The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMN-CC-1989-12-06i Regular Meeting PRESENT: Mayor Gutenberger L I Alderpersons (10: 1 COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK 7:00 P.M. December 6, 1989 December 6, 1989 - Booth, Cummings, Johnson, Nichols, Hoffman, Killeen, Lytel, Peterson, Schlather, Romanowski OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney - Nash City Controller - Cafferillo City Clerk - Paolangeli Planning and Development Director - Van Cort Planning and Development Deputy Director - Mazzarella Police Chief - McEwen (r`' Personnel Administrator - Walker >� Personnel Associate - Patz t" 9 l.� Building Commissioner - Datz t Acting Superintendent of Public Works - Fabbroni "s City Chamberlain - Parsons Youth Bureau Director - Cohen Fire Chief - Olmstead Board of Public Works Commissioner - Reeves PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. MINUTES• Approval of Minutes of the October 4, 1989 Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 4, 1989 Common Council meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of October 17, 1989 Special Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 17, 1989 Special Common Council meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously ADDroval of Minutes of the _October 181989 Special Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 18, 1989 Special Common Council meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Alderperson Nichols noted for the record a correction to the November 1, 1989 Council meeting. On page 18 under "Amending Resolution" (Rental Housing Task Force), the resolution should read as follows: "RESOLVED, That under Item 1. "Membership" the first category shall read as follows: five (5) members, one from each of the Wards ". Approval of the complete text of the Minutes of the meeting was postponed until the January 3, 1990 Common Council meeting. ��III 2 December 6, 1989 SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public Hearing An Ordinance Amendinq Sections 30.3. 30.21 30.25 and 30.26 of Chapter 30, Entitled 'Zoning' of the Citv of Ithaca Municipal Code Resolution to Open Public Hearing By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider 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 declared open. Carried Unanimously Alderperson Booth gave an explanation of the amendment. Sara Adams, 112 West Marshall Street, addressed Council regarding the proposed zoning amendment. She stated that she feels it is a fairly major change and she does not think the public has been adequately informed. She is concerned that the R -2c zoning could have a very serious effect on the established street scape of the downtown neighborhoods and she is not sure that has been addressed or thought about. Ms. Adams would like to see more discussion and understanding of what the impacts of this zoning amendment will be before it is voted on. Resolution to Close Public Hearing By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider 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 declared closed. Carried Unanimously ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: Budget and Administration Committee Alderperson Schlather requested the addition of Item 15.13, a resolution on the Fire Fighters Contract. Alderperson Schlather stated that there are substitute resolutions for Items 15.1, Adoption of 1990 Budget; 15.2, Adoption of 1990 Tax Rate; and 15.3, Police Department Computer System. No Council member objected. Charter and Ordinance Committee Alderperson Booth stated that there is a re -typed version of Item 18.2, Amendments to Section 26.24(C) of Chapter 26, Entitled 'Building Code Enforcement' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code pertaining to various fee charges. Report of City Boards, Commissions and Committees Alderperson Hoffman requested the addition of a report on the Hydropower Commission. No Council member objected. Alderperson Hoffman requested a discussion of the Hudson Street Reconstruction Project and the possibility of a resolution to be introduced on that matter. Alderperson Cummings objected to a resolution being added to the agenda but she had no objection to a discussion. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: Sciencenter John Schwartz, 510 Hudson Street, addressed Council on the commitment of the Sciencenter to remain in the City of Ithaca. He stated that the Sciencenter, however, needs assistance to stay in the City. D 3 December 6, 1989 Citizens to Save Our Parks Doria Higgins, spea::ing for "Citizens to Save Our Parks" read the following statement to Council: "We understand that some of you feel that the City is morally obligated to transfer the Festival Lands to State Parks. We appreciate your desire to do the morally right thing, but in this case we think you a,:a misinformed. The contract that the Mayor and the Director of Fingerlakes State Parks signed in 1986, agreeing to transfer the Festival Lands to State Parks is legally invalid for a number of reasons. One primary reason is that Mr. Mazzella, Director of Fingerlakes, did not have the authority to sign that document. Let me say parenthetically that I like and respect Mr. Mazzella and I am sure that he acted in good faith but the fact is, according to the legal department of State Parks the only person who has authority to sign a contract accepting ownership of new park land is the Commissioner. Secondly, State Parks has an established procedure for them to follow before deciding to acquire new park sA land, and that procedure had not been followed at the time Mr. Mazzella signed the contract. Therefore, in the words of a QF; lawyer at State Parks who answered our questions about this L matter last year, "the contract is ineffective." If the contract is "ineffective" for one party to the contract it certainly is "ineffective" for the other party. It is not right for elected officials to act on an issue as important as giving away park land on the basis of a presumed obligation that does not exist. Your basic obligation, which does exist, is to represent the best interests of the people of Ithaca. Furthermore, Common Council has not yet shown, by its actions, (6001 that it fully understands the extreme importance of facts presented to you to by Attorney Judith Rossiter in her October 1989 memorandum to you. In that memorandum she quoted from Title Six of the New York Code of Regulations Part 617.3(a) which provides that "no agency involved in an action shall carry out, fund or approve any action until it has complied with the provisions of SEQR." I talked to DEC people yesterday and voting on this is considered by them an action. This means that the City has placed itself in a vulnerable legal position by asserting that it voted in 1983 to sell the Festival Lands to Fingerlakes. At that time (as indeed is still true) the City had not yet complied with SEQR rules and regulations which require that an environmental review take place before a decision be made. And under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law, the City of Ithaca, we have been told, can be taken to court for having voted on transfer of the Festival Lands before completing the environmental review. We have also been told, and Attorney Rossiter cited examples in her memorandum, that most courts would undoubtedly declare City decisions made prior to the environmental review about the Festival Lands null and void. In other words, going forward at this stage, is just a waste of time. In discussion yesterday with Albany DEC we were told that in their opinion the City's best recourse at this time would be for Common Council to rescind previous resolutions concerning the transfer of the Festival Lands, and then, after the environmental review has been completed, to vote again upon the matter. In the opinion of the person we talked to, the City cannot make things legally proper by conducting the environmental review now, after the vote has taken place. To be legally correct the vote must come after the review. At the time, when environmental review, the Festival Lands to urging State Parks to Hole, and park land as enjoy." 4 December 6, 1989 you do vote on this matter after the we hope you will vote against transferring enlarge the marina and that you join us in leave that good balance of marina, Hogs' it now is, a beautiful place for us all to Ms. Higgins referred to Item 16.2 (Designation of Hogs' Hole) on the agenda, and she asked that the following be added to the resolution: "WHEREAS, this wetland used to be considerably larger but has been extensively diminished by land fill processes to a small fraction of its former acreage ". Ms. Higgins expressed, on behalf of the Citizens to Save our Parks and herself, their appreciation to Mayor Gutenberger for his gracious courtesy in welcoming their group to Common Council meetings. She also stated they will miss Alderperson Killeen and that she thinks his professional knowledge and understanding of how government works will leave a serious gap. She also wished the two alderpersons who are leaving voluntarily good luck. Ms. Higgins thanked all the alderpersons for the work they do for the City and wished the new Mayor good luck. Hogs' Hole - Treman Expansion Robert Fletcher, Synder Hill Road, spoke in favor of additional boat slips at the Marina. Hudson Street Project Ari Van Tienhoven, 7 Hudson Place, stated to Council that he is concerned about the possible delay on the Hudson Street Project. He is specifically concerned about the curve in the road from Coddington Road to Hudson Street - it is a very dangerous curve. Betsy Darlington, Chair of the Conservation Advisory Council, updated Council on the Hudson Street Project. She stated that the Department of Public Works has decided to go ahead with an environmental review since the project is now much larger than originally planned. She made comments on the scope of work for that project and stated that the CAC will act as quickly as possible on environmental review. Senior Citizens' Council Valorie Rockney, 304 Linn Street, expressed the Senior Citizens' Council pleasure with the progress so far of the Northside Land Use Committee. She stated that the important thing for the Senior Citizens' Council is that they remain in the City of Ithaca. Fall Creek Conservation Committee Margaret Fabrizio, representing the Fall Creek Conservation Committee, stated to Council that on November 16th, the Committee met with DEC representative, Vernon Husek. He reviewed the maps as we have drawn the boundaries and took them with him for further study. The committee has since talked with him and the unofficial, informal reply about the maps was that they looked pretty good. According to Mr. Husek, the boundaries look very supportable from their perspective. Hopefully, some time this month, the committee will be receiving the maps back from Mr. Husek along with a letter indicating what changes need to be made. Ms. Fabrizio said the next logical step would be for Marty Luster to ask the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation for some kind of written agreement, ultimately. That way the committee would have a commitment from the Commissioner and they would know what the boundaries could be. She urged Council to sponsor some intermunicipal meetings as soon as possible on this matter. 19 i^ S r 5 December 6, 1989 Hudson Street Improvement Project Marie Connett Porceddu, 641 Hudson Street, addressed Council on the Hudson Street Improvement Project. She commented on the curve where Coddington Road comes onto Hudson Street. Her concern is that by removing the curve, which is the only method of speed control at the present, they will be setting up a big speeding problem on Hudson Street. Mrs. Porceddu suggested that there be a light install.. =:a at the intersection of Coddington Road and Hudson Street. She has been told by the NYS DoT Regional Director that a Stop sign can be used to insure safe speeds. She feels that either a Stop sign of Stop light would be reasonable to consider at this location. GIAC Pool Nancy Cramer, 300 Cayuga Heights Road, Vice President of the Ithaca City School Board, addressed the Council regarding the proposed pool across from the GIAC Building. She stated that the school district wants to fully cooperate in any way they can with the City to help see the pool constructed. She asked that the City, at this time, refrain from digging or the start of construction in that area. The school district has contacted their attorneys and they will be receiving a complete report on the safety to the environment and the ground in that area and on that block, which they will share with the City. Ms. Cramer asked the Council to notify the school district in advance when they are ready to proceed with the project. Hudson Street Improvement Project Guy Gerard stated his feelings regarding the Hudson Street Improvement Project. He stated that according to the plan that he has seen there is no protection for pedestrians and he asked the City to reconsider several parts of the project. Cass Park Pool Graham Kerslick, 222 University Avenue, expressed concern about the reduction of swimming hours at the Cass Park Pool. He would like to see the pool open longer in the evenings to be able to accommodate more adults and he asked Council to please consider addressing the problem. Fall Creek Designation Alfredo Rossi, 409 Lake Street, member of the Fall Creek Conservation Committee, spoke to Council on the Fall Creek designation. He said the City has an opportunity at this time to protect this resource for future generations and he asked the Council to do so. Token of Appreciation Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, presented to Alderperson Schlather a bouquet of dried flowers from residents of the First Ward in appreciation for all his hard work in representing this Ward. Hudson Street Improvement Project Robert Murphy, 519 Hudson Street, spoke to Council in favor of the proposed Hudson Street Improvement Project. He asked that the project not be delayed. He presented to the City Clerk signed statements from South Hill school personnel and several residents. Skate Board Park Darby A. Green, 519 East Buffalo Street, urged Council to establish a committee to find an alternative for skateboarders and the construction of a skate park in Ithaca. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC: R -2c Zoning Alderperson Hoffman remarked that he agrees with Ms. Adams that there should be more public information on the proposed R -2c Zoning Ordinance. Alderperson Hoffman stated that he believes the R -2c Zoning is most appropriate for areas that are relatively 6 December 61 1989 undeveloped in the City and that we need other designations that could be applied to existing R -3 zones that would decrease the density. Skate Boards Alderperson Booth stated that the comments on skate boards are well taken. He agrees that Ithaca does have a growing problem and there should be some kind of alternative for skateboarders. He is confident that this matter will continue to be looked at. Alderperson Peterson remarked that the issue of skateboarding has been in front of the Human Services Committee for a while and what the committee is waiting for is to hear from the skateboarding community with an agreed upon plan that the committee can look at. R -2c Zoning Alderperson Killeen stated that he has a recommendation of support for the R -2c Zoning from the Planning Board. REPORT OF CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES: Hydropower Commission Alderperson Hoffman reported that the Hydropower Commission met on Monday night and there is a recommendation from that group that a meeting be held of the three municipalities (Town of Ithaca, Town of Dryden and City of Ithaca) affected by the proposal to designate Fall Creek as a recreational river. He asked the Mayor to call the meeting. Central Business District Meeting Mr. Andrew Yale, member of the City's Planning Board, reported that the Planning Board hosted a meeting on November 15th with the Central Business District community. Mr. Yale gave a summary of the meeting. He remarked that Council members have received a letter from Susan Blumenthal on the substance of the meeting. Susan Blumenthal, Chair of the City's Planning Board, commented that not all of the things that need to be done cost money. Some of the things that were discussed could be done without incurring any cost and the Board thinks they should move forward at least on those things and then examine what needs to be spent for other actions. Ms. Blumenthal stressed that the Board is not just talking about downtown and The Commons - we are talking about the Central Business District. That is the area from the Tuning Fork to Meadow Street and from Six Mile Creek to Court Street. Therefore, the Board is interested in all the multiple uses that go on there and maybe opening up the West State Street corridor as a gateway to the City. She said that her fear is that this county and community will become increasingly suburbanized if we do not maintain and support a strong multi -use central business district. Board of Public Works Commissioner Reeves reported on the following: Resignalization of the Octopus - A letter was written to the NYS DoT for their assistance in this matter. A letter was received on September 20th from DoT with an additional request for an update of traffic counts. The City Engineer conducted the traffic counts in October and November and the information is currently being compiled and will be send to the DoT shortly. Skateboarding Issue - The Board of Public Works discussed this issue at its Committee of the Whole meeting on November 15th. Police Chief McEwen was in attendance as well as members of a local skateboarding group. On November 29th the Board passed two resolutions to the effect that skateboarding be specifically banned in DeWitt Park in accordance with the longstanding W-1 7 December 6, 1989 agreement with the City and the Presbyterian Church. The Board respectfully requested that the Charter and Ordinance Committee review the resolutions and also the resolution passed on June 14, 1989 and take appropriate action to enact a Local Law in this regard. The Board of Public Works respectfully requests the Council to investigate alternatives for