Resources Survey Allocation Andrea Fleck Clardy, 616 Cayuga Heights Road, addressed Council in regard to the Budget and Administration Item 17.2, Cultural and Natural Resources Study that has been suggested and she referred to a communication from Richard Driscoll. Ms. Clardy explained that there has been a great deal of troubled history as far as the arts activities of this community are concerned. She reported that there is a cooperative effort of supporters of the arts and businesses who are eager to improve communication. She stated that if we are going to have an arts council that operates successfully it is important that the City contribute to demonstrate cooperation with the County and with local businesses and feels that this is a very appropriate request. She urged Council to give their support. Senior Citizens' Council Valerie Rockney, 304 Linn Street representing the Senior Citizens' Council addressed Council with the need for a new Senior Center in Ithaca and distributed copies of their new brochure and described its contents. She stated that the Senior Center is preparing for a new Senior Center although they do not 21() 10 November 1, 1989 have a new site at this time. Public Transit Item 20 1, Rental Housing Commission Staffing, and Strand Theater Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street addressed Council and stated that he was running for Ray Schlather's seat on Council. Mr. Sayvets reported that he supports the Conservation Advisory Council's resolution Item 20.1 on the Agenda and reported that people are actively working on the issue of making it easier for bicycles as a means of transportation. He feels that shuttle buses are needed up and down the hills in the City with bicycle racks attached. He also spoke in regard to the Rental Housing Commission and the need for more staff. He stated that if there was going to be a staff person dedicated to such a purpose he would suggest that a Planning Department staff member be assigned to the Rental Housing Commission as opposed to hiring a new person. Mr. Sayvetz supported Andrea Clardy's remarks in regard to the Arts and reported that people had tried to save the Strand Theater and it did not work out -- maybe we'll do it right this time. He urged Council's support for citizen's trying to do something for the Strand Theater and stated that it is a very vital part of downtown. RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC: Rental Housing Resolution Alderperson Cummings stated that in regard to the staffing in the Rental Housing Resolution the language of the resolution is intended to allow for the possibility of reallocating existing staff resources. The Planning and Development Committee has discussed an additional staffing commitment but it was the consensus of the Committee not to incorporate it into this resolution. She explained that this resolution is to make sure that there is staff to work with this commission but it does admit to the possibility of reallocating existing resources. Recreational River Designation Alderperson Hoffman thanked Jim Novak for his information in regard to Recreational River Designation and stated that it is a perspective that he had not heard before about the consequences of designation. He reported that he would make a commitment, as Chairperson of the Hydropower Commission, to have the situation investigated where designation has occurred in populated areas and he also believes there should be a public hearing prior to State decision on designation. Alderperson Peterson stated that she would also seek information from Riverhead and other officials in the DEC in regard to designation of recreational lands in populated areas. She feels that it is necessary to have the full picture. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR: Tompkins County Budget Mayor Gutenberger reported that the City staff has been working with Tompkins County staff on the cost of recycling. The County will be seeking reimbursement from City tax payers for recycling costs. He reported that the entire cost for the recycling program, as is in the County budget, is approximately $600,000 and the benefit from the program does not go to the City of Ithaca. The City residents pay the County roughly 25% of the County taxes with no benefit. The City taxpayers pay 100% for the City Recycling Program. The City is requesting Tompkins County to reimburse $160,000 for the City's recycling in 1990. Mayor Gutenberger explained the County's proposed program that will begin in January 1990. The City has requested that the County not impose a tipping fee until a program is in place for implementation of a tipping fee and how to recoup the cost. Alderperson Nichols reported that he attended the County Board meeting tonight and in regard to the tipping fee issue, the Public Works Committee met today and is recommending to the Board " o: 11 November 1, 1989 that they not impose a tipping fee until March 1, 1990. He also reported that the County budget includes the same total income and that means that it will be necessary to increase the tipping fee to bring in the same income. He feels the consensus on the part of members of the Board is that the situation is unfair. The County Recycling program should be covering the costs throughout the County. (400'e Empire State Games Mayor Gutenberger reported favorable reports from the State in regard to the Emp that the Empire Games held the best games held in New that the City is still receiving participants, the visitors and the ire State Games. The reports indicate in Ithaca, has been determined to be York State. Tompkins County Recycling Sticker Program Commissioner of Public Works Reeves reported that the Board of psi Public Works recommends that the County not implement any type of its a sticker program until the procedure and goals are in place. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY: City /Jason Fane Lawsuit Update In response to Alderperson Killeen's question of the status of the lawsuit, City Attorney Nash said that day two of the trial occurred today November 1, 1989 and day three is scheduled for tomorrow. City /Sagan Lawsuit In response to Alderperson Booth's question of the status of the Sagan lawsuit, City Attorney Nash said that suit has been terminated. The ILPC met and reviewed application for alteration permit under the appropriate regulations and granted them a permit for renovations. The lawsuit was stipulated to be discontinued. Unauthorized Satelite Dish in Stewart Park In response to Alderperson Hoffman's question in regard to the satellite dish in Stewart Park, City Attorney Nash said that no action has been taken. Attorney Nash stated that he will not take action until he has been directed by Common Council to do SO. Possible Lawsuit due to Fire Alderperson Romanowski asked City Attorney Nash if the possible lawsuit in regard to a January 1989 fire is based on remarks made by City officials or other circumstances. City Attorney Nash responded that he could not speculate as to the motivations of the lawsuit. He reported that a Notice of Claim has been filed. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: *16.6(a)Industrial Zone Regulations Amendments Determination of No Significant Environmental Impact Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather (400.1 WHEREAS, the matter of amending the regulations pertaining to the I -1 Zoning District is currently being considered by this Common Council, and WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted, including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) , and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an "unlisted" action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), including the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and may be a Type I action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act (EQR Section 36.5 (B) (5)), and 2.011 12 November 1, 1989 WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the environment; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, be and it hereby does adopt as its own the findings and conclusions as set forth on the Short Environmental Assessment Form dated September 28, 1989, and be it further RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency be and it hereby does determine that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental. review is unnecessary under the circumstances, and be it further RESOLVED, that this resolution shall constitute notice of this negative declaration and the City Clerk be and she is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with the attachment, in the City Clerk's office and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. Alderperson Booth stated