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