the skateboarders and to designate a committee comprised of members of the Youth Bureau Board, the Board of Public Woks and Common Council to discuss (awe,, and resolve the issue of skateboarding in the City. Darby Green would also be interested in serving on the committee. Police Chief McEwen received from the Police Chief of Saratoga Springs, (where a successful program for skateboarders is in place), a valuable packet of information that will be shared once further discussion gets under way. New Parking Garage Rates - At the Committee of the Whole meeting A.'' today the Board of Public Works proposed new parking garage rates and fees for permits. This matter will go before the Board in ' resolution form on December 13th. Ms. Reeves explained to the Board the rates that are being proposed. Hudson Street Improvement Project - An Environmental Assessment Form was done on June 9, 1989 on the Hudson Street Improvement Project. At this point, Ms. Reeves turned the discussion over to Acting Superintendent of Public Works Fabbroni. Acting Superintendent Fabbroni stated that the Department is out on the streets every day trying to improve the environment of the City for everyone in the City. He stated that in terms of the evolution of the whole Hudson Street project his office, a long time ago, looked at the environmental process and how this project would be classified. As much as a year ago, and admittedly, before there were three public meetings with all the neighbors involved in and along the project it was decided that it was a Type II Action based on the City's regulation and what was intended to be done on the project. As recent as today it has been reaffirmed that it is a Type II Action. However, with all the activity that has arisen in the last week the Department has re- considered it as an Unlisted Action because some of the improvements, and ironically, the ones recommended by the public hearing process in evolving the whole design of the project required going quite a ways off the right -of -way to re -do slopes or flatten the curve out or to develop the sidewalk from the South Hill School on a primary pedestrian route for the children. Acting Superintendent Fabbroni stated that the department's attention right now is to follow through on the environmental process as an Unlisted Action. There is a meeting scheduled with the Conservation Advisory Committee Chair on Friday. Their report is expected by the first of next week. He said that next week they will be looking at all the input on environmental review and if it is appropriate to add additional mitigation measures, they will be considered at next week's Board of Public Works meeting so they can get on with the process. (640,01 Acting Superintendent of Public Works Fabbroni stated that it is most desirable, from his standpoint, to have as few changes as possible once the plans are sent out. However, the bidding process will extend to the end of January and we can send out addendums as we do with any capital project. Acting Superintendent Fabbroni concluded by saying that we are, as a department, trying to be environmentally responsible. We are committed to the process that the City has set up. c P 8 December 6, 1989 Alderperson Cummings stated that there is no doubt in anybody's mind that there are safety problems on Hudson Street. The question is how can the City correct them and enhance the road and how can we change people's driving patterns. Alderperson Cummings spoke on the process for this project. She stated that the Department of Public Works deserves the support of Council and all members of City government in this process. Further public input will still be welcome on this project. Alderperson Booth stated that he believes the Department of Public Works is making the right choice to submit this project to an environmental assessment. He remarked that some of the criticism of this project may be due to the fact that the Conservation Advisory Council is doing the job it is supposed to be doing. Sometimes raising questions causes conflict. Alderperson Nichols pointed out that he has had a number of calls from people who generally support the project but who feel there is a need for the traffic light. He urged the consideration of the various arguments that have been made for a street light somewhere near the top of that hill. Alderperson Hoffman stated he believes there is some lack of clarity in the environmental review process. He feels the process should be clarified so that it is completely clear to the Department of Public Works or any other City departments in terms of City projects. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR: 1990 Budget Mayor Gutenberger thanked the Council members and the staff for all the work that was done on the City budget. He stated that he is very pleased that the budget has the same tax rate increase that he had recommended and that the departments were able to work within the guidelines that were set. CITY CONTROLLER'S REPORT 1990 Budget City Controller Cafferillo thanked the Mayor, members of Common Council, and all Department Heads in the City for their willingness to heed the severe financial budgetary constraints which the City is confronted with. He stated that this budget represents a cooperative effort of all involved. This has been done in the interest of sustaining City services at existing levels while accepting new and expanded programming in various prioritized areas and all the way battling declining and stagnant revenue sources over which the City, as a local government, has no legislative control. City Controller Cafferillo stated that in view of the fact that the Finance Department is now responsible for the City's purchasing function, it is his responsibility to apprise Common Council and question a notice to bid which has been distributed by the Fire Commissioners and the Fire Department. He said that he has received an inquiry from a prospective bidder and having since been given the opportunity to review the notice to bid and the bid specs, he has several questions. He stated that he would therefore recommend the Common Council request that the Board of Fire Commissioners delay the bidding process until all the impending questions can be advisably addressed. Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That Common Council request the Fire Commissioners to re- examine their bid specifications, confer with the City Controller about the concerns that he has in his role of handling the purchasing function for the City, and if necessary re -bid the item. J THERE IS NO PAGE 245 - 246 ...................... THE NEXT PAGE IS NO. 247 D 9 December 6, 1989 Fire Chief Olmstead spoke to Council regarding the delay in the bidding process. fie does not believe there is a substantial reason for delay. The technical clarification is a straight forward issue but the other matters do not warrant a delay. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: (Woo" Ayes (7) - Schlather, Cummings, Hoffman, Romanowski,Johnson, Killeen, Nichols Nay (1) - Booth Abstentions (2) - Peterson, Lytel Carried Recess Common Council recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened in regular session at 9:18 p.m. BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: * 15.1 Adoption of 1990 Budget E" By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski " WHEREAS, this Common Council has reviewed the Executive Budget as proposed by Mayor John C. Gutenberger, and the Budget and Administration Committee recommendations, and WHEREAS, it is the consensus of this Common Council that the total appropriations and estimated revenues are adequate for the operation of the City for 1990; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Budget for 1990, in the total amount of $28,354,697 be approved, and be it further RESOLVED, That the following sections of the 1990 budget be approved: (A) General Fund Appropriations (B) Water Fund Appropriations (C) Sewer Fund Appropriations (D) Joint Activity Fund Appropriations (E) General Fund Revenues (F) Water Fund Revenues (G) Sewer Fund Revenues (H) Joint Activity Fund Revenues (I) Debt Retirement Schedule (J) Capital Projects (K) Schedule of Salaries and Positions (L) Schedule of Salaries and Positions - Fund (M) Schedule of Salaries and Positions - Fund - General Fund Water and Sewer Joint Activity (N) Authorized Equipment - General Fund (0) Authorized Equipment - Water Fund (P) Authorized Equipment - Sewer Fund (Q) Authorized Equipment - Joint Activity Fund Alderperson Schlather noted that this final budget is the product of over seven meetings and over forty hours of deliberation by this Common Council. He believes the budget reflects a very pragmatic, re- prioritizing of our interests in this City. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That $5,000 be added to the budget for the restoration of the hours for the Cass Park Pool to be open as they were in previous years. Discussion followed on the amount of the additional funding being requested. 10 December 6, 1989 City Controller Cafferillo stated that the Youth Bureau Board is addressing the question of fees. When they do establish a new fee structure, they will send it to the Budget and Administration Committee for review. At that time, if there are additional dollars to be derived from fees for swimming purposes, we can increase the projected hours at that point in time. A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (3) - Lytel, Cummings, Peterson Nays (7) - Schlather, Romanowski, Johnson, Killeen, Booth, Nichols, Hoffman Motion Fails Amending Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That $5,000 be added to the budget to restore the funding for the DeWitt Historical Society. Ayes (7) - Nays (3) - Lytel, Cummings, Johnson, Booth, Killeen, Peterson, Hoffman Nichols, Schlather, Romanowski Carried Alderperson Booth requested that the City Controller state, for the record, what the anticipated cash surplus will be at the end of the year to carry over into 1990. City Controller Cafferillo stated that there are unknowns that are still confronting the City for the last four to five weeks of the year. It is his hope that we will be able to pull together between $400,000 - $500,000 to carry over into 1990 from a combination of sources. He commented that the hope is that the City's sales tax revenues will continue to come in at their current pace, that there will not be a need to expend all of the appropriations that have been anticipated and budgeted for 1989, and certain other items which are going to affect our budget, which have not yet been finalized. Main Motion as Amended A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 15.2 Adoption of 1990 Tax Rate By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the 1990 City of Ithaca Budget was approved, adopted'and confirmed in the total amount of $28,354,697 on December 6, 1989, in accordance with a detailed Budget on file in the office of the City Controller, and WHEREAS, available and estimated revenues total $22,275,302 leaving $6,079,395, as the amount to be raised by taxation, and WHEREAS, the Assessment Roll for 1990, certified and filed by the Assessment Department of Tompkins County, has been footed and approved and shows the total net taxable valuation as $319,968,156, and WHEREAS, under Charter provisions, the tax limit for City purposes amounts to $10,809,676 for 1990; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Tax Rate for general purposes, for the fiscal year 1990, be, and the same hereby is, established and fixed at $19.00 per $1,000 of taxable valuation as shown, certified and extended against the respective properties on the 1990 Tax Roll, thereby making a total tax levy, as near as may be, of $6,079,395, and be it further 11 December 6, 1989 RESOLVED, That the amount of said tax levy be spread, and the same hereby is levied upon and against the respective properties shown on said City Tax Roll, in accordance with their respective net taxable valuation, at the rate of $19.00 per $1,000 of such taxable valuation, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Chamberlain be, and hereby is, directed to extend and apportion the City Tax as above, and that upon the completion of the extension of said Roll, the City Clerk shall prepare a warrant on the City Chamberlain for the collection of said levy; and the Mayor and the City Clerk hereby are authorized and directed to sign and affix the corporate seal to such warrant and forthwith to file the same with said Tax Roll with the City Chamberlain, and be it further RESOLVED, That upon the execution and filing of said warrant and Tax Roll with the City Chamberlain, the amounts of the City Tax a; set opposite each and every property shall hereby become liens, due, payable and collectible in accordance with provisions of the City Charter and other laws applicable thereto, and be it further f � RESOLVED, That the total sum of $28,354,697 be appropriated in accordance with the Budget adopted, to the respective Boards, 1 Offices and Departments of the City, for the purposes respectively set forth therein. The 1990 Assessment Roll has been completed and approved by the Assessment Department of Tompkins County and resulted in the following valuation: Valuation of Land $ 84,546,050 Valuation of Buildings 533,981,487 Total Value of Real Property 618,527,537 (WOOV, Less: Value of Exempt Property 311,052,052 (50.29 %) 307,475,485 Plus: Value of Special Franchises 12,492,671 Net Value of Taxable Property $319,968,156 Carried Unanimously Alderperson Schlather thanked the Mayor for giving the Council a budget which was workable and City Controller Cafferillo for making it work and bringing the Mayor's targets into reality. He also thanked Deputy Controller Thayer for all his work and the Department Heads who met the Mayor's challenge and reduced their budgets dramatically in conjunction with their advisory boards. He especially tha -ked the members of the Budget and Administration Committee for all the extensive work that was put into this budget. Alderperson Booth stated that Alderperson Schlather's leadership through this process has been extraordinary and the members of Council appreciate that and there will be a very large void to fill in future years. * 15.3 Police Department Computer System By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Capital Project #211 Computer Acquisition, be increased by $82,000, in order to modify and upgrade the existing Police Department Computer System, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Police Chief be authorized to enter into an agreement with the Cott Corporation for the installation of the new System Software. Carried Unanimously 12 December 6, 1989 * 15.4 Fire Department Equipment Acquisitions By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the Fire Department's Authorized Equipment List be amended as follows: A. 1 Fax Machine $1,495 B. High Density Filing System $4,536 C. Computer Hardware and Software $17,000 and be it further RESOLVED, That $23,726 be transferred from Accounts A690 -6 and A690 -7 Overpayments and Collections in Advance, to A3410 -210 Office Equipment for the Acquisition of a Fax Machine, High Density Filing System, and Computer Hardware and Software. Carried Unanimously * 15.5 Appointment of Superintendent of Public Works By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Mayor's selection for Superintendent of Public Works of Narayan Thadani be approved at the annual salary and relocation expenses recommended, to wit $54,000 for 1990 and up to $4,000 in relocation expenses, effective January 16, 1990. Carried Unanimously * 15.6 Appointment of Senior Stenographer. Personnel Department By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That Bonnie Fiorille be appointed to the position of Senior Stenographer in the Personnel Department at an annual salary of $15,167 (Step 5 of the 1989 CSEA Administrative Unit Compensation Plan) effective January 2, 1990. Carried Unanimously * 15.7 Appointment of Building Inspector III By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That Albert J. Rich, Sr. be appointed to the position of Building Inspector III at an annual salary of $22,378 (Step 3 of the 1989 CSEA Administrative Unit Compensation Plan) effective January 2, 1990. Carried Unanimously * 15.8 Waiver of Civil Service Application Fees By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols RESOLVED, That as authorized by the Ithaca Civil Service Commission and requested by the City of Ithaca Affirmative Action Advisory Committee, the City of Ithaca does hereby waive all civil service application fees as authorized by Section 50.5(b) of the NYS Civil Service Law. Alderperson Schlather, for the record, stated that the reason for this waiver is that the State of New York, for the first time, is passing on the cost of Civil Service examinations to the local governments. He said that even though it is a relatively small amount of money the Council thinks that it is important that the fees be waived, that the City assume that cost in the interest of encouraging candidates to take these examinations from all walks of life and economic strata. Alderperson Killeen noted that this is not just for potential employees of the City of Ithaca but also of the school district so the benefit will be extended to that jurisdiction as well. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously riU 13 December 6, 1989 * 15.9 City Attorney's Office, Funding for Outside Legal Services By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That $10,000 from Unrestricted Contingency and $2,141 from Restricted Contingency be transferred to A1420 -435 City Attorney Contractual Services, to hire outside legal counsel for services to be rendered in connection with any Central Processing Facility siting litigation. Alderperson Cummings commented on the schedule that has been set up by the Tompkins County Board of Representatives. She stated that the City is looking at 23 days according to the Board of Representative's schedule and therefore it is urgent that the City have someone with expertise available to us instantly. Discussion followed on the floor. c Mayor Gutenberger stated, as he has stated before, he does not think this is a good expenditure of public dollars, to be i +..' spending over $12,000 of City taxpayer's money, to fight another government. He thinks it can be handled with the City's own legal staff and with help from the New York Conference of Mayors, Cornell Law School and any other expertise that we have , in our community or in the State to help us in this type of " thing. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Schlather, Nichols, Romanowski, Cummings, Lytel, Peterson, Johnson, Killeen Nays (2) - Hoffman, Booth (aw" Carried GIAC /Drop -in Center Contract with City - Report Alderperson Schlather stated that the recommendation is that the Mayor and new Council call a meeting with the GIAC Board, the Drop -in Center, the Community Dispute Resolution Center and Common Council to decide the allocation space in GIAC. He said that it seems that is the critical issue that needs to be solved. He stressed the importance of this issue and urged a solution to the problem as quickly as possible. Alderperson Peterson, as Chair of the Human Services Committee, stated that the City has tried to give GIAC and the Drop -in Center a chance to resolve their differences. This has not happened and therefore she agrees with the method that the Budget and Administration Committee has suggested. * 15.11 Audit By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract #22/1989, in the total amount of $36,077.44, be approved for payment. Alderperson Booth questioned the charge on the audit for Nolan, Noonan and Gordon, Inc. (P &D - travel expense for J. Nolan) . City Controller clarified that the amount of $2,724.60 is for fees and travel expenses. $2262.50 of that total charge is for his fee. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 15.12 Sale of Fire Station No. 5 Purchase Agreement Amendment By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has entered into a certain Purchase Offer with Harvey Ferdschneider and Anne Trovinger dated December 81 1988 for the sale of property known as the Fire Station No. 5, and 14 December 6, 1989 WHEREAS, it was not feasible to close title pursuant to the Purchase Offer by September 1, 1989, by which time the City was prepared to close the transaction, and WHEREAS, the parties to said Purchase Offer desire said project to go forward as planned and to consummate the Purchase Offer, and WHEREAS, the Buyer is willing to compensate the City for the financial loss which will or may accrue to the City by reason of Buyer's inability to close on the Purchase Offer by September 1, 1989; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: 1. The City shall and it hereby does extend the time pursuant to the Purchase Offer for the Buyer to close this transaction to January 5, 1990; 2. The City Clerk shall give such public notice by publication or otherwise as may be required for consideration of a resolution to amend said Purchase Offer and any notice heretofore given at the direction of the Budget and Administration Committee is hereby ratified, and shall place on the agenda for the January 1990 meeting of the Common Council a resolution to amend the Purchase Offer in the following respects: A. Paragraph II -A is amended to provide for a T w o Thousand Dollar ($2,000.00) deposit; B. Paragraph III of the Purchase Offer is deleted in its entirety; C. Paragraph X is deleted in its entirety and there is substituted therefor the following: "At closing Seller shall deliver to Buyer a Warranty Deed for the consideration stated hereinabove, sufficient toconvey good marketable title in fee simple, free and clearof all liens and encumbrances except as stated herein. Theclosing shall take place in Ithaca, New York, on or beforeJanuary 5, 1990." "As and for liquidated damages for Buyer's failure to close pursuant to the Purchase Offer on or by September 1, 1989, Buyer shall pay to Seller at closing a sum equal to Twenty -Three and No /100 Dollars ($23.00) multiplied by the number of days following September 1, 1989 that the closing actually occurs. In addition, Buyer shall forfeit the $2,000.00 deposit paid pursuant to Paragraph II -A as amended in the event closing does not occur on or by January 5, 1990." D. Harvey Ferdschneider will be taking title to the property in his name alone. 3. The Purchase Offer as amended by this resolution is in all other respects ratified and confirmed. 4. The Mayor or other proper City Officer is authorized and directed to execute such documents as may be required in the opinion of counsel to the city to give effect to this resolution. Carried Unanimously ,i Ki7 i• 1/j I J : / 15 December 6, 1989 * 15.13 Fire Fighters Contract By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Agreement between the City of Ithaca and the Ithaca Paid Fire Fighters Association for a new three -year contract commencing January 1, 1990 and expiring on December 31, 1992, be approved as recommended by the City's Negotiator, and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized and directed to sign and execute the contract on behalf of the City under its corporate seal. Carried Unanimously PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: Fall Creek Recreational River Designation - Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the Planning and Development Committee is recommending a public informational session and public hearing on the river boundaries and that the meeting take place no later than January. * 16.2 Designation of Hogs' Hole # By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is a wetland inside the City of Ithaca, Y and nationwide, urban wetlands are becoming increasingly rare; o and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is visited by numerous species of birds, including several on the endangered, threatened, rare, and special concerns lists of NY State; and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is a critical resting and feeding point for migrating birds on the Cayuga Lake flyway; and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is valued as a natural area by many citizens, both for its wildlife and its scenic beauty and serenity; and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is used by college and university classes as a living laboratory; and WHEREAS, in addition to the above benefits, wetlands serve many functions, such as flood control, erosion and sedimentation control, and filtration or neutralization of pollutants; and WHEREAS, agencies of both the federal and NYS governments have determined that loss of wetlands is a significant problem, and furthermore that our long -term goal should be restoration and expansion of existing wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole needs greater protection if it is to flourish; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council request that the NYSDEC add the Hogs' Hole wetland to the States regulatory map as a wetland of unusual local importance according to authority provided by Section 24 -0301, subdivision I of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 664.7, subdivision C. (400,11 Discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Northside Citv Lands Committee - Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the consultant, Peter Trowbridge, has begun to draw up the inventory of assets on the site and is working toward development of land use and design guidelines. She stated that the committee will be coming back in January with some recommendations and she urged Council members to act expeditiously on the Northside matter as it relates to the Sciencenter and the Senior Citizens' Council. Qr ri,� 16 December 6, 1989 * 16.4 Cherry Street Industrial Park /Sale of Remnant Lands to Ithaco By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel WHEREAS, Common Council does concur with the finding of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency that the two triangular remnant parcels of land in the Cherry Street Industrial Park adjacent to Ithaco, Inc. (.13 acre and .11 acre respectively) have limited usefulness other than for purposes of assemblage with adjacent parcels, and WHEREAS, Ithaco, Inc. is in the process of expanding its manufacturing facilities, and is desirous of acquiring these two parcels at fair market value, and WHEREAS, the Cherry Street Industrial Park was developed to encourage the retention.and expansion of local industries, and WHEREAS, an appraisal has been obtained establishing the value of said parcels at three thousand, nine hundred dollars ($3,900); now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council does concur with the designation of Ithaco, Inc. as a qualified sponsor for acquisition of the said parcels of land in the Cherry Street Industrial Park, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney is hereby directed to draft the appropriate sale agreement for review by Common Council, and be it further RESOLVED, That this disposition is in accordance with applicable state law and with the city's Urban Renewal Land Disposition Procedure, and is in furtherance of the Urban Renewal Plan and in the best interest of the City of Ithaca. Alderperson Cummings explained the resolution. Discussion followed on the floor and Planning and Development Director Van Cort answered questions from Council members. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 16.5 Ithaca Industrial Park /Environmental Review 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 project, 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. 0 17 December 6, 1989 Discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Schlather, Nichols, Johnson, Killeen, Lytel, Cummings, Romanowski, Peterson Nays (2) - Hoffman, Booth Carried (awe * 16.6 Exchange of Easements Between Laube and City /108 Water Street By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather WHEREAS, a request was received for an easement agreement from Mrs. Vivian F. Laube of 108 Water Street for the driveway at that property which crosses the City's Water Filter Plant's property, and the driveway cannot be relocated, and C4� WHEREAS, the staff of the Department of Public Works and the City Engineer's office has reviewed the property at 108 Water Street -� and the City's Water Filter Plant and determined that the City would not want to build a structure on this property because it is over a 24' raw water main, and WHEREAS, the City driveway at the very northwest corner encroaches on Mrs. Laube's property, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works at its meeting of September 27, 1989 approved an easement for the driveway of 108 Water Street in exchange for a driveway easement to the City of approximately the same square footage along the northwest portion of the property at 108 Water Street, provided that Mrs. Laube supply an updated survey showing the location and dimensions of the current driveways, granite curb line, underground utilities, (4000, and meter pit, and upon the usual terms and conditions handled through the City Attorney; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That a permanent easement be granted to Vivian F. Laube for the driveway at 108 Water Street as it encroaches on City property in exchange for an easement granted to the City of approximately the same square footage along the northwest portion of the property at 108 Water Street; and be it further RESOLVED, That Mrs. Laube supply an updated survey showing the location and dimensions of the current driveways, granite curb line, underground utilities and meter pit; and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney draft the papers necessary to effectuate the exchange of easements; and be it further RESOLVED, That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the documents on behalf of the City of Ithaca. Carried Unanimously * 16.7 GIAC Pool Site By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather (Woo, WHEREAS, it has been determined that the GIAC pool site contains toxic materials, and WHEREAS, NYSEG has acknowledged responsibility for these toxic materials, and WHEREAS, the Common Council has established a capital project to construct a neighborhood pool on this site, and WHEREAS, planning for this neighborhood pool cannot proceed until the toxic waste problem has been resolved; now, therefore, be it 18 December 6, 1989 RESOLVED, That the Common Council urges NYSEG to complete its studies expeditiously and to make the site safe for construction of the neighborhood pool at the earliest possible time. Planning and Development Director Van Cort stated that the Planning and Development Committee had a 2 hour presentation by the NYSEG engineers who are in charge of this coal tar residue clean up. Evidently the coal tars are contained in one area of the site which is partially under the existing portable pool and the other had been right next to the old Markles Flats building. He stated that the materials in these pits are fully contained and they are not getting into the environment at all. The engineers have done air testing all around the site and have found no incidence of any substances above ground level. Mr. Van Cort noted that the person from NYSEG stated that the reason this is on the DEC list is because it is a flammable substance rather than a toxic substance. He explained that they have done test wells in a number of locations including the location where the pool is proposed to be built and have found nothing in the location of the proposed pool. Mr. Van Cort stated that the committee has asked the NYSEG engineers to do a few other air tests in the Markles building to be sure that materials close to the building were not migrating into the building somehow and possibly causing some health risks to the occupants of the building. They also asked that one test be conducted in a home nearby that would be selected by the fact that the home has a wet basement to see if materials might be getting into their basement. Mr. Van Cort emphasized that NYSEG is quite confident they can fully contain this problem by removing the remaining waste on the site and then filling the containers with a concrete slurry. J, Mr. Van Cort stated that the conclusion of the meeting was that we should proceed with our planning for the pool and once we have a schematic location for the pool they could then do further tests in the location that we propose. They would then report on their findings in that location and then the school district would make a determination whether they wanted us to go ahead. Further discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: * 17.1 Sexual Harassment Policy By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Affirmative Action Committee has written a sexual harassment policy for City employees, and WHEREAS, the Human Services Committee has reviewed and approved it; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the document entitled "City of Ithaca Sexual Harassment Policy" be adopted by the Common Council as City policy. CITY OF ITHACA SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICY Statement of Policy It is the policy of the City of Ithaca in its capacity as an employer to provide and maintain a work environment which is free from unlawful discrimination. Sexual harassment is a form of f 19 December 6, 1989 unlawful discrimination and is prohibited in each and every City work environment and each and every situation which directly impacts a City work environment. The City of Ithaca considers sexual harassment to be a form of employee misconduct and considers this type of misconduct to be a serious offense. Allegations of sexual harassment will be investigated thoroughly and, if substantiated, will be met with appropriate corrective and /or disciplinary action commensurate with the seriousness of the offense(s), up to and including discharge. Definition According to federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidelines, sexual harassment is defined as follows: "Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when: 1. submission to such conduct is made explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment; 2. submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual; or 3. such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment." The City of Ithaca hereby adopts the above definition of sexual harassment. The definition applies to the conduct of a supervisor toward a subordinate; the conduct of one employee toward another employee; the conduct of an employee toward a job applicant; and the conduct of a non - employee toward a City employee. Reporting Sexual Harassment If a City employee is subjected to a situation which he /she believes constitutes sexual harassment in violation of this policy, the City recommends that the employee confront the harasser directly and advise the harasser that his /her behavior is not welcomed and will not be tolerated. Employees should keep a written record of any alleged sexual harassment incident, including the date, time, location, names of the people involved, witnesses (if any), and who said or did what to whom. If an alleged incident of sexual harassment cannot be resolved directly between the parties involved, a formal complaint should be filed by the affected employee with either his /her department head or the Personnel Administrator. Employees may also file sexual harassment complaints with either the Tompkins County Human Rights Commission or the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or pursue any other remedies as permitted by law. Sexual harassment complaints will be investigated as promptly as possible and resolved within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the complaint. Department Heads who receive sexual harassment complaints should contact the Personnel Administrator immediately to coordinate an investigation of the complaint. All information gathered during an investigation of a sexual harassment complaint will be handled in a confidential manner. Retaliation against any individual making such a complaint is forbidden. (This does not, however, preclude an individual from exercising his /her legal rights in any way.) �! 