that the assessment seems to be written with respect to the Route 13 Commercial Avenue Site as opposed to dealing with all industrial use sites and asked Alderperson Cummings if she agreed with that statement. Alderperson Cummings responded that her reading of the assessment is that it did refer to the full range of industrial zones and the intent of the review is to be a generic review of the zoning change. She said her understanding is that the impact is a positive impact in terms of enhanced protection for ground water. Alderperson Booth stated that he thinks this is not in the best interest for the City of Ithaca. Industrial Zones, almost by definition, have businesses that deal with a number of things including toxic chemicals. He stated that he thinks that changing industrial use zoning so that the City doesn't have to deal with rubbish is an unwise thing to do and he is going to vote against this change and the environmental assessment as well. Alderperson Slather stated, for the record, that this environmental assessment indicates the Route 13 corridor and in fact, does apply to all the industrial land in the City. Mayor Gutenberger stated that after years of discussion of how to deal with solid waste, this issue was never discussed until the County proposed the Commercial Avenue site for the baling station. He further stated that if Council thinks that by passing this zoning change the problem will go away then every town and village can pass the same legislation. Alderperson Cummings explained the rationale for this zoning change and stated that in terms of consistency, we do many zoning changes. Many deal with decreasing residential density which surely has a direct effect on the surrounding counties. Alderperson Lytel misrepresentation the processing of true. He further something outrigh that is necessary a very major part stated that he feels that it is a to say that this rezoning is a prohibition on rubbish in the City of Ithaca, as this is not stated that this is not designed to prohibit t but to give it the kind of critical assessment for something that could have a major impact on of the City. Alderperson Johnson stated that it is his understanding that this EAF has not come before the Conservation Advisory Council and said that he would like to hear their comments before he votes. P9- 13 November 1, 1989 Alderperson Johnson offered the following resolution: Motion to Table Resolution By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the resolution on Industrial Zone Regulations Amendments - Determination of No Significant Environmental Impact be tabled. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (4) Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Hoffman, Nays (6) Schlather, Romanowski, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols, Killen Motion Fails Questions followed in regard to the Conservation Advisory Committee review of the Environmental Assessment Form. e Motion to Refer By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the Environmental Assessment Form on the Industrial Zone Amendment be referred to the Conservation Advisory Council for their review and report back to Common Council. Ayes (6)- Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Hoffman Nays (5)- Schlather, Romanowski, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye. Carried Alderperson Cummings noted for the record that she believes Attorney Dwyer who spoke for the County during the Public Hearing portion of the meeting regarding the Industrial Zoning change made several contradictory remarks. The County Administrator in • previous meeting stated there would not be a problem in getting • variance to the bird problem. The appropriate agency that grants the variance is the DEC under contract to the FAA. She also wished to point out that Harry Missirian, Acting Commissioner of Planning for the County indicated in a memo of October 20, 1989 that there was no problem with the resolution on the zoning change. HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: Permanent Homeless Shelter Report Alderperson Peterson reported that the Homeless Shelter Task Force met today, November 1, 1989 at Southside Center in regard to the need for a permanent homeless shelter. Many key items such as procuring a building and funding were discussed. There is a process underway and we all realize that Southside is providing a shelter for the last time during this winter season. Alderperson Nichols stated meeting and feels, for the permanent shelter and that support for it. that the meeting was a positive first time, we are going to have a the County will be the lead agency in Alderperson Killeen reported that today's meeting was well attended by many agencies concerned with the homeless issue and stated two points: 1) there was no question that all people in that room were committed to having a permanent shelter, and, 2) the County clearly has assumed the leadership role. Alderperson Killeen gave a brief history of the work involved in trying to provide a homeless shelter. QN)(► 14 November 1, 1989 *15.2 1990 Human Services Plan Resolution By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the City wishes to fund human services, providing that they have met the City's review criteria and the Human Services Coalition process and provide a service as identified under the City of Ithaca Human Services Plan; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the following areas of human services are identified as crucial to the provision of a good quality of life for all Ithacans, and that the City may meet the need for these services through contracts with specific agencies. HUMAN SERVICES PLAN - 1990 1. Emergency food, clothing supplies 2. Temporary shelter 3. Child care 4. Skills development and education 5. Transportation - seniors, disabled 6. Housing assistance for low -mod income 7. Assistance to low income for basic needs 8. Youth services 9. Senior citizens services 10. Crisis and dispute resolution 11. Assistance to persons in distress 12. Preventive and supportive health services Alderperson Peterson explained that the Human Services Committee is now doing a very broad type of plan each year so that the City is able to contract and give funds to Human Service Agencies. Discussion followed. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Drug and Alcohol abuse prevention services be added to the resolution as item 13. Carried Unanimously Discussion followed on the main motion. Alderperson Schlather asked Alderperson Peterson if it is intended by this resolution to restrict its application to the traditional human services as opposed to what we refer to as the non - traditional human services. Alderperson Peterson answered yes. Alderperson Schlather asked City Attorney Nash if this accomplishes what the City wants it to accomplish in terms of laying the foundation for giving money for contracting for such services with respect to the non- human services or do we need a separate resolution to accommodate contacts for the so called non -human service agencies, i.e. SPCA, Arts and Culture, Labor Coalition, etc. Attorney Nash responded that the reason we provided this plan was so that the City could spend money to provide services along the lines of this plan. Some funding by municipalities for public purposes is already provided by State statute. Other things are not specifically authorized and it is better for the City to specifically incorporate providing of those services within a human services plan so that we can justify that the City is contracting for services that it could not otherwise provide within its current employee manpower. W_ 15 November 1, 1989 Alderperson Schlather stated that since the purpose of this resolution is to lay a legal foundation for the funding of these services, we ought to be relying upon the legal expertise of counsel available to us in an advisory capacity. He recommended that the matter be tabled for a month so as to allow the City Attorney to review the items in the list and other contracts that are proposed in the present City budget so as to determine whether or not those other contracts could be added to the list. Motion to Table By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, that the 1990 Human Services Plan Resolution be tabled and referred to the City Attorney for review and guidance. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (3) - Schlather, Romanowski, Hoffman f, Nays (7) - Peterson, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols, Booth, Killeen, Johnson Motion Fails Further discussion followed on the Main Motion. Alderperson Peterson explained to Council that this is the third year the City has had a Human Services Plan and that the plan was discussed with the City Attorney the first year. She stated that the system has not changed with the exception of adding some categories. A vote on the main motion as amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: * 17.2 Funding for Comprehensive Study of Tompkins County Cultural Resources By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the Community Arts Coalition has requested that the City appropriate $5,000 to fund in part, a comprehensive study of the Cultural Resources throughout Tompkins County; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that $5,000 be transferred from Account A1990 Unrestricted Contingency, to Account A1010 -435 Legislative Contractual Services, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Mayor be authorized to enter into a contract with the Community Arts Coalition for such purpose. Discussion followed with Alderpersons Nichols and Hoffman stating that they feel the funding should be coming from the County hotel and room tax. However, they will vote for the resolution. Alderperson Killeen stated that he feels that this is a good use of funds. Alderperson Cummings stated that this an investment in the arts (4wel and economic development and is important. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: * 16.1 Northside City Lands - Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the Northside City Lands Committee has had two meetings. There is an inventory assessment of the land owned by the City on the Northside now being developed to determine what is the reusable value use of the land in terms of where are the underground utilities and the practical "no build" zones. She reported that the Planning and 2 C; 16 November 1, 1989 Development Committee is receiving reports monthly. Alderperson Cummings reported that the P & D Committee is interested in the results of the Board of Public Works plans for consolidation. Mayor Gutenberger reported the Board of Public Works and staff are putting together plans for what that re- organization would look like and related costs. Alderperson Schlather questioned the Trowbridge and Trowbridge Contract of October 27, 1989, for the Northside Land Use and Urban Design Guidelines. Alderperson Cummings responded that this is the contract under which Trowbridge is doing the assessment and mapping of the Northside City Lands. Planning and Development Director VanCort explained the contract to Council. Alderpersons Killeen and Cummings explained the goals of the Northside Ad Hoc Committee. *16.2 Central Processing Facility - Report Alderperson Cummings reminded Council that there will be an Executive Session after tonight's meeting in regard to the Central Processing Facility. Alderperson Cummings reported on the time line for the CPF /SEQR Review Process and will send copies to Council members. *16.3 Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services Funding Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the INHS Funding request will be presented to B & A. Their request is for $80,000 and only $20,000 is covered in the current budget. She explained that there may be additional monies from the Eddygate project pay back for this funding shortfall. *16.4 Alienation - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has begun the process of alienation of park lands located on both the Inlet Island and in Southwest Park, and WHEREAS, alienation of both of these areas has been considered concurrently and both have been included in the same authorizing legislation that has been submitted to the New York Assembly and Senate, and WHEREAS, the technical and political considerations for alienation are different for each of the two affected areas; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Planning and Development staff is hereby directed to separate the Inlet Island and Southwest Park alienation procedures and to prepare and bring before Common Council separate bills authorizing the alienation of all or portions of both Inlet Island and Southwest Park. Alderperson Cummings gave background information on this resolution and explained that this will allow the City greater flexibility. Discussion followed in regard to the length of time this process for alienation has taken. M 17 November 1, 1989 A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (9)- Schlather, Nichols, Cummings, Lytel, Killeen, Peterson, Romanowski, Johnson, Hoffman Nays (1)- Booth Carried * 16.5 Festival Lands Transfer - Environmental Review and Legal Investigations - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the Common Council has decided to undertake environmental review of a proposal to transfer title of the so- called "Festival Lands" to the State of New York, in conjunction with the State's proposed expansion of the marina at Allen Treman State Park and the implementation of a specified plan for the so- called "Hogs Hole" area and the adjacent lake JA shore area, and WHEREAS, the Common Council has designated itself as lead agency for the environmental review of said proposed transfer, and :4 WHEREAS, questions have arisen regarding the ownership and legal �? status of lands in the area under consideration, including but not limited to the question of whether or not the festival lands are park lands and the question of whether part or all of the Treman State Marine Park is owned by the City of Ithaca; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Planning Department is directed to begin the environmental review process for the proposed transfer of the Festival Lands, under the conditions stipulated in the October 4, 1989 Common Council resolution, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca require the State of New York to provide financial and /or technical assistance in the preparation of those parts of the environmental review related to the Marina and recreational area expansion, as allowed by law, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Planning Department is directed to notify other involved agencies of the city's intent to act as lead agency, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney is directed to investigate the ownership and legal status of all property affected by the transfer proposal (including associated agreements regarding the Hogs Hole and lake shore areas), and to make a report to Common Council, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney is directed to determine, in consultation with appropriate State agencies, the degree to which the commitments offered by Finger Lakes State Parks Commission (in Common Council 10/4/89 Agenda Item 17.8 Amended) regarding the Hogs Hole and the mowing policy can be made permanently binding upon the State; likewise, whether commitments to limit future marina expansion and /or development in the lake shore area can be made permanently binding. Alderperson Cummings explained the resolution. Discussion followed on the resolution. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (9) - Nichols, Johnson, Peterson, Hoffman, Romanowski, Schlather, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel Nays (1) - Booth Carried W November 1, 1989 *16.7 Rental Housing Commission - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the Rental Housing Task Force appointed by Common Council has recommended that a permanent Rental Housing Commission be established, and WHEREAS, the Planning and Development Committee and Planning and Development staff have discussed the Task Force's recommendations regarding the membership and responsibilities of a Rental Housing Commission, and WHEREAS, "rental" as used herein shall include all housing which is not owned by one or more of the occupants, and WHEREAS, the Rental Housing Commission will provide a needed forum for the discussion and resolution of rental housing issues; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Common Council hereby creates a Rental Housing Commission for the City of Ithaca in accordance with the following conditions: 1. Membership a. The Commission shall be composed of nine (9) members, at least four of whom are tenants. b. The Mayor with concurrence from Common Council shall appoint the members of the Commission and appoint a chair to the Commission, with members selected from the following categories: The members of Common Council from each ward shall nominate to the Mayor two (2) residents of their respective wards, from which nominees the Mayor shall choose five (5) members of the Commission. Two (2) members of the Commission shall be selected from the staff or board of not -for- profit housing providers. One (1) member of the Commission shall be selected to represent the landlord, property manager, or banking community. One (1) member of the Commission shall be a member of Common Council, to serve as a voting member and liaison to Council. 