5, -7 20 ADDeal Procedures December 6, 1989 In the event that the City investigates a sexual harassment complaint and determines that the incident(s) reported does not constitute sexual harassment as defined in this policy, the employee who filed the complaint may appeal the City's determination through the Tompkins County Human Rights Commission and /or the United State Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Said employee may also appeal the City's determination through the grievance procedure outlined in his /her labor contract. If, as a result of an investigation by the City, disciplinary charges are filed against an employee on the grounds that the City believes the employee is guilty of sexual harassment, the accused employee may exercise his /her rights through the disciplinary procedure provided for in his /her labor contract. In the event that either the employee alleging sexual harassment or the employee being charged with sexual harassment is not covered by a labor contract, he /she may exercise his /her appeal rights provided for by Civil Service Law. Responsibilities of Managers /Supervisors All managerial and supervisory staff of the City of Ithaca shall be responsible for enforcing this policy and shall have particular responsibility for ensuring that the work environment under their supervision is free from sexual harassment and its effects. All managerial and supervisory staff who receive sexual harassment complaints will be responsible for immediately forwarding such complaints to either their department head or the Personnel Administrator for investigation. The City shall conduct training for managerial and supervisory staff in each department on the issues surrounding sexual harassment, its effects and its appearances, and the role and responsibility of supervisory personnel in preventing incidents of sexual harassment and resolving sexual harassment complaints. The City shall also distribute this policy to all City employees and conspicuously post this policy at all City work sites. Copies of this policy will also be distributed to new employees as they are hired. The City shall also conduct training for City employees on the concept and definition of sexual harassment, the issues surrounding it, and ways in which to deal with sexual harassment. Carried Unanimously * 17.2 Handicapped Accessibility - Principal Entrance Definition By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols WHEREAS, on August 1, 1989, Common Council voted "that it shall be City Policy to make every effort to establish procedures so that a building plan that provides only rear access for physically handicapped persons not be accepted as meeting the requirements for access", and WHEREAS, this community and City wishes to provide buildings and facilities that are accessible to all its citizens, and WHEREAS, the NYCRR 9 Executive (B) code book contains no definition in the Uniform Code for principal entrance to a building, thus making principal entrance a discretionary determination within guidelines set forth in RS 72 (ANSI A117.1- 1986), and WHEREAS, a written definition will aid the Building Department in decisions on principal entrances for handicapped persons; now, therefore, be it I Y .,DPI 21 December 6, 1989 RESOLVED, That Common Council define principal entrance(s) as an entrance(s) intended to be used by a substantial number of residents or users to enter or leave a building or facility as a primary path of travel to the building or facility. Alderperson Peterson explained the resolution. Alderperson Nichols suggested the following words be added after facility in the last Resolved: "or any of the commercial establishments therein." Motion to Refer to Committee By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel RESOLVED, That the matter of Handicapped Accessibility - Principal Entrance Definition - be referred to the Charter and Ordinance Committee for review. Carried Unanimously Homeless Shelters - Report Alderperson Peterson reported there was a meeting on December 1st. There was a request that Southside and Friendship Center people come to the Human Services Committee meeting this month. ' It appears that both places are running at capacity and it is only just beginning for this season. They want to discuss with "E. the committee what can possibly be done. Kathe Evans will be attending a meeting in Syracuse to learn more about State grants that may be available. 1990 Youth Services - Report Alderperson Peterson reported that Sam Cohen and Allen Green attended the committee meeting and reminded the committee that 1990 is considered a "swing year" for youth services, looking at the County commitment of dollars, being aware of how that is going to work out. They also reported to the committee that they are going to be making a strong affirmative action push for hiring and internal relations in the Youth Bureau services. They will also be looking at Youth Bureau salary comparisons with other Youth Bureaus. CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE: * 18.1 to Section 4.6(C) of the Charter of the Citv of Ithaca Respecting Penalty Additions to Tax Sale Certificates - Local Law Previously Laid on Table in Order to Permit Common Council Action By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather LOCAL LAW OF THE YEAR 1989 A LOCAL LAW AMENDING ITHACA CITY CHARTER, ARTICLE IV ENTITLED "TAXATION AND ASSESSMENT," SECTION 4.6 THEREOF ENTITLED "PROCEEDINGS TO COLLECT UNPAID TAXES, ARREARAGES," SUBSECTION (C) THEREOF ENTITLED "NOTICE OF REDEMPTION" BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDING ARTICLE IV, SECTION 4.6, SUBDIVISION (C) THEREOF Section 4.6 (C) of Article IV of the Ithaca City Charter is hereby amended to read to as follows: C. Notice of Redemption For all properties sold at tax sale on or after January 1, 1990, the owner of any interest in the premises may redeem the premises from the tax sale by paying to the City Chamberlain of the City of Ithaca for the benefit of the owner of the tax certificate the amount bid as hereinbefore provided plus fifteen percentum. After one year from the date of the tax sale the ` 6, 0 22 December 6, 1989 percentum addition to the amount bid as hereinbefore provided to be paid to redeem the premises from the tax sale shall increase by ten percentum each year or fraction thereof from the date of the tax sale. The City Chamberlain shall, at least three months prior to the expiration of the one year provided for the redemption of said tax sale property, cause notice to be published at least once a week for three weeks in at least one of the daily newspapers designated by Common Council. The notice shall give a brief description of each parcel of unredeemed land and the amount necessary to redeem said parcel. The City Chamberlain shall also, prior to the commencement of such publication, cause such notice of unredeemed land to be sent by first class mail to the owner of such parcel as such name appears on the assessment roll. Said notice shall give a brief description of each parcel of unredeemed land and the amount necessary to redeem said parcel. The expense of advertising and of mailing such notices shall be an additional expense chargeable against the parcel. Carried Unanimously * 18.2 Amendments to Section 26.24(C) of Chapter 26, Entitled "Building Code Enforcement" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Pertaining to various Fee Charges By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather ORDINANCE NO. 89 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26.24(C) OF CHAPTER 26 ENTITLED "BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT" OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York as follows: Section 1. That Section 26.24(C) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled "Building Permits" be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Application for permit. Every application for a permit shall be in writing on approved form and shall be signed by the owner or his authorized agent. In his discretion the Building Commissioner may require sealed plans from an architect or engineer registered to practice in the State of New York for structural or other work, even though the cost of the work may be below the minimum requirement of the State Education Law, and may also require a property survey of the lot or lots concerned in any proposed building operation. Permit fees shall be paid before permit review can commence according to the following schedule: Where the total valuation of the work is: 1. $2,000.00 or less None 2. From $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $6. 00 for each $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 3. Over $25,000.00 $150.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus $4.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof 23 I 6 l December 6, 1989 Other inspections and fees related to building construction: Requested inspections outside of $25.00 per hour normal business hours (minimum charge: two hours in addition to the permit fee) Plan review for projects exceeding $5,000.00 (where no permit is requested) Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to approved plans. Building Permit Renewal Certificate of Occupancy Temporary Certificates of Occupancy Demolition work Up to $1,000.00 $1,001.00 to $5,000.00 $5,001.00 and up 50% of permit fee schedule (amount to be be applied to permit fee) $25.00 per hour $25.00 or 10% of the original building permit fee, whichever is larger No charge if building permit is in effect; otherwise $25.00 f o r one- and two - family dwellings; $50.00 for all others $100.00 plus 25% of building permit fee $12.00 $25.00 $25.00 plus $4.00 for for each $1,000.00 or fraction thereof over $5,000.00 In the event that an application for a building permit is not approved the applicant shall be entitled to a refund of fifty percent (50 %) of the fee paid, provided no work has commenced. If construction work has been started and the application is not approved, no part of the fees paid shall be refunded. Any amendment to the application or the plans and specifications upon which the building permit has been issued may be filed at any time prior to the completion of the work. If there is an increase in the value of the project as a result of the amendment, an additional fee shall be paid for that increase, based on the fee schedule above. If there is no increase in the value of the project as a result of the amendment, but additional plan review time is incurred, an additional fee of $25.00 per hour shall be paid for the additional plan review time. During the period of time that the work is going on for which the Qe building permit is issued, said permit shall be displayed on the property in such a location that it is readily visible from the nearest street. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City Charter. Carried Unanimously 24 December 6, 1989 * 18 3 Amendments to Section 27.45 of Chapter 27 Entitled "Housing Code" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather ORDINANCE NO. 89 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 27.45 OF CHAPTER 27 ENTITLED "HOUSING CODE" OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, as follows: Section 1. That Section 27.45 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled "Certificate of Compliance" be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: A. The Building Department shall issue every three years a Certificate of Compliance with all applicable City and State codes to all rental dwelling units covered in Section 27.44. B. The Building Department shall not issue a Certificate of Compliance to any rental unit as described in Section 27.44 that is in violation of any applicable City and State code. C. Failure of an owner of any rental dwelling unit to hold a valid Certificate of Compliance for said rental dwelling unit shall be deemed a violation of the Housing Code. D. A fee of $25.00 per rental dwelling unit up to two bedrooms plus $15.00 for each additional bedroom shall be paid to the Building Department before a Certificate of Compliance can be issued. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City Charter. Carried Unanimously * 18.4 Environmental Review for Negative Declaration By Alderperson Booth: Seconded WHEREAS, the matter of amending for the purpose of creating the being considered by this Common -2c Z by Alderperson Peterson Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code R -2c zoning district is currently Council, and WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) and a Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF), and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an "unlisted" action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), including the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and may be a Type I action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act (EQR Section 36.5 (B)(5)), and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the environment; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, be and it hereby does adopt as its own the findings and conclusions as set forth on the Short and Long Environmental Assessment Forms dated November 9, 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 I rn 7 25 December 6, 1989 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 Cummings stated the question has been raised that in reading the environmental review, it sounds like it will be- imposing R -2c only in R -3 zones. Alderperson Booth explained that what the proposed negative declaration says is that the evaluation is in the context that most of these amendments will probE.bly be in R -3 zones that will then be amended to R -2c. Some of th,_ `changes that the committee asked Deputy Director Mazzarella t:) to reflect the fact that. in reality amendments might i.n other districts and while his negative declaration did ,iJt change to a very large r„y degree, it did change ta• reflect thaT : :;ct.. He stated ghat any arert of the city, theoretically, C01_110 . amended to R -2c. == Further discussion followed on the r-i oor on c he ±Mier or not the ° public had been fully inform,_�d .bout 'UO L :..,�� Ong change. Alderperson Cummings riote6 for the "r•d that rill agenda from the Planning and Development k:'c;min ` _ always go to all the n�.ighborhood civic associations s:_ i R -2r zcning has been arinounced many times. Further discussion followed on the Ayes (9) - F >cottj , K3Yleer., Johnson, Lytel , Cummings, Peterson, Hoffman, Nichols, Romanowski (400", Nay (1) - Schlathe- Carried * 18.5 Amendment to Chapter 30, Entitled "Zoning of the Cit, of Ithaca Municipal Code Pe ilii.nq to the _Creation of a New Z oninq District, the 11R -2c Zon1w District" and the Adoption of Other Related Amendments By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen GUHNANCE NO. 89 - p-V ORDINA14CE AMENDING MCTIONS 30.3, 30.21, 30.25 and 30.26 OF CHA -TER 30 ENTITIM "ZONING' OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUN I C: _C RAL CODE BE 17' ORDAINED AND i�TED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York that an ordinance amending Sections 30.3, 30.211 30.25 and 30.26 at. Chapter 30 entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal ande be adopted, as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDIM SECTION 30.3, DEFINITIONS. 1. That the defink an for "Dwelling, one - family ", Section 30.3 (24) , shall be amendika.s follows: [ "Dwelling, ems- family" shall mean a building containing not more thar.ane dwelling unit occupied exclusively for residential. purposeshg an individual or family and not more than one (1) unrelated A&ividual, or by an individual or family and not more than two ( ;anrelated individuals if owner occupied in R -1 zones. In R -2 amkM -3 zones, a one - family dwelling may be occupied by an individaL or family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals.] "Dwelling,_ cp4amily" shall mean a dwelling unit occupied e- clusivel}__fc _-psidential purposes by an individual or farni.ly and not more tjis one j 1 or a functional family uni.t... In the R -1 zones, occupancy by an 26 December 6, 1989 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. -_� -- Ill II .A. One - family detached dwelling. B. One family detached dwelling, zero -lot line - A building containing not more than one dwelling unit which is sited so that the side of the building is on or near the side nronerty line of the parcel on which it is built. I I I11 II B One - family detached dwelling, zero lot line. C. One family semi - detached dwelling - A building _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. 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.- I �a o I11 II D._ One - family attached dwelling._ 27 December 6, 1989 2. That a new definition for "Occupant" be added to Section 30.3 as follows: 104. "Occupant" (in R -2c zones only) 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 or members of a functional familv unit 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 ". 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 occupy a dwelling unit or building is based on the amount of habitable space in the dwelling unit or building and on the basis 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: Y f Number of Persons 1 2 3 4 or more ----------------------------- I`f_� 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 or members of a functional familv unit 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 ". 28 December 6, 1989 C. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -2 district, add the following: +18. 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 "3. 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 -lb 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.if. 8. For the R -3a zone, add 114. One - family attached dwelling, conversion: 7,000 for first 1- 3 units+ 750 for each addll unit plus 500 per room let for profit." 9. For the R -3a zone, renumber existing items " 3 . " , " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 5 . " , " 6 . " and "7.". 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" 3.if. J P_�r •y Y)I�' 29 December 6, 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." 16. For the R -U zone, delete "Two- family dwelling" and 14. For the R -3b zone, renumber existing items " 3 . " , " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 5 . " " 6 . " and " 7 " 17. For the R -U zone, add 113. One - family , . . (4wo" 15. For the R -U zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and (480.1 add "One- family detached dwelling ". 16. For the R -U zone, delete "Two- family dwelling" and 4. One - family attached dwelling: 1500 for the first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 300 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: 2000 for first occupant in each dwelling unit, plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 6. Other uses: 4000." 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 ". (400,11 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 ". 2. One - family add "One- family semi - detached or two - family 2,500 for dwelling ". ea c h 17. For the R -U zone, add 113. One - family 3. One - family attached dwelling: 16,500 for first 1 - 3 units (480.1 occupant in plus 1,500 for each add'1 unit." each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 18. For the R -U zone, renumber existing items " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 4 . " , " 5 . " and " 6 . " . H. Under Column 6, Minimum Lot Size, Area in Square Feet 4.; add under a new subdistrict heading 1IR -2c" as follows: "l. One - family detached dwelling: 2500 for first occupant, plus 500 for each additional occupant. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 1500 for the first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 300 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: 2000 for first occupant in each dwelling unit, plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 6. Other uses: 4000." 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 ". (400,11 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 ". 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 2,500 for first occupant plus 500 for ea c h additional occupant. 3. One - family semi - detached dwelling: 2000 for first (480.1 occupant in each dwelling unit plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 1500 for the first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 300 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: 2000 for first occupant in each dwelling unit, plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 6. Other uses: 4000." 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 ". (400,11 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 ". () -11 , F,, RE 7. go 0 10. 11. 12. 30 For the R -3a zone, attached dwelling: 50." December 6, 1989 add "2. One- family For the R -3a zone, renumber existing items "2. 11, 113. 11 and 114." to 113.11, 114." and "5.11. For the R -3b zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". For the R -3b zone, add 112. One - family attached dwelling: 40." For the R -3b zone, renumber existing items "2.11 , 113 . 11 and 114.11 to 113 . ", "4 . " and "5.11. For the R -U zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 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 "3.11, " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 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: "l. 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": "3n. L. Under Column 9, Maximum Building Height, Height in Feet, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": "35 ". M. Under Column 10, Maximum Percent Lot Coverage By Buildings, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "1. 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 31 December 6, 1989 N. Under Column 11, Yard Dimensions, Front, Minimum Required, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": "10". 0. Under Column 12, Yard Dimensions, Side, One Side at Least, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "l. 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. 5. Two - family dwelling: 10. 6. Other uses: 10." 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 o f Depth, add under a new subdistrict heading "R- 2c": 112511. R. Under Column 151 Yard Dimensions, Rear, Maximum Required in Feet, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": 1150 ". SECTION 4. AMENDING SECTION 30.261 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. 21120 32 December 6, 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. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather the RESOLVED, That under "D ", "one- family attached dwelling", maximum of six one - family dwelling units be changed to four one - family dwelling units. Nays (5) - Johnson, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols Ayes (6) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth, Hoffman, Peterson Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye, breaking the tie. Carried Motion to Table By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That the matter of amending Chapter 30, entitled Zoning of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code pertaining to the creation of a new zoning district, the "R -2c Zoning District" and the adoption of other related amendments be tabled. Ayes (6) - Lytel, Cummings, Nichols, Johnson, Killeen, Hoffman Nays (4) - Schlather, Romanowski, Peterson, Booth Carried * 18 6 Amendments to Fee Schedules for Parking Areas: Recommendation to the Board of Public Works By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather WHEREAS, it is the best interests of the residents of the City of Ithaca to alleviate pressures on the City's real property tax base to as great an extent as possible by utilizing City revenues from other sources and by expanding those other revenues, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca should therefore collect appropriate user fees for City - provided services wherever it can fairly do so; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca hereby encourages the Board of Public Works to amend the parking fee schedules for the City's various parking areas by eliminating 11 existing "first hour park free" provisions, effective January 1, 1990, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council encourages the Board of Public Works to enact as soon as possible other appropriate parking fee adjustments. Carried Unanimously Amendments to Monthly... Charges for Unpaid Water Sewer, and General Fund Miscellaneous Accounts Receivable Report Alderperson Booth reported that the item that is referred to relates to some changes in fees which the Controller recommended during the budget session. There will be a resolution forthcoming. 19� D 33 December 6, 1989 REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS: * 20-1 Resolution to Common Council from Conservation Advisory Council Regarding Air Quality Testing Alderperson Johnson presented the following resolution from the CAC: "WHEREAS, the Conservation Advisory Council is concerned about the lack of information regarding local air quality, and WHEREAS, no database currently exists on local air quality, and WHEREAS, no air quality testing program is in place, and WHEREAS, an on -going testing program would define the current situation and provide the City with baseline data with which to compare future test results; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council explore ways to establish an ongoing testing program that should include testing for the common indicators of air quality, such as the following: 1. Inhalable particulates (e.g. from woodburning stoves, road deicers and traction agents). (County Health Department has a tape sampler John Anderssen says the City could probably use, but testing tubes for each test would need to be ordered in advance. DEC may be able to provide a better monitor.) 2. Ozone (the #1 air pollution problem in the U.S.). (Boyce Thompson Institute may be willing to do this testing free of charge. They already test for ozone at the Cornell Apple Orchards.) 3. Carbon monoxide (Cornell does not have a monitor. DEC might. They cost about $3,000 - $5,000.) 4. Hydrocarbons (e.g. from car exhaust) Motion to Refer to Committee By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the resolution regarding Air Quality Testing be referred to the Planning and Development Committee, the Charter and Ordinance Committee and the Board of Public Works for review and report back to Council. Carried Unanimously Adjournment On a motion the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 P.M. Callista F. Paolang(�li John C. Gutenberger City Clerk Mayor ,p'7 1 i Regular Meeting PRESENT: Mayor Gutenberger L I Alderpersons (10: 1 COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK 7:00 P.M. December 6, 1989 December 6, 1989 - Booth, Cummings, Johnson, Nichols, Hoffman, Killeen, Lytel, Peterson, Schlather, Romanowski OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney - Nash City Controller - Cafferillo City Clerk - Paolangeli Planning and Development Director - Van Cort Planning and Development Deputy Director - Mazzarella Police Chief - McEwen (r`' Personnel Administrator - Walker >� Personnel Associate - Patz t" 9 l.� Building Commissioner - Datz t Acting Superintendent of Public Works - Fabbroni "s City Chamberlain - Parsons Youth Bureau Director - Cohen Fire Chief - Olmstead Board of Public Works Commissioner - Reeves PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Gutenberger led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. MINUTES• Approval of Minutes of the October 4, 1989 Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 4, 1989 Common Council meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Approval of Minutes of October 17, 1989 Special Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 17, 1989 Special Common Council meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously ADDroval of Minutes of the _October 181989 Special Common Council Meeting By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Booth RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 18, 1989 Special Common Council meeting be approved as published. Carried Unanimously Alderperson Nichols noted for the record a correction to the November 1, 1989 Council meeting. On page 18 under "Amending Resolution" (Rental Housing Task Force), the resolution should read as follows: "RESOLVED, That under Item 1. "Membership" the first category shall read as follows: five (5) members, one from each of the Wards ". Approval of the complete text of the Minutes of the meeting was postponed until the January 3, 1990 Common Council meeting. ��III 2 December 6, 1989 SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public Hearing An Ordinance Amendinq Sections 30.3. 30.21 30.25 and 30.26 of Chapter 30, Entitled 'Zoning' of the Citv of Ithaca Municipal Code Resolution to Open Public Hearing By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider 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 declared open. Carried Unanimously Alderperson Booth gave an explanation of the amendment. Sara Adams, 112 West Marshall Street, addressed Council regarding the proposed zoning amendment. She stated that she feels it is a fairly major change and she does not think the public has been adequately informed. She is concerned that the R -2c zoning could have a very serious effect on the established street scape of the downtown neighborhoods and she is not sure that has been addressed or thought about. Ms. Adams would like to see more discussion and understanding of what the impacts of this zoning amendment will be before it is voted on. Resolution to Close Public Hearing By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing to consider 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 declared closed. Carried Unanimously ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: Budget and Administration Committee Alderperson Schlather requested the addition of Item 15.13, a resolution on the Fire Fighters Contract. Alderperson Schlather stated that there are substitute resolutions for Items 15.1, Adoption of 1990 Budget; 15.2, Adoption of 1990 Tax Rate; and 15.3, Police Department Computer System. No Council member objected. Charter and Ordinance Committee Alderperson Booth stated that there is a re -typed version of Item 18.2, Amendments to Section 26.24(C) of Chapter 26, Entitled 'Building Code Enforcement' of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code pertaining to various fee charges. Report of City Boards, Commissions and Committees Alderperson Hoffman requested the addition of a report on the Hydropower Commission. No Council member objected. Alderperson Hoffman requested a discussion of the Hudson Street Reconstruction Project and the possibility of a resolution to be introduced on that matter. Alderperson Cummings objected to a resolution being added to the agenda but she had no objection to a discussion. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: Sciencenter John Schwartz, 510 Hudson Street, addressed Council on the commitment of the Sciencenter to remain in the City of Ithaca. He stated that the Sciencenter, however, needs assistance to stay in the City. D 3 December 6, 1989 Citizens to Save Our Parks Doria Higgins, spea::ing for "Citizens to Save Our Parks" read the following statement to Council: "We understand that some of you feel that the City is morally obligated to transfer the Festival Lands to State Parks. We appreciate your desire to do the morally right thing, but in this case we think you a,:a misinformed. The contract that the Mayor and the Director of Fingerlakes State Parks signed in 1986, agreeing to transfer the Festival Lands to State Parks is legally invalid for a number of reasons. One primary reason is that Mr. Mazzella, Director of Fingerlakes, did not have the authority to sign that document. Let me say parenthetically that I like and respect Mr. Mazzella and I am sure that he acted in good faith but the fact is, according to the legal department of State Parks the only person who has authority to sign a contract accepting ownership of new park land is the Commissioner. Secondly, State Parks has an established procedure for them to follow before deciding to acquire new park sA land, and that procedure had not been followed at the time Mr. Mazzella signed the contract. Therefore, in the words of a QF; lawyer at State Parks who answered our questions about this L matter last year, "the contract is ineffective." If the contract is "ineffective" for one party to the contract it certainly is "ineffective" for the other party. It is not right for elected officials to act on an issue as important as giving away park land on the basis of a presumed obligation that does not exist. Your basic obligation, which does exist, is to represent the best interests of the people of Ithaca. Furthermore, Common Council has not yet shown, by its actions, (6001 that it fully understands the extreme importance of facts presented to you to by Attorney Judith Rossiter in her October 1989 memorandum to you. In that memorandum she quoted from Title Six of the New York Code of Regulations Part 617.3(a) which provides that "no agency involved in an action shall carry out, fund or approve any action until it has complied with the provisions of SEQR." I talked to DEC people yesterday and voting on this is considered by them an action. This means that the City has placed itself in a vulnerable legal position by asserting that it voted in 1983 to sell the Festival Lands to Fingerlakes. At that time (as indeed is still true) the City had not yet complied with SEQR rules and regulations which require that an environmental review take place before a decision be made. And under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law, the City of Ithaca, we have been told, can be taken to court for having voted on transfer of the Festival Lands before completing the environmental review. We have also been told, and Attorney Rossiter cited examples in her memorandum, that most courts would undoubtedly declare City decisions made prior to the environmental review about the Festival Lands null and void. In other words, going forward at this stage, is just a waste of time. In discussion yesterday with Albany DEC we were told that in their opinion the City's best recourse at this time would be for Common Council to rescind previous resolutions concerning the transfer of the Festival Lands, and then, after the environmental review has been completed, to vote again upon the matter. In the opinion of the person we talked to, the City cannot make things legally proper by conducting the environmental review now, after the vote has taken place. To be legally correct the vote must come after the review. At the time, when environmental review, the Festival Lands to urging State Parks to Hole, and park land as enjoy." 4 December 6, 1989 you do vote on this matter after the we hope you will vote against transferring enlarge the marina and that you join us in leave that good balance of marina, Hogs' it now is, a beautiful place for us all to Ms. Higgins referred to Item 16.2 (Designation of Hogs' Hole) on the agenda, and she asked that the following be added to the resolution: "WHEREAS, this wetland used to be considerably larger but has been extensively diminished by land fill processes to a small fraction of its former acreage ". Ms. Higgins expressed, on behalf of the Citizens to Save our Parks and herself, their appreciation to Mayor Gutenberger for his gracious courtesy in welcoming their group to Common Council meetings. She also stated they will miss Alderperson Killeen and that she thinks his professional knowledge and understanding of how government works will leave a serious gap. She also wished the two alderpersons who are leaving voluntarily good luck. Ms. Higgins thanked all the alderpersons for the work they do for the City and wished the new Mayor good luck. Hogs' Hole - Treman Expansion Robert Fletcher, Synder Hill Road, spoke in favor of additional boat slips at the Marina. Hudson Street Project Ari Van Tienhoven, 7 Hudson Place, stated to Council that he is concerned about the possible delay on the Hudson Street Project. He is specifically concerned about the curve in the road from Coddington Road to Hudson Street - it is a very dangerous curve. Betsy Darlington, Chair of the Conservation Advisory Council, updated Council on the Hudson Street Project. She stated that the Department of Public Works has decided to go ahead with an environmental review since the project is now much larger than originally planned. She made comments on the scope of work for that project and stated that the CAC will act as quickly as possible on environmental review. Senior Citizens' Council Valorie Rockney, 304 Linn Street, expressed the Senior Citizens' Council pleasure with the progress so far of the Northside Land Use Committee. She stated that the important thing for the Senior Citizens' Council is that they remain in the City of Ithaca. Fall Creek Conservation Committee Margaret Fabrizio, representing the Fall Creek Conservation Committee, stated to Council that on November 16th, the Committee met with DEC representative, Vernon Husek. He reviewed the maps as we have drawn the boundaries and took them with him for further study. The committee has since talked with him and the unofficial, informal reply about the maps was that they looked pretty good. According to Mr. Husek, the boundaries look very supportable from their perspective. Hopefully, some time this month, the committee will be receiving the maps back from Mr. Husek along with a letter indicating what changes need to be made. Ms. Fabrizio said the next logical step would be for Marty Luster to ask the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation for some kind of written agreement, ultimately. That way the committee would have a commitment from the Commissioner and they would know what the boundaries could be. She urged Council to sponsor some intermunicipal meetings as soon as possible on this matter. 