2. Term of Appointments a. All members of the Commission shall be appointed for three year terms, except that the initial appointments shall be made for three members each at one, two, and three year terms such that every year three seats will become vacant. 3. Responsibilities of the Commission a. Advising Common Council on steps to be taken to improve the accessibility, affordability, and quality of rental housing in the City of Ithaca. b. Advising Common Council on steps to be taken to achieve the goals of the City of Ithaca's housing policy. C. Advising both the Board of Planning and Development and the Board of Zoning Appeals concerning zoning changes and appeals for variances and any potential impacts those changes or appeals might have on rental housing affordability and availability. s11 -19- d. Advising both the Building Department and the Planning Department on the allocation of staff time to, and the design of programs for, the improvement of rental housing conditions, and calling upon the Directors of those departments or their designees to appear as necessary at the (6wel meetings of the Commission. e. Readying for implementation those recommendations of the Rental Housing Task Force which call for further elaboration before implementation. f. Studying further those issues and proposals left to the Commission by the Rental Housing Task Force and such other issues and proposals as it may become necessary to examine. r "` +,� g. Implementing programs or activities related to rental housing, as hereafter directed by the Common Council. ' h. The preparing of requests for funding from Common Council for rental housing activities. 4. Staffing for Commission Activities The Commission shall be staffed with a housing planner and clerical services at a level sufficient to carry out the Commission's responsibilities. Alderperson Cummings gave background information of this resolution. Discussion followed in regard to the appointment procedures for membership. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That under "Membership Item b" the first category shall read: The members of Common Council from each Ward shall nominate to the Mayor two residents of their respective wards, from which nominees the Mayor shall choose one person from each of the five wards. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather, Cummings, Lytel Nays (2) Killeen, Hoffman Carried Alderperson Romanowski stated that he thinks it is very important that all members of this commission be residents of the City of Ithaca. Alderperson Killeen asked that Council consider making 6 out of the 9 slots of the Rental Housing Commission residents. He feels that to require all members be residents may make it difficult to fill the commission. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That under "Membership" Item A - the following language be added : "and all of whom are residents of the City of Ithaca - be added to the resolution. 9 20 November 1, 1989 A vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (7) - Schlather, Booth, Nichols, Cummings, Peterson, Romanowski, Johnson Nays (2) - Killeen, Hoffman (Alderperson Lytel was out of room when vote was taken.) Carried Further discussion followed in regard to staff help for the Commission. Alderperson Schlather stated that he assumes that this resolution is not intended to create another position. Alderperson Cummings responded that the intent is to allocate already existing staff. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, that Item No. 4 "Staffing for Commission Activities" shall read as follows: "The Commission shall be staffed with a planner and clerical services at a level sufficient to carry out the Commission's responsibilities, subject to City budget constraints." Discussion followed on the amendment. Alderperson Nichols stated that we either are committed to properly staffing this Commission or we shouldn't be forming it at this time. Alderperson Killeen stated that staff must be included. This Commission is a key element to affordable housing. Alderperson Cummings stated that the intent of this resolution was not to establish a staff person but rather to say there shall be staff, even if it means taking it out of existing resources. A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (6) - Schlather, Romanowski, Cummings, Booth, Peterson Nays (5) Johnson, Hoffman, Killeen, Lytel, Nichols Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye Carried Main Motion as Amended A vote on the Main Motion as amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 16.8 R 2c Zoning District - Call for Public Hearing By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That Ordinance Number 89 - entitled "An Ordinance Amending Sections 30.3, 30.21, 30.25 and 30.26 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 December 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 D 21 November 1,.1989 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 Unanimously ORDINANCE NO. 89 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 30.3, 30.211 30.25 and 30.26 (awr, 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 that an ordinance amending Sections 30.3, 30.21, 30.25 and 30.26 of Chapter 30 entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code be adopted, as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDING SECTION 30.3, DEFINITIONS. 1. That the definition for "Dwelling, one - family ", Section E_ 30.3(24), shall be amended as follows: [ "Dwelling, one - family" shall mean a building containing not more than one dwelling unit occupied exclusively for residential purposes by an individual or family and not more than one (1) unrelated individual, or by an individual or family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals if owner occupied in R -1 zones. In R -2 and R -3 zones, a one - family dwelling may be occupied by an individual or family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals.) "Dwelling, one - family" shall mean a dwelling unit occupied exclusively for residential purposes by an individual or family and not more than one (1) unrelated individual, or a functional family unit. In the R -1 zones, occupancy by an individual or a family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals is permitted if the dwelling is owner - occupied. In the R -2 and R -3 zones, occupancy by an individual or a family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals is permitted. A one- family dwelling may be constructed in any of the following configurations, as permitted in specific zoning districts: A. One - family detached dwelling - A building containing not more than one dwelling unit. a II.A. One - family detached dwelling. H 22 B. One- family detached dwelling, zero -lot buildinq containing not more than one which is sited so that the side of the or near the side property line of the it is built. I � November 1, 1989 line - A 1welling unit building is on parcel on which Ill II B One - family detached dwelling, zero lot line. C. One - family semi - detached dwelling - A buildinq containing not more than two one - family dwellings, each of which shares a party wall or other common structural elements with the other dwelling unit in the building and which has direct exterior access from the ground floor. All Ill II C One - family semi - detached dwelling. D. One family attached dwelling - A building containing three or more one - family dwellings, each of which shares one or more party walls or structural elements with the other one - family dwellings in the building and which has direct exterior access from the ground floor. A maximum of six (6) one - family dwelling units may be attached to form a single building. p OLIGO L.._..— .._.._..� Ill II D One - family attached dwelling. 23 November 1, 1989 2. That a new definition for "Occupant" be added to Section 30.3 as follows: 104. "Occupant" (in R -2c zones only) A. "Occupant" (in R -2c zones only) shall mean a person that is permitted to occupy a dwelling unit or building in an R -2c zone. The number of such occupants that are permitted to legally occunv a dwellina unit or buildina is based on the amount of of lot size. The minimum amounts of habitable space that are required for occupancy by one or more persons are as follows: 1. In R -2c dwelling units, the maximum number of occupants shall be limited to the number determined on the basis of lot size and on the basis of the floor areas of habitable space, other than kitchens, as shown in the following table: Number of Persons 1 2 3 4 or more a. Sleeping room, 80 120 180 240 plus 60 minimum sq. ft. for each addtl. person b. Dwelling unit (other 150 250 350 450 plus 100 than kitchen), minimum for each addtl. sq. ft. person 2. In any other lodging units permitted in R -2c zones, the maximum number of occupants shall be limited to the number determined on the same basis as for dwelling units. B. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the maximum size of any room in a dwelling unit. Bedrooms that exceed the minimum square footage in the above chart may not sleep more persons unless the appropriate lot size requirements are met. C. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, once an R -2c dwelling unit is constructed and legally occupied, the term "occupant" shall not include additional family members that are added to a household. SECTION 2. AMENDING SECTION 30.21, ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS. 1. That the list of zoning districts in Section 30.21, Establishment of Zoning Districts, be amended to add the following new zoning district, to be inserted after the words 11R -2b Residential" and before the words 11R -3a Residential ": R -2c Residential SECTION 3. AMENDING SECTION 30.25, DISTRICT REGULATIONS. 1. That Section 30.25, District Regulations, be amended by altering the District Regulations Chart as follows: A. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -1 districts, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One - family detached dwelling ". B. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -2 districts, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One - family detached or semi - detached dwelling ". 2).�► 24 November 1, 1989 C. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -2 district, add the following: "8. R -2c only: One - family detached dwelling; zero -lot line." 119. R -2c only: One - family attached dwelling." D. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -3 districts, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached, semi - detached or attached dwelling or two - family dwelling." E. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -U district, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached, semi - detached or attached dwelling or two - family dwelling." F. Under Column 3, Permitted Accessory Uses, for the R -2 districts, add 113. R -2c only: Private garage for not more than six (6) cars per building." G. Under Column 6, Minimum Lot Size, Area in Square Feet, change the following: 1. For the R -la zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling." 2. For the R -1b zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling." 3. For the R -2a zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 4. For the R -2b zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 5. For the R -3a zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 6. For the R -3a zone, add 112. One - family attached dwelling, new const.: 6,000 for first 1 - 3 units + 750 for each add'1 unit plus 500 per room let for profit." 7. For the R -3a zone, renumber existing item 112." to "3.". 8. For the R -3a zone, add 114. One - family attached dwelling, conversion: 7,000 for first 1 - 3 units + 750 for each add'1 unit plus 500 per room let for profit." 9. For the R -3a zone, renumber existing items 113.11, 114. " and " 5. " to 115.111 " 6 . " and 117. " . 10. For the R -3b zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling." 11. For the R -3b zone, add 112. One- family attached dwelling, new const.: 3,500 for first 1 - 3 units + 500 for each add'1 unit plus 300 per room let for profit." 12. For the R -3b zone, renumber existing item 112." to 113.11. 25 November 1, 1989 13. For the R -3b zone, add 114. One - family attached dwelling, conversion: 4,000 for first 1 - 3 units + 500 for each add'1 unit plus 300 per room let for profit." 14. For the R -3b zone, renumber existing items 113.11, "4." a n d " 5 . " to 115.111 " 6 . " and " 7 . " . 15. For the R -U zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 16. For the R -U zone, delete "Two- family dwelling" and add "One- family semi - detached or two - family dwelling ". 17. For the R -U zone, add 113. One - family attached dwelling: 16,500 for first 1 - 3 units plus 1,500 for each add'1 unit." C1' 18. For the R -U zone, renumber existing items 113.11, 1 " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 4 . " , " 5 . " and 116.11. q H. Under Column 6, Minimum Lot Size, Area in Square Feet add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "1. One - family detached dwelling: 3,000 for first occupant, plus 500 for each additional occupant. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 3,000 for first occupant plus 500 for each additional occupant. 3. One - family semi - detached dwelling: 2,500 for first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 2,500 for the first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit plus 500 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit in excess of five (5) occupants. 5. Two - family dwelling: 2,500 for first occupant in each dwelling unit, plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 6. Other uses: 4,000." I. Under Column 7, Minimum Lot Size, Width in Feet at Street Line, change the following: 1. For the R -la zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 2. For the R -1b zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 3. For the R -2a zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 4. For the R -2b zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 5. For the R -3a zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 26 November 1, 1989 6. For the R -3a zone, add 112. One - family attached dwelling: 50." 7. For the R -3a zone, renumber existing items 112.1', " 3 . " and " 4 . " to 113.11f " 4 . " and "5.". 8. For the R -3b zone, delete "One- or two- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". 9. For the R -3b zone, add 112. One - family attached dwelling: 40." 10. For the R -3b zone, renumber existing items 112.11, It 3. " and " 4. " to " 3 . " , 114. " and " 5. " . 11. For the R -U zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 12. For the R -U zone, delete "Two- family dwelling" and add "One- family semi - detached or two - family dwelling ". 13. For the R -U zone, add 113. One - family attached dwelling: 125." 14. For the R -U zone, renumber existing items 113.11, 114.11 a nd 115.11 t o " 4 . " , " 5 . " and "6". J. Under Column 7, Minimum Lot Size, Width in Feet at Street Line, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "1. One - family detached dwelling: 40. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 40. 3. One - family semi - detached dwelling: 50. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 50. 5. Two - family dwelling: 50. 6. Other Uses: 40." K. Under Column 8, Maximum Building Height, Number of Stories, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c ": 113" L. Under Column 9, Maximum Building Height, Height in Feet, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c ": 1135". M. Under Column 10, Maximum Percent Lot Coverage By Buildings, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "l. One - family detached dwelling: 35. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 35. 3. One- family semi - detached dwelling: 40. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 50. 5. Two- family dwelling: 40. 6. Other Uses: 35." J 1 ,) N. Under Column 11, Required, add un "10". O. Under Column 12, Least, add under follows: 27 November 1, 1989 Yard Dimensions, Front, Minimum der a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": Yard Dimensions, Side, One Side at a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as "1. One - family detached dwelling: 10. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero lot line: 15. 3. One - family semi - detached dwelling, unattached sides only: 10. 4. One - family attached dwelling, unattached sides only: 10. i J 5. Two - family dwelling: 10. 6. Other uses: 10." i P. Under Column 13, Yard Dimensions, Side, Other Side at Least, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "1. One - family detached dwelling: 5. 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 0. 3. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line, on side abutting a non-zero-lot line building or lot: 10. 4. One - family semi - detached dwelling, attached sides: 0. 5. One - family attached dwelling, attached sides: 0. 6. Two - family dwelling: 5. 7. Other uses: 5." Q. Under Column 14, Yard Dimensions, Rear, Percent of Depth, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": "25 ". R. Under Column 15, Yard Dimensions, Rear, Maximum Required in Feet, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": 1150 ". SECTION 4. AMENDING SECTION 30.26, STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND SPECIAL PERMITS. 