19 i^ S r 5 December 6, 1989 Hudson Street Improvement Project Marie Connett Porceddu, 641 Hudson Street, addressed Council on the Hudson Street Improvement Project. She commented on the curve where Coddington Road comes onto Hudson Street. Her concern is that by removing the curve, which is the only method of speed control at the present, they will be setting up a big speeding problem on Hudson Street. Mrs. Porceddu suggested that there be a light install.. =:a at the intersection of Coddington Road and Hudson Street. She has been told by the NYS DoT Regional Director that a Stop sign can be used to insure safe speeds. She feels that either a Stop sign of Stop light would be reasonable to consider at this location. GIAC Pool Nancy Cramer, 300 Cayuga Heights Road, Vice President of the Ithaca City School Board, addressed the Council regarding the proposed pool across from the GIAC Building. She stated that the school district wants to fully cooperate in any way they can with the City to help see the pool constructed. She asked that the City, at this time, refrain from digging or the start of construction in that area. The school district has contacted their attorneys and they will be receiving a complete report on the safety to the environment and the ground in that area and on that block, which they will share with the City. Ms. Cramer asked the Council to notify the school district in advance when they are ready to proceed with the project. Hudson Street Improvement Project Guy Gerard stated his feelings regarding the Hudson Street Improvement Project. He stated that according to the plan that he has seen there is no protection for pedestrians and he asked the City to reconsider several parts of the project. Cass Park Pool Graham Kerslick, 222 University Avenue, expressed concern about the reduction of swimming hours at the Cass Park Pool. He would like to see the pool open longer in the evenings to be able to accommodate more adults and he asked Council to please consider addressing the problem. Fall Creek Designation Alfredo Rossi, 409 Lake Street, member of the Fall Creek Conservation Committee, spoke to Council on the Fall Creek designation. He said the City has an opportunity at this time to protect this resource for future generations and he asked the Council to do so. Token of Appreciation Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street, presented to Alderperson Schlather a bouquet of dried flowers from residents of the First Ward in appreciation for all his hard work in representing this Ward. Hudson Street Improvement Project Robert Murphy, 519 Hudson Street, spoke to Council in favor of the proposed Hudson Street Improvement Project. He asked that the project not be delayed. He presented to the City Clerk signed statements from South Hill school personnel and several residents. Skate Board Park Darby A. Green, 519 East Buffalo Street, urged Council to establish a committee to find an alternative for skateboarders and the construction of a skate park in Ithaca. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC: R -2c Zoning Alderperson Hoffman remarked that he agrees with Ms. Adams that there should be more public information on the proposed R -2c Zoning Ordinance. Alderperson Hoffman stated that he believes the R -2c Zoning is most appropriate for areas that are relatively 6 December 61 1989 undeveloped in the City and that we need other designations that could be applied to existing R -3 zones that would decrease the density. Skate Boards Alderperson Booth stated that the comments on skate boards are well taken. He agrees that Ithaca does have a growing problem and there should be some kind of alternative for skateboarders. He is confident that this matter will continue to be looked at. Alderperson Peterson remarked that the issue of skateboarding has been in front of the Human Services Committee for a while and what the committee is waiting for is to hear from the skateboarding community with an agreed upon plan that the committee can look at. R -2c Zoning Alderperson Killeen stated that he has a recommendation of support for the R -2c Zoning from the Planning Board. REPORT OF CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES: Hydropower Commission Alderperson Hoffman reported that the Hydropower Commission met on Monday night and there is a recommendation from that group that a meeting be held of the three municipalities (Town of Ithaca, Town of Dryden and City of Ithaca) affected by the proposal to designate Fall Creek as a recreational river. He asked the Mayor to call the meeting. Central Business District Meeting Mr. Andrew Yale, member of the City's Planning Board, reported that the Planning Board hosted a meeting on November 15th with the Central Business District community. Mr. Yale gave a summary of the meeting. He remarked that Council members have received a letter from Susan Blumenthal on the substance of the meeting. Susan Blumenthal, Chair of the City's Planning Board, commented that not all of the things that need to be done cost money. Some of the things that were discussed could be done without incurring any cost and the Board thinks they should move forward at least on those things and then examine what needs to be spent for other actions. Ms. Blumenthal stressed that the Board is not just talking about downtown and The Commons - we are talking about the Central Business District. That is the area from the Tuning Fork to Meadow Street and from Six Mile Creek to Court Street. Therefore, the Board is interested in all the multiple uses that go on there and maybe opening up the West State Street corridor as a gateway to the City. She said that her fear is that this county and community will become increasingly suburbanized if we do not maintain and support a strong multi -use central business district. Board of Public Works Commissioner Reeves reported on the following: Resignalization of the Octopus - A letter was written to the NYS DoT for their assistance in this matter. A letter was received on September 20th from DoT with an additional request for an update of traffic counts. The City Engineer conducted the traffic counts in October and November and the information is currently being compiled and will be send to the DoT shortly. Skateboarding Issue - The Board of Public Works discussed this issue at its Committee of the Whole meeting on November 15th. Police Chief McEwen was in attendance as well as members of a local skateboarding group. On November 29th the Board passed two resolutions to the effect that skateboarding be specifically banned in DeWitt Park in accordance with the longstanding W-1 7 December 6, 1989 agreement with the City and the Presbyterian Church. The Board respectfully requested that the Charter and Ordinance Committee review the resolutions and also the resolution passed on June 14, 1989 and take appropriate action to enact a Local Law in this regard. The Board of Public Works respectfully requests the Council to investigate alternatives for the skateboarders and to designate a committee comprised of members of the Youth Bureau Board, the Board of Public Woks and Common Council to discuss (awe,, and resolve the issue of skateboarding in the City. Darby Green would also be interested in serving on the committee. Police Chief McEwen received from the Police Chief of Saratoga Springs, (where a successful program for skateboarders is in place), a valuable packet of information that will be shared once further discussion gets under way. New Parking Garage Rates - At the Committee of the Whole meeting A.'' today the Board of Public Works proposed new parking garage rates and fees for permits. This matter will go before the Board in ' resolution form on December 13th. Ms. Reeves explained to the Board the rates that are being proposed. Hudson Street Improvement Project - An Environmental Assessment Form was done on June 9, 1989 on the Hudson Street Improvement Project. At this point, Ms. Reeves turned the discussion over to Acting Superintendent of Public Works Fabbroni. Acting Superintendent Fabbroni stated that the Department is out on the streets every day trying to improve the environment of the City for everyone in the City. He stated that in terms of the evolution of the whole Hudson Street project his office, a long time ago, looked at the environmental process and how this project would be classified. As much as a year ago, and admittedly, before there were three public meetings with all the neighbors involved in and along the project it was decided that it was a Type II Action based on the City's regulation and what was intended to be done on the project. As recent as today it has been reaffirmed that it is a Type II Action. However, with all the activity that has arisen in the last week the Department has re- considered it as an Unlisted Action because some of the improvements, and ironically, the ones recommended by the public hearing process in evolving the whole design of the project required going quite a ways off the right -of -way to re -do slopes or flatten the curve out or to develop the sidewalk from the South Hill School on a primary pedestrian route for the children. Acting Superintendent Fabbroni stated that the department's attention right now is to follow through on the environmental process as an Unlisted Action. There is a meeting scheduled with the Conservation Advisory Committee Chair on Friday. Their report is expected by the first of next week. He said that next week they will be looking at all the input on environmental review and if it is appropriate to add additional mitigation measures, they will be considered at next week's Board of Public Works meeting so they can get on with the process. (640,01 Acting Superintendent of Public Works Fabbroni stated that it is most desirable, from his standpoint, to have as few changes as possible once the plans are sent out. However, the bidding process will extend to the end of January and we can send out addendums as we do with any capital project. Acting Superintendent Fabbroni concluded by saying that we are, as a department, trying to be environmentally responsible. We are committed to the process that the City has set up. c P 8 December 6, 1989 Alderperson Cummings stated that there is no doubt in anybody's mind that there are safety problems on Hudson Street. The question is how can the City correct them and enhance the road and how can we change people's driving patterns. Alderperson Cummings spoke on the process for this project. She stated that the Department of Public Works deserves the support of Council and all members of City government in this process. Further public input will still be welcome on this project. Alderperson Booth stated that he believes the Department of Public Works is making the right choice to submit this project to an environmental assessment. He remarked that some of the criticism of this project may be due to the fact that the Conservation Advisory Council is doing the job it is supposed to be doing. Sometimes raising questions causes conflict. Alderperson Nichols pointed out that he has had a number of calls from people who generally support the project but who feel there is a need for the traffic light. He urged the consideration of the various arguments that have been made for a street light somewhere near the top of that hill. Alderperson Hoffman stated he believes there is some lack of clarity in the environmental review process. He feels the process should be clarified so that it is completely clear to the Department of Public Works or any other City departments in terms of City projects. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE MAYOR: 1990 Budget Mayor Gutenberger thanked the Council members and the staff for all the work that was done on the City budget. He stated that he is very pleased that the budget has the same tax rate increase that he had recommended and that the departments were able to work within the guidelines that were set. CITY CONTROLLER'S REPORT 1990 Budget City Controller Cafferillo thanked the Mayor, members of Common Council, and all Department Heads in the City for their willingness to heed the severe financial budgetary constraints which the City is confronted with. He stated that this budget represents a cooperative effort of all involved. This has been done in the interest of sustaining City services at existing levels while accepting new and expanded programming in various prioritized areas and all the way battling declining and stagnant revenue sources over which the City, as a local government, has no legislative control. City Controller Cafferillo stated that in view of the fact that the Finance Department is now responsible for the City's purchasing function, it is his responsibility to apprise Common Council and question a notice to bid which has been distributed by the Fire Commissioners and the Fire Department. He said that he has received an inquiry from a prospective bidder and having since been given the opportunity to review the notice to bid and the bid specs, he has several questions. He stated that he would therefore recommend the Common Council request that the Board of Fire Commissioners delay the bidding process until all the impending questions can be advisably addressed. Resolution By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That Common Council request the Fire Commissioners to re- examine their bid specifications, confer with the City Controller about the concerns that he has in his role of handling the purchasing function for the City, and if necessary re -bid the item. J THERE IS NO PAGE 245 - 246 ...................... THE NEXT PAGE IS NO. 247 D 9 December 6, 1989 Fire Chief Olmstead spoke to Council regarding the delay in the bidding process. fie does not believe there is a substantial reason for delay. The technical clarification is a straight forward issue but the other matters do not warrant a delay. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: (Woo" Ayes (7) - Schlather, Cummings, Hoffman, Romanowski,Johnson, Killeen, Nichols Nay (1) - Booth Abstentions (2) - Peterson, Lytel Carried Recess Common Council recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened in regular session at 9:18 p.m. BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: * 15.1 Adoption of 1990 Budget E" By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski " WHEREAS, this Common Council has reviewed the Executive Budget as proposed by Mayor John C. Gutenberger, and the Budget and Administration Committee recommendations, and WHEREAS, it is the consensus of this Common Council that the total appropriations and estimated revenues are adequate for the operation of the City for 1990; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Budget for 1990, in the total amount of $28,354,697 be approved, and be it further RESOLVED, That the following sections of the 1990 budget be approved: (A) General Fund Appropriations (B) Water Fund Appropriations (C) Sewer Fund Appropriations (D) Joint Activity Fund Appropriations (E) General Fund Revenues (F) Water Fund Revenues (G) Sewer Fund Revenues (H) Joint Activity Fund Revenues (I) Debt Retirement Schedule (J) Capital Projects (K) Schedule of Salaries and Positions (L) Schedule of Salaries and Positions - Fund (M) Schedule of Salaries and Positions - Fund - General Fund Water and Sewer Joint Activity (N) Authorized Equipment - General Fund (0) Authorized Equipment - Water Fund (P) Authorized Equipment - Sewer Fund (Q) Authorized Equipment - Joint Activity Fund Alderperson Schlather noted that this final budget is the product of over seven meetings and over forty hours of deliberation by this Common Council. He believes the budget reflects a very pragmatic, re- prioritizing of our interests in this City. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Lytel: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings RESOLVED, That $5,000 be added to the budget for the restoration of the hours for the Cass Park Pool to be open as they were in previous years. Discussion followed on the amount of the additional funding being requested. 10 December 6, 1989 City Controller Cafferillo stated that the Youth Bureau Board is addressing the question of fees. When they do establish a new fee structure, they will send it to the Budget and Administration Committee for review. At that time, if there are additional dollars to be derived from fees for swimming purposes, we can increase the projected hours at that point in time. A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (3) - Lytel, Cummings, Peterson Nays (7) - Schlather, Romanowski, Johnson, Killeen, Booth, Nichols, Hoffman Motion Fails Amending Resolution By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That $5,000 be added to the budget to restore the funding for the DeWitt Historical Society. Ayes (7) - Nays (3) - Lytel, Cummings, Johnson, Booth, Killeen, Peterson, Hoffman Nichols, Schlather, Romanowski Carried Alderperson Booth requested that the City Controller state, for the record, what the anticipated cash surplus will be at the end of the year to carry over into 1990. City Controller Cafferillo stated that there are unknowns that are still confronting the City for the last four to five weeks of the year. It is his hope that we will be able to pull together between $400,000 - $500,000 to carry over into 1990 from a combination of sources. He commented that the hope is that the City's sales tax revenues will continue to come in at their current pace, that there will not be a need to expend all of the appropriations that have been anticipated and budgeted for 1989, and certain other items which are going to affect our budget, which have not yet been finalized. Main Motion as Amended A vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 15.2 Adoption of 1990 Tax Rate By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the 1990 City of Ithaca Budget was approved, adopted'and confirmed in the total amount of $28,354,697 on December 6, 1989, in accordance with a detailed Budget on file in the office of the City Controller, and WHEREAS, available and estimated revenues total $22,275,302 leaving $6,079,395, as the amount to be raised by taxation, and WHEREAS, the Assessment Roll for 1990, certified and filed by the Assessment Department of Tompkins County, has been footed and approved and shows the total net taxable valuation as $319,968,156, and WHEREAS, under Charter provisions, the tax limit for City purposes amounts to $10,809,676 for 1990; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Tax Rate for general purposes, for the fiscal year 1990, be, and the same hereby is, established and fixed at $19.00 per $1,000 of taxable valuation as shown, certified and extended against the respective properties on the 1990 Tax Roll, thereby making a total tax levy, as near as may be, of $6,079,395, and be it further 11 December 6, 1989 RESOLVED, That the amount of said tax levy be spread, and the same hereby is levied upon and against the respective properties shown on said City Tax Roll, in accordance with their respective net taxable valuation, at the rate of $19.00 per $1,000 of such taxable valuation, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Chamberlain be, and hereby is, directed to extend and apportion the City Tax as above, and that upon the completion of the extension of said Roll, the City Clerk shall prepare a warrant on the City Chamberlain for the collection of said levy; and the Mayor and the City Clerk hereby are authorized and directed to sign and affix the corporate seal to such warrant and forthwith to file the same with said Tax Roll with the City Chamberlain, and be it further RESOLVED, That upon the execution and filing of said warrant and Tax Roll with the City Chamberlain, the amounts of the City Tax a; set opposite each and every property shall hereby become liens, due, payable and collectible in accordance with provisions of the City Charter and other laws applicable thereto, and be it further f � RESOLVED, That the total sum of $28,354,697 be appropriated in accordance with the Budget adopted, to the respective Boards, 1 Offices and Departments of the City, for the purposes respectively set forth therein. The 1990 Assessment Roll has been completed and approved by the Assessment Department of Tompkins County and resulted in the following valuation: Valuation of Land $ 84,546,050 Valuation of Buildings 533,981,487 Total Value of Real Property 618,527,537 (WOOV, Less: Value of Exempt Property 311,052,052 (50.29 %) 307,475,485 Plus: Value of Special Franchises 12,492,671 Net Value of Taxable Property $319,968,156 Carried Unanimously Alderperson Schlather thanked the Mayor for giving the Council a budget which was workable and City Controller Cafferillo for making it work and bringing the Mayor's targets into reality. He also thanked Deputy Controller Thayer for all his work and the Department Heads who met the Mayor's challenge and reduced their budgets dramatically in conjunction with their advisory boards. He especially tha -ked the members of the Budget and Administration Committee for all the extensive work that was put into this budget. Alderperson Booth stated that Alderperson Schlather's leadership through this process has been extraordinary and the members of Council appreciate that and there will be a very large void to fill in future years. * 15.3 Police Department Computer System By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That Capital Project #211 Computer Acquisition, be increased by $82,000, in order to modify and upgrade the existing Police Department Computer System, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Police Chief be authorized to enter into an agreement with the Cott Corporation for the installation of the new System Software. Carried Unanimously 12 December 6, 1989 * 15.4 Fire Department Equipment Acquisitions By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the Fire Department's Authorized Equipment List be amended as follows: A. 1 Fax Machine $1,495 B. High Density Filing System $4,536 C. Computer Hardware and Software $17,000 and be it further RESOLVED, That $23,726 be transferred from Accounts A690 -6 and A690 -7 Overpayments and Collections in Advance, to A3410 -210 Office Equipment for the Acquisition of a Fax Machine, High Density Filing System, and Computer Hardware and Software. Carried Unanimously * 15.5 Appointment of Superintendent of Public Works By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Mayor's selection for Superintendent of Public Works of Narayan Thadani be approved at the annual salary and relocation expenses recommended, to wit $54,000 for 1990 and up to $4,000 in relocation expenses, effective January 16, 1990. Carried Unanimously * 15.6 Appointment of Senior Stenographer. Personnel Department By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That Bonnie Fiorille be appointed to the position of Senior Stenographer in the Personnel Department at an annual salary of $15,167 (Step 5 of the 1989 CSEA Administrative Unit Compensation Plan) effective January 2, 1990. Carried Unanimously * 15.7 Appointment of Building Inspector III By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That Albert J. Rich, Sr. be appointed to the position of Building Inspector III at an annual salary of $22,378 (Step 3 of the 1989 CSEA Administrative Unit Compensation Plan) effective January 2, 1990. Carried Unanimously * 15.8 Waiver of Civil Service Application Fees By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols RESOLVED, That as authorized by the Ithaca Civil Service Commission and requested by the City of Ithaca Affirmative Action Advisory Committee, the City of Ithaca does hereby waive all civil service application fees as authorized by Section 50.5(b) of the NYS Civil Service Law. Alderperson Schlather, for the record, stated that the reason for this waiver is that the State of New York, for the first time, is passing on the cost of Civil Service examinations to the local governments. He said that even though it is a relatively small amount of money the Council thinks that it is important that the fees be waived, that the City assume that cost in the interest of encouraging candidates to take these examinations from all walks of life and economic strata. Alderperson Killeen noted that this is not just for potential employees of the City of Ithaca but also of the school district so the benefit will be extended to that jurisdiction as well. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously riU 13 December 6, 1989 * 15.9 City Attorney's Office, Funding for Outside Legal Services By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That $10,000 from Unrestricted Contingency and $2,141 from Restricted Contingency be transferred to A1420 -435 City Attorney Contractual Services, to hire outside legal counsel for services to be rendered in connection with any Central Processing Facility siting litigation. Alderperson Cummings commented on the schedule that has been set up by the Tompkins County Board of Representatives. She stated that the City is looking at 23 days according to the Board of Representative's schedule and therefore it is urgent that the City have someone with expertise available to us instantly. Discussion followed on the floor. c Mayor Gutenberger stated, as he has stated before, he does not think this is a good expenditure of public dollars, to be i +..' spending over $12,000 of City taxpayer's money, to fight another government. He thinks it can be handled with the City's own legal staff and with help from the New York Conference of Mayors, Cornell Law School and any other expertise that we have , in our community or in the State to help us in this type of " thing. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Schlather, Nichols, Romanowski, Cummings, Lytel, Peterson, Johnson, Killeen Nays (2) - Hoffman, Booth (aw" Carried GIAC /Drop -in Center Contract with City - Report Alderperson Schlather stated that the recommendation is that the Mayor and new Council call a meeting with the GIAC Board, the Drop -in Center, the Community Dispute Resolution Center and Common Council to decide the allocation space in GIAC. He said that it seems that is the critical issue that needs to be solved. He stressed the importance of this issue and urged a solution to the problem as quickly as possible. Alderperson Peterson, as Chair of the Human Services Committee, stated that the City has tried to give GIAC and the Drop -in Center a chance to resolve their differences. This has not happened and therefore she agrees with the method that the Budget and Administration Committee has suggested. * 15.11 Audit By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Romanowski RESOLVED, That the bills presented, as listed on Audit Abstract #22/1989, in the total amount of $36,077.44, be approved for payment. Alderperson Booth questioned the charge on the audit for Nolan, Noonan and Gordon, Inc. (P &D - travel expense for J. Nolan) . City Controller clarified that the amount of $2,724.60 is for fees and travel expenses. $2262.50 of that total charge is for his fee. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 15.12 Sale of Fire Station No. 5 Purchase Agreement Amendment By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has entered into a certain Purchase Offer with Harvey Ferdschneider and Anne Trovinger dated December 81 1988 for the sale of property known as the Fire Station No. 5, and 14 December 6, 1989 WHEREAS, it was not feasible to close title pursuant to the Purchase Offer by September 1, 1989, by which time the City was prepared to close the transaction, and WHEREAS, the parties to said Purchase Offer desire said project to go forward as planned and to consummate the Purchase Offer, and WHEREAS, the Buyer is willing to compensate the City for the financial loss which will or may accrue to the City by reason of Buyer's inability to close on the Purchase Offer by September 1, 1989; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: 1. The City shall and it hereby does extend the time pursuant to the Purchase Offer for the Buyer to close this transaction to January 5, 1990; 2. The City Clerk shall give such public notice by publication or otherwise as may be required for consideration of a resolution to amend said Purchase Offer and any notice heretofore given at the direction of the Budget and Administration Committee is hereby ratified, and shall place on the agenda for the January 1990 meeting of the Common Council a resolution to amend the Purchase Offer in the following respects: A. Paragraph II -A is amended to provide for a T w o Thousand Dollar ($2,000.00) deposit; B. Paragraph III of the Purchase Offer is deleted in its entirety; C. Paragraph X is deleted in its entirety and there is substituted therefor the following: "At closing Seller shall deliver to Buyer a Warranty Deed for the consideration stated hereinabove, sufficient toconvey good marketable title in fee simple, free and clearof all liens and encumbrances except as stated herein. Theclosing shall take place in Ithaca, New York, on or beforeJanuary 5, 1990." "As and for liquidated damages for Buyer's failure to close pursuant to the Purchase Offer on or by September 1, 1989, Buyer shall pay to Seller at closing a sum equal to Twenty -Three and No /100 Dollars ($23.00) multiplied by the number of days following September 1, 1989 that the closing actually occurs. In addition, Buyer shall forfeit the $2,000.00 deposit paid pursuant to Paragraph II -A as amended in the event closing does not occur on or by January 5, 1990." D. Harvey Ferdschneider will be taking title to the property in his name alone. 3. The Purchase Offer as amended by this resolution is in all other respects ratified and confirmed. 4. The Mayor or other proper City Officer is authorized and directed to execute such documents as may be required in the opinion of counsel to the city to give effect to this resolution. Carried Unanimously ,i Ki7 i• 1/j I J : / 15 December 6, 1989 * 15.13 Fire Fighters Contract By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the Agreement between the City of Ithaca and the Ithaca Paid Fire Fighters Association for a new three -year contract commencing January 1, 1990 and expiring on December 31, 1992, be approved as recommended by the City's Negotiator, and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized and directed to sign and execute the contract on behalf of the City under its corporate seal. Carried Unanimously PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: Fall Creek Recreational River Designation - Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the Planning and Development Committee is recommending a public informational session and public hearing on the river boundaries and that the meeting take place no later than January. * 16.2 Designation of Hogs' Hole # By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is a wetland inside the City of Ithaca, Y and nationwide, urban wetlands are becoming increasingly rare; o and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is visited by numerous species of birds, including several on the endangered, threatened, rare, and special concerns lists of NY State; and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is a critical resting and feeding point for migrating birds on the Cayuga Lake flyway; and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is valued as a natural area by many citizens, both for its wildlife and its scenic beauty and serenity; and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole is used by college and university classes as a living laboratory; and WHEREAS, in addition to the above benefits, wetlands serve many functions, such as flood control, erosion and sedimentation control, and filtration or neutralization of pollutants; and WHEREAS, agencies of both the federal and NYS governments have determined that loss of wetlands is a significant problem, and furthermore that our long -term goal should be restoration and expansion of existing wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Hogs' Hole needs greater protection if it is to flourish; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council request that the NYSDEC add the Hogs' Hole wetland to the States regulatory map as a wetland of unusual local importance according to authority provided by Section 24 -0301, subdivision I of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 664.7, subdivision C. (400,11 Discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Northside Citv Lands Committee - Report Alderperson Cummings reported that the consultant, Peter Trowbridge, has begun to draw up the inventory of assets on the site and is working toward development of land use and design guidelines. She stated that the committee will be coming back in January with some recommendations and she urged Council members to act expeditiously on the Northside matter as it relates to the Sciencenter and the Senior Citizens' Council. Qr ri,� 16 December 6, 1989 * 16.4 Cherry Street Industrial Park /Sale of Remnant Lands to Ithaco By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel WHEREAS, Common Council does concur with the finding of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency that the two triangular remnant parcels of land in the Cherry Street Industrial Park adjacent to Ithaco, Inc. (.13 acre and .11 acre respectively) have limited usefulness other than for purposes of assemblage with adjacent parcels, and WHEREAS, Ithaco, Inc. is in the process of expanding its manufacturing facilities, and is desirous of acquiring these two parcels at fair market value, and WHEREAS, the Cherry Street Industrial Park was developed to encourage the retention.and expansion of local industries, and WHEREAS, an appraisal has been obtained establishing the value of said parcels at three thousand, nine hundred dollars ($3,900); now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council does concur with the designation of Ithaco, Inc. as a qualified sponsor for acquisition of the said parcels of land in the Cherry Street Industrial Park, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney is hereby directed to draft the appropriate sale agreement for review by Common Council, and be it further RESOLVED, That this disposition is in accordance with applicable state law and with the city's Urban Renewal Land Disposition Procedure, and is in furtherance of the Urban Renewal Plan and in the best interest of the City of Ithaca. Alderperson Cummings explained the resolution. Discussion followed on the floor and Planning and Development Director Van Cort answered questions from Council members. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously * 16.5 Ithaca Industrial Park /Environmental Review 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 project, 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. 