1. That Section 30.26(B), Special Conditions, pertaining to Group Care Residence, be amended by amending 113. Density controls at individual facility level" as follows: (R -2b] R -2b and R -2c All other provisions in the chart contained in Section 30.26(B) shall remain the same. 99( f., F� . ) November 1, 1989 2. That Section 30.26(C)(4)(iv) be amended as follows: (iv) Specific standards applicable to a school and related buildings in all Residential Districts (R -1, R -la, R -lb, R -2, R -2a, R -2b, R -2c, R -3, R -3a, R -3b, R -U): SECTION 5. 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. Alderperson Cummings explained the proposed changes in this resolution. Discussion followed on the floor in regard to the meaning of "family units" as opposed to "functional family ". Amending Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That 104. "Occupant" (in R -2c zones only) Item 2C be amended to read as follows: Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, once an R.-2c dwelling unit is constructed and legally occupied, the term "occupant" shall not include additional family members or members of a functional family unit that are added to a household. Carried Unanimously Amending Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That under Item D- "one- family attached dwelling" the number of units be reduced from six (6) to four (4) units. Ayes (5) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth, Peterson, Hoffman Nays (6) - Nichols, Johnson, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel Mayor Gutenberger voted Nay Motion Fails A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously *16.9 Route 96 - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has received and reviewed the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the various Route 96 /Octopus alternatives, and WHEREAS, the City has received the New York State Department of Transportation's recommendation that Alternative A be the preferred alternative for this project; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca rejects New York State Department of Transportation's selection of Alternative A for the following reasons: 1) This Alternative would result in the taking or relocation of nine homes on Cliff Street. The destruction of these homes would reduce the supply of housing affordable to low and moderate income households, cause a loss of taxes to the City of Ithaca, and take a very high toll on the individuals and families who would be uprooted by this taking or relocation. 2) A substantial portion of the park land that would be taken by Alternative A - Optional 89 Alignment, has never been developed for park purposes. The City has recognized that some of these lands may have more appropriate use than as park land, and be it further J 29 November 1, 1989 RESOLVED, That the City does hereby endorse Alternative A - Optional 89 Alignment and requests that DOT implement this Alternative at the earliest possible time. The City makes this recommendation for the above stated reasons and because it believes that Alternative A- Optional 89 Alignment preserves the following future options: construction of an emergency vehicle route that connects directly to the hospital, construction of an overpass over the Conrail tracks, separation of Route 89 traffic from Route 96 via a Route 89 connection at Esty Street, and the diversion of traffic off Cliff Street through construction of a northern connection from Route 96 to Route 89, and be it further RESOLVED, That if the Department of Transportation agrees with the City's position as stated in this resolution or if it continues with its Alternative A. proposal,) it fully investigate the feasibility and cost of relocating those homes on Cliff Street slated for removal under the Cliff Street alignment proposed in its Alternative A onto new foundations further back on their existing lots, and locate the sidewalk proposed to run along newly widened Cliff Street at the base of the embankment to be created under said Alternative A alignment, and further that a landscape screen sufficient to buffer the relocated homes from the newly widened Cliff Street be included in the design of the improvements to the street, as sketched in the drawing dated 4�. September 22, 1989, with the further clarification that the cul- de -sac be eliminated and instead connect directly to Route 89 /Park Road. Carried Unanimously *16.10 Ithaca Industrial Park - Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is considering the development of a new industrial park known as the Ithaca Industrial Park, and WHEREAS, the Common Council has designated the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency as the lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed industrial park, and WHEREAS, an expanded environmental assessment that concludes that a negative declaration is appropriate has been prepared for the broiect, and WHEREAS, the Conversation Advisory Council has reviewed the environmental assessment and recommended that a draft environmental impact statement be prepared, and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency has requested that Common Council provide guidance as to whether further environmental review of this project is desired; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council notify the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency that they recommend that further environmental review of the proposed Ithaca Industrial Park is not necessary. Alderperson Cummings explained this resolution and stated the major point raised by the Conservation Advisory Council had to do with the issues of jobs and the local employment picture, etc. She asked Council if their recommendation was to go to DEIS. Alderperson Booth stated that the Conservation Advisory Council Chair recommended that Council not pass this resolution until their committee makes a determination in regard to a DEIS. Motion to Table By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That the Ithaca Industrial Park resolution be tabled to give the Conservation Advisory Council a chance to review and report back to Council. 212 `-, 30 November 1, 1989 A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather, Killeen, Hoffman Nays (2)- Cummings, Lytel Carried UNFINISHED AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: *21.1 Central Processing Facility - Commercial Avenue Resolution By Alderperson Romanowski: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Central Processing Facility (CPF) located on the Commercial Avenue site in the City of Ithaca revealed serious concerns relating to wet land status, odor, ground water contamination, toxic storage, traffic impact and other ecological problems not satisfactorily addressed nor mitigated, and WHEREAS, the DEIS failed to properly identify, the scope of the total program, the magnitude of the amount of land needed for present and future use and the ultimate agency or private operator of the proposed facility, and WHEREAS, the DEIS indicated the intense negative impact of the CPF on neighboring businesses and property owners and effectively forestalls the City of Ithaca's ability to use this area and nearby areas to address its housing and recreational needs, and WHEREAS, the Spencer Road residential neighborhood has expressed its opposition to the proposed Commercial Avenue site for the CPF and is presenting a petition indicating this opposition, and WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Construction Management Committee has not properly examined the feasibility nor inquired from all the pertinent State and Federal Government agencies for a definitive ruling on the use of the airport site for its CPF; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca wishes again to state its adamant opposition to the locating of the CPF at the Commercial Avenue site and calls upon the Tompkins County Construction Management Committee to cease any further consideration of this area for the CPF. Alderperson Romanowski explained the resolution and stated that there are some items on alternative sites that have been dismissed without being addressed adequately. Alderperson Booth stated that the DEIS for the Central Processing Facility is clearly deficient and he has written them a long memo urging them to re -issue the DEIS. However, he is not prepared at this time to conclude that the facility should not be located at that site. Alderperson Cummings presented a petition from the residents on Spencer Road opposing the proposed Central Processing Facility Site that read as follows: "We the Undersigned wish it to be known that we believe we would suffer severe negative impacts if the proposed Central Processing Facility were located on nearby Commercial Avenue. We strongly feel that every thing possible must be done to find a more appropriate and isolated site in the County where fewer residents and businesses will be so immediately affected by the Central Processing Facility odor, noise and traffic. She further reported that there were many residents unaware of the proposed location. A copy of the petition will be sent to the City Clerk. 0 31 November 1, 1989 A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (7) Nichols, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel Nays (3) Johnson, Booth, Hoffman Carried BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE *17.1 Deputy Police Chief Position - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, that John A. Ecklund be appointed to the position of Deputy Police Chief at an annual salary of $44,698, effective November 6, 1989, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Deputy Police Chief position be assigned to the Managerial Compensation Plan at the salary range $31,087 - $46,017. Carried Unanimously Mayor Gutenberger reported that John A. Ecklund will be sworn into office at 11:30 a.m. on November 6, 1989 and the public, press and Council are invited. "a4 *17.3 Funding for GIAC Renovations - Resolution p By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the GIAC Renovations Client Committee and the Department of Planning and Development have been authorized to initiate the architect selection process for the GIAC Building Renovations; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Mayor be authorized to execute an agreement with a selected architectural firm, for the preparation of a schematic design of such renovations, at an amount not to exceed $10,000, and be it further RESOLVED, That Capital Project #226 GIAC Renovations, be and is hereby established at a maximum cost of $500,000, and be it further RESOLVED, That the authorized down payment of $25,000 be transferred from Account A1990 Restricted Contingency to Capital Project #226 GIAC Renovations, with the balance of $475,000 to be derived from the issuance of serial bonds. Alderperson Booth asked Alderperson Hoffman what the B & A Committee believes this architect is going to do. Alderperson Hoffman responded that the intent is for an architect to carefully, in a comprehensive manner, study the available space and how it can be allocated for the programs now housed in this space. Alderperson Lytel stated that the City cannot make progress until we can determine if both programs space needs can be provided at GIAC. He further stated that we absolutely need the architect to make this kind of determination. Alderperson Nichols responded that there are two issues involved here. One of them is how the Drop -In- Center and GIAC can work together and establish a better relationship. The other is a serious question of whether the plans that GIAC has for its future and its needs will accommodate an expanded daycare facility. Alderperson Nichols stated that he is concerned with the sum of $500,000 because part of the reason for this figure was that it included the cost of the day care. There are many specific requirements to be a licensed day care facility. However if there is not going to be a licensed day care facility in the GIAC building, he thinks the sum should be considerably less than $500,000 so that the City can use those funds to get another day care facility established. 32 November 1, 1989 Alderperson Schlather stated that he also has concerns in regard to spending $500,000 if that sum does not include providing expanded day care. City Controller Cafferillo explained that if the City is going to go ahead with the $10,000 allocation, ($1,000 was allocated at last month's meeting) we would have to take $11,000 from the $25,000 in restricted contingency, then if the project goes forward that $11,000 would become a part of the down payment and would be transferred to the capital project when established. He further explained that the City would need to transfer $11,000 from restricted contingency to the Planning Department on a temporary basis then transfer those costs to the capital project when established. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Nichols RESOLVED, That the last two Resolveds be deleted and that a further Resolved to read as follows be added. RESOLVED, That an additional $10,000 be transferred from restricted contingency Account #A1990 to Planning Department Contractual Services line. Ayes (9) - Nays (1) - Nichols, Johnson, Booth, Peterson, Romanowski, Schlather, Hoffman, Cummings, Lytel Killeen A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows; Carried Ayes (8) - Nichols, Johnson, Peterson, Hoffman, Romanowski, Schlather, Cummings, Lytel Nays (2) - Booth, Killeen Carried *17.4 Youth Bureau - Upgrade Recreation Specialist By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Killeen RESOLVED, That the position of Recreation Specialist currently held by Nancy Pace be reclassified to Recreation Supervisor, at an annual salary of $18,146, which is Step One on the CSEA Administrative Unit Compensation Plan. Carried Unanimously *17.5 Youth Bureau - Increase Petty Cash _Fund Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Youth Bureau's authorized petty cash fund be increased from $175.00 to $350.00 for efficiency of operations. Carried Unanimously *17.6 Commons Advisor - Authorize Release of Unrestricted Contingency Funds for Preparation of a City Facilities and Service Booklet - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That $2,317 be transferred from A1990 Unrestricted Contingency to Account A8510 -450 Commons Advisory Advertising, for the preparation of a City Facilities and Services booklet. Carried Unanimously *17.7 Finance Department - Authorize city Chamberlain to Purchase all Lands at the 1989 City Tax Sale - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That pursuant to Ithaca City Charter Section 4.6 (E) the City Chamberlain is hereby authorized and directed on behalf of the City of Ithaca to purchase all lands at the 1989 City Tax Sale, without competitive bidding, for the gross amount due. Carried Unanimously J I W-� � rJ iD 33 November 1, 1989 *17.8 Engineering Department - Amend Equipment List - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the authorized Equipment List for the Engineering Department be amended to include a new Blue Print Machine, and be it further RESOLVED, That the funding for such acquisition be distributed as *17.11 Reorganization of Finance Department Alderperson Hoffman reported that there is a proposed reorganization of the Finance, Purchasing, and Personnel Departments. He explained that this is a report and stated that it is important that the public understand what is being proposed in terms of the effect on the budget. City Controller Cafferillo briefly described the proposed reorganization as a consolidation of the finance, purchasing, and personnel functions into one single administrative unit. He stated that Budget and Administration feels that the merger would permit more effective use of City personnel while reducing the present level of staffing from 26 to 23 positions. The related net projected 1990 reduction in spending would be approximately $80,000. City Controller Cafferillo reported that detailed information is available. (400.1 Alderperson Schlather reported that Budget and Administration Committee will start their budget sessions on November 2, 1989 and a memo has been sent to Council listing important items to be discussed. follows: A. General Fund A1440 -210 Engineering Office Equipment $500 B. Water Fund F8311 -210 Administrative Office Equipment $500 C. Sewer Fund G8111 -210 Administrative Office Equipment $500 D. Joint Activity Fund J8150 -210 Treatment Plant Office Equipment $500 Carried Unanimously *17.9 Fire Department Personnel - Resolution By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Marcia E. Lynch be provisionally appointed 4.•. to the position of Volunteer Coordinator (part- time, 20 hours per week) for the Ithaca Fire Department at an annual salary of $10,753, effective November 6, 1989. Fire Chief Olmstead explained to Council the process used for filling the position of Volunteer Coordinator. Carried Unanimously *17.10 Audit By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract #20/1989, in the total amount of $22,876.19 be approved for payment. Carried Unanimously *17.11 Reorganization of Finance Department Alderperson Hoffman reported that there is a proposed reorganization of the Finance, Purchasing, and Personnel Departments. He explained that this is a report and stated that it is important that the public understand what is being proposed in terms of the effect on the budget. City Controller Cafferillo briefly described the proposed reorganization as a consolidation of the finance, purchasing, and personnel functions into one single administrative unit. He stated that Budget and Administration feels that the merger would permit more effective use of City personnel while reducing the present level of staffing from 26 to 23 positions. The related net projected 1990 reduction in spending would be approximately $80,000. City Controller Cafferillo reported that detailed information is available. (400.1 Alderperson Schlather reported that Budget and Administration Committee will start their budget sessions on November 2, 1989 and a memo has been sent to Council listing important items to be discussed. 34 November 1, 1989 CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE: *18.1 An Ordinance Amending Cha ter 31 Entitled "Subdivision Re ulations" Exactions for Park Land Pur oses) of the Cit of Ithaca Municipal Code - Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen ORDINANCE NO. 89 - AN ORDINANCE OFETHENCITYAOFEITHACANMUNICDIPAL "SUBDIVISION REGULATION BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 31 entitled "Subdivision Regulations" is amended as follows: 1. That the existing section o 31.48 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with "Section 31.48 Park, Open Space and Recreation Areas A. The plat shall show all areas proposed to be set aside for park, open space or recreation areas. The plat_ shall show the size, character and location of such park, open space or recreation areas, including features such as trees, rock outcrops, streams or ponds. B. The Board of Planning and Development may require that up to ten (10) percent of the gross area of the proposed plat be reserved for park, open space or recreation purposes. The Board shall approve the size, shape and location of all areas proposed to be reserved for park, open space or recreation purposes. C. If the Board determines that a suitable park, open space or recreation area of adequate size cannot be properly located in any such plat or is otherwise not approval may then City condition of as approval o P follows: 1. In the R -1 and R -2 zones, one thousand dollars($1,000) per building lot within the subdivision. 2. In the R -3, C -SU and B zones, one thousand dollars ($1,000) per three thousand (3,000) square feet of land area within the subdivision. 3. In the R -U zone, one thousand dollars ($1,000) per ten thousand (10,000) square feet of land area within the subdivision. Such payment shall be paid to the City of Ithaca at the time of final plat approval, and no plat shall be signed by the authorized officer of the Board until such payment is made. All such payments shall be held ce by the City of Ithaca in a dedicated Park, open Spaused and Recreation Area Improvement Fund, and only for the following purposes: 1. The acquisition of land that is suitable for a permanent public park, open space or recreation area that is so located that it will serve primarily the general neighborhood in which the plat is located. I W- � 35 November 1, 1989 2. The improvement of public park, open space or recreation areas which serve primarily the general neighborhood in which the plat is located, provided that the need for such improvements is established by the Board of Planning and Development or by the Board of Public Works. D. The Board of Planning and Development shall waive the requirement that either park, open space or recreation land be reserved or that a payment be made to the City of Ithaca if either of the following conditions exists: 1. The subdivision of land does not create additional building lots which meet the applicable area and lot width requirements contained in the City of Ithaca's Zoning Ordinance, (e.g. boundary line adjustments); or, +j 2. In the R -1, R -2 or R -3 zones, the parcel of land to be subdivided is divided into not more than two (2) building lots, provided that such waiver shall not be applied to the same parcel of land, or s subdivided parts thereof, more than one time in r any ten (10) year period." SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City Charter. Alderperson Booth explained the amendment. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (6) Schlather, Lytel, Hoffman, Booth, Johnson, Peterson (Cummings, Nichols, Romanowski and Killeen were out of the room when vote was taken). Carried INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE: Mayor Gutenberger reported that the Intergovernmental Relations Committee met in regard to the disposition of Fire Station #5 and discussions are taking place. REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS: Conservation Advisory Council *20.1 Resolution to Common Council from the Conservation Advisory Council on Relieving Traffic Congestion Alderperson Johnson introduced the following resolution for referral. WHEREAS, traffic congestion and parking in the City of Ithaca have become major problems, and WHEREAS, every community bears a responsibility to reduce the causes of global warming -- brought on in large measure by automobile exhaust, and (600" WHEREAS, there are several ways the City could relieve these problems; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City adopt a multi - pronged attack on these problems, including the following specific suggested solutions: 1. the City urge Cornell to charge students for owning cars and put the money collected into a fund for subsidizing a free bus system for all members of the public; 36 November 1, 1989 2. the City work with the County to immediately start working on ways to improve mass transit, including looking into costs and feasibility of light rail systems; 3. the City encourage Cornell, Ithaca College, TC3, the hospital, and other large traffic generators to construct park - and -ride facilities in Varna, on South hill (in the Town of Danby or Ithaca), in Lansing, and on West Hill (in the Town of Ithaca or Ulysses). 4. the City urge the large traffic generators to subsidize a public transit system that would be free to all and would run more frequently, to more places, and at predictable times. (Cornell could, for example, divert the huge funds proposed for new parking lots on or near campus, to the public transit fund.) 5. the City and County work together on setting up a ride -share program. Comments: As we delay, congestion, air pollution, global warming, and loss of open space to parking lots only become worse. It should be noted that Mt. Holyoke, Smith, Amherst, Hampshire College, and the U. of Mass. jointly subsidize a bus system that is free for everyone, provides services within and between the five towns, and is heavily used by the public. The County Planning Department may be able to help resolve these problems, and we urge the City to seek this help. (Resolution approved unanimously, October 16, 1989.) Motion to Refer By Alderperson Johnson: RESOLVED, that the resole referred to the Planning Planning and Development Seconded by Alderperson Booth .ition on Relieving Traffic Congestion be and Development Committee and the Board for their review. Carried Unanimously NEW BUSINESS: *22.1 ZBB: A Budget Policy Guideline - Resolution By Alderperson Killeen: Seconded by Alderperson Booth WHEREAS, Ithaca's public services' demands and legitimate social needs are rapidly out pacing available revenues, and WHEREAS, governmental fiscal practices of past decades now suggest that newer models of financial management are required for the successful delivery of public services in the 1990's, and WHEREAS, the City is searching for new revenue sources including additions to the tax base by returning public lands to private lands and administrative reforms in tax rate equalization, and WHEREAS, ZBB (Zero Based Budgeting) is a financial management policy which deals with the problem of expenditure growth out racing revenue generation by examining each activity from a fresh perspective each year; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca consider adopting a policy of annual ZBB practice, modified as appropriate for those actions which are already obligated on an incremental basis, and be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution be referred to the Budget and Administration Committee for their deliberation and action at its November meeting. Carried Unanimously r_: I 37 November 1, 1989 EXECUTIVE SESSION: By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Common Council adjourn into Executive Session to discuss the Central Processing Facility possible litigation. ADJOURNMENT: Council came out of Executive Session and the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Callista F. Paolangeli City Clerk John C. Gutenberger Mayor