0 17 December 6, 1989 Discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Ayes (8) - Schlather, Nichols, Johnson, Killeen, Lytel, Cummings, Romanowski, Peterson Nays (2) - Hoffman, Booth Carried (awe * 16.6 Exchange of Easements Between Laube and City /108 Water Street By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather WHEREAS, a request was received for an easement agreement from Mrs. Vivian F. Laube of 108 Water Street for the driveway at that property which crosses the City's Water Filter Plant's property, and the driveway cannot be relocated, and C4� WHEREAS, the staff of the Department of Public Works and the City Engineer's office has reviewed the property at 108 Water Street -� and the City's Water Filter Plant and determined that the City would not want to build a structure on this property because it is over a 24' raw water main, and WHEREAS, the City driveway at the very northwest corner encroaches on Mrs. Laube's property, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works at its meeting of September 27, 1989 approved an easement for the driveway of 108 Water Street in exchange for a driveway easement to the City of approximately the same square footage along the northwest portion of the property at 108 Water Street, provided that Mrs. Laube supply an updated survey showing the location and dimensions of the current driveways, granite curb line, underground utilities, (4000, and meter pit, and upon the usual terms and conditions handled through the City Attorney; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That a permanent easement be granted to Vivian F. Laube for the driveway at 108 Water Street as it encroaches on City property in exchange for an easement granted to the City of approximately the same square footage along the northwest portion of the property at 108 Water Street; and be it further RESOLVED, That Mrs. Laube supply an updated survey showing the location and dimensions of the current driveways, granite curb line, underground utilities and meter pit; and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Attorney draft the papers necessary to effectuate the exchange of easements; and be it further RESOLVED, That the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the documents on behalf of the City of Ithaca. Carried Unanimously * 16.7 GIAC Pool Site By Alderperson Cummings: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather (Woo, WHEREAS, it has been determined that the GIAC pool site contains toxic materials, and WHEREAS, NYSEG has acknowledged responsibility for these toxic materials, and WHEREAS, the Common Council has established a capital project to construct a neighborhood pool on this site, and WHEREAS, planning for this neighborhood pool cannot proceed until the toxic waste problem has been resolved; now, therefore, be it 18 December 6, 1989 RESOLVED, That the Common Council urges NYSEG to complete its studies expeditiously and to make the site safe for construction of the neighborhood pool at the earliest possible time. Planning and Development Director Van Cort stated that the Planning and Development Committee had a 2 hour presentation by the NYSEG engineers who are in charge of this coal tar residue clean up. Evidently the coal tars are contained in one area of the site which is partially under the existing portable pool and the other had been right next to the old Markles Flats building. He stated that the materials in these pits are fully contained and they are not getting into the environment at all. The engineers have done air testing all around the site and have found no incidence of any substances above ground level. Mr. Van Cort noted that the person from NYSEG stated that the reason this is on the DEC list is because it is a flammable substance rather than a toxic substance. He explained that they have done test wells in a number of locations including the location where the pool is proposed to be built and have found nothing in the location of the proposed pool. Mr. Van Cort stated that the committee has asked the NYSEG engineers to do a few other air tests in the Markles building to be sure that materials close to the building were not migrating into the building somehow and possibly causing some health risks to the occupants of the building. They also asked that one test be conducted in a home nearby that would be selected by the fact that the home has a wet basement to see if materials might be getting into their basement. Mr. Van Cort emphasized that NYSEG is quite confident they can fully contain this problem by removing the remaining waste on the site and then filling the containers with a concrete slurry. J, Mr. Van Cort stated that the conclusion of the meeting was that we should proceed with our planning for the pool and once we have a schematic location for the pool they could then do further tests in the location that we propose. They would then report on their findings in that location and then the school district would make a determination whether they wanted us to go ahead. Further discussion followed on the floor. A vote on the resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: * 17.1 Sexual Harassment Policy By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Affirmative Action Committee has written a sexual harassment policy for City employees, and WHEREAS, the Human Services Committee has reviewed and approved it; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the document entitled "City of Ithaca Sexual Harassment Policy" be adopted by the Common Council as City policy. CITY OF ITHACA SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICY Statement of Policy It is the policy of the City of Ithaca in its capacity as an employer to provide and maintain a work environment which is free from unlawful discrimination. Sexual harassment is a form of f 19 December 6, 1989 unlawful discrimination and is prohibited in each and every City work environment and each and every situation which directly impacts a City work environment. The City of Ithaca considers sexual harassment to be a form of employee misconduct and considers this type of misconduct to be a serious offense. Allegations of sexual harassment will be investigated thoroughly and, if substantiated, will be met with appropriate corrective and /or disciplinary action commensurate with the seriousness of the offense(s), up to and including discharge. Definition According to federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidelines, sexual harassment is defined as follows: "Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when: 1. submission to such conduct is made explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment; 2. submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual; or 3. such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment." The City of Ithaca hereby adopts the above definition of sexual harassment. The definition applies to the conduct of a supervisor toward a subordinate; the conduct of one employee toward another employee; the conduct of an employee toward a job applicant; and the conduct of a non - employee toward a City employee. Reporting Sexual Harassment If a City employee is subjected to a situation which he /she believes constitutes sexual harassment in violation of this policy, the City recommends that the employee confront the harasser directly and advise the harasser that his /her behavior is not welcomed and will not be tolerated. Employees should keep a written record of any alleged sexual harassment incident, including the date, time, location, names of the people involved, witnesses (if any), and who said or did what to whom. If an alleged incident of sexual harassment cannot be resolved directly between the parties involved, a formal complaint should be filed by the affected employee with either his /her department head or the Personnel Administrator. Employees may also file sexual harassment complaints with either the Tompkins County Human Rights Commission or the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or pursue any other remedies as permitted by law. Sexual harassment complaints will be investigated as promptly as possible and resolved within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the complaint. Department Heads who receive sexual harassment complaints should contact the Personnel Administrator immediately to coordinate an investigation of the complaint. All information gathered during an investigation of a sexual harassment complaint will be handled in a confidential manner. Retaliation against any individual making such a complaint is forbidden. (This does not, however, preclude an individual from exercising his /her legal rights in any way.) �! 5, -7 20 ADDeal Procedures December 6, 1989 In the event that the City investigates a sexual harassment complaint and determines that the incident(s) reported does not constitute sexual harassment as defined in this policy, the employee who filed the complaint may appeal the City's determination through the Tompkins County Human Rights Commission and /or the United State Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Said employee may also appeal the City's determination through the grievance procedure outlined in his /her labor contract. If, as a result of an investigation by the City, disciplinary charges are filed against an employee on the grounds that the City believes the employee is guilty of sexual harassment, the accused employee may exercise his /her rights through the disciplinary procedure provided for in his /her labor contract. In the event that either the employee alleging sexual harassment or the employee being charged with sexual harassment is not covered by a labor contract, he /she may exercise his /her appeal rights provided for by Civil Service Law. Responsibilities of Managers /Supervisors All managerial and supervisory staff of the City of Ithaca shall be responsible for enforcing this policy and shall have particular responsibility for ensuring that the work environment under their supervision is free from sexual harassment and its effects. All managerial and supervisory staff who receive sexual harassment complaints will be responsible for immediately forwarding such complaints to either their department head or the Personnel Administrator for investigation. The City shall conduct training for managerial and supervisory staff in each department on the issues surrounding sexual harassment, its effects and its appearances, and the role and responsibility of supervisory personnel in preventing incidents of sexual harassment and resolving sexual harassment complaints. The City shall also distribute this policy to all City employees and conspicuously post this policy at all City work sites. Copies of this policy will also be distributed to new employees as they are hired. The City shall also conduct training for City employees on the concept and definition of sexual harassment, the issues surrounding it, and ways in which to deal with sexual harassment. Carried Unanimously * 17.2 Handicapped Accessibility - Principal Entrance Definition By Alderperson Peterson: Seconded by Alderperson Nichols WHEREAS, on August 1, 1989, Common Council voted "that it shall be City Policy to make every effort to establish procedures so that a building plan that provides only rear access for physically handicapped persons not be accepted as meeting the requirements for access", and WHEREAS, this community and City wishes to provide buildings and facilities that are accessible to all its citizens, and WHEREAS, the NYCRR 9 Executive (B) code book contains no definition in the Uniform Code for principal entrance to a building, thus making principal entrance a discretionary determination within guidelines set forth in RS 72 (ANSI A117.1- 1986), and WHEREAS, a written definition will aid the Building Department in decisions on principal entrances for handicapped persons; now, therefore, be it I Y .,DPI 21 December 6, 1989 RESOLVED, That Common Council define principal entrance(s) as an entrance(s) intended to be used by a substantial number of residents or users to enter or leave a building or facility as a primary path of travel to the building or facility. Alderperson Peterson explained the resolution. Alderperson Nichols suggested the following words be added after facility in the last Resolved: "or any of the commercial establishments therein." Motion to Refer to Committee By Alderperson Schlather: Seconded by Alderperson Lytel RESOLVED, That the matter of Handicapped Accessibility - Principal Entrance Definition - be referred to the Charter and Ordinance Committee for review. Carried Unanimously Homeless Shelters - Report Alderperson Peterson reported there was a meeting on December 1st. There was a request that Southside and Friendship Center people come to the Human Services Committee meeting this month. ' It appears that both places are running at capacity and it is only just beginning for this season. They want to discuss with "E. the committee what can possibly be done. Kathe Evans will be attending a meeting in Syracuse to learn more about State grants that may be available. 1990 Youth Services - Report Alderperson Peterson reported that Sam Cohen and Allen Green attended the committee meeting and reminded the committee that 1990 is considered a "swing year" for youth services, looking at the County commitment of dollars, being aware of how that is going to work out. They also reported to the committee that they are going to be making a strong affirmative action push for hiring and internal relations in the Youth Bureau services. They will also be looking at Youth Bureau salary comparisons with other Youth Bureaus. CHARTER AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE: * 18.1 to Section 4.6(C) of the Charter of the Citv of Ithaca Respecting Penalty Additions to Tax Sale Certificates - Local Law Previously Laid on Table in Order to Permit Common Council Action By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather LOCAL LAW OF THE YEAR 1989 A LOCAL LAW AMENDING ITHACA CITY CHARTER, ARTICLE IV ENTITLED "TAXATION AND ASSESSMENT," SECTION 4.6 THEREOF ENTITLED "PROCEEDINGS TO COLLECT UNPAID TAXES, ARREARAGES," SUBSECTION (C) THEREOF ENTITLED "NOTICE OF REDEMPTION" BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDING ARTICLE IV, SECTION 4.6, SUBDIVISION (C) THEREOF Section 4.6 (C) of Article IV of the Ithaca City Charter is hereby amended to read to as follows: C. Notice of Redemption For all properties sold at tax sale on or after January 1, 1990, the owner of any interest in the premises may redeem the premises from the tax sale by paying to the City Chamberlain of the City of Ithaca for the benefit of the owner of the tax certificate the amount bid as hereinbefore provided plus fifteen percentum. After one year from the date of the tax sale the ` 6, 0 22 December 6, 1989 percentum addition to the amount bid as hereinbefore provided to be paid to redeem the premises from the tax sale shall increase by ten percentum each year or fraction thereof from the date of the tax sale. The City Chamberlain shall, at least three months prior to the expiration of the one year provided for the redemption of said tax sale property, cause notice to be published at least once a week for three weeks in at least one of the daily newspapers designated by Common Council. The notice shall give a brief description of each parcel of unredeemed land and the amount necessary to redeem said parcel. The City Chamberlain shall also, prior to the commencement of such publication, cause such notice of unredeemed land to be sent by first class mail to the owner of such parcel as such name appears on the assessment roll. Said notice shall give a brief description of each parcel of unredeemed land and the amount necessary to redeem said parcel. The expense of advertising and of mailing such notices shall be an additional expense chargeable against the parcel. Carried Unanimously * 18.2 Amendments to Section 26.24(C) of Chapter 26, Entitled "Building Code Enforcement" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Pertaining to various Fee Charges By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather ORDINANCE NO. 89 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26.24(C) OF CHAPTER 26 ENTITLED "BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT" OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York as follows: Section 1. That Section 26.24(C) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled "Building Permits" be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Application for permit. Every application for a permit shall be in writing on approved form and shall be signed by the owner or his authorized agent. In his discretion the Building Commissioner may require sealed plans from an architect or engineer registered to practice in the State of New York for structural or other work, even though the cost of the work may be below the minimum requirement of the State Education Law, and may also require a property survey of the lot or lots concerned in any proposed building operation. Permit fees shall be paid before permit review can commence according to the following schedule: Where the total valuation of the work is: 1. $2,000.00 or less None 2. From $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $6. 00 for each $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 3. Over $25,000.00 $150.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus $4.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof 23 I 6 l December 6, 1989 Other inspections and fees related to building construction: Requested inspections outside of $25.00 per hour normal business hours (minimum charge: two hours in addition to the permit fee) Plan review for projects exceeding $5,000.00 (where no permit is requested) Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to approved plans. Building Permit Renewal Certificate of Occupancy Temporary Certificates of Occupancy Demolition work Up to $1,000.00 $1,001.00 to $5,000.00 $5,001.00 and up 50% of permit fee schedule (amount to be be applied to permit fee) $25.00 per hour $25.00 or 10% of the original building permit fee, whichever is larger No charge if building permit is in effect; otherwise $25.00 f o r one- and two - family dwellings; $50.00 for all others $100.00 plus 25% of building permit fee $12.00 $25.00 $25.00 plus $4.00 for for each $1,000.00 or fraction thereof over $5,000.00 In the event that an application for a building permit is not approved the applicant shall be entitled to a refund of fifty percent (50 %) of the fee paid, provided no work has commenced. If construction work has been started and the application is not approved, no part of the fees paid shall be refunded. Any amendment to the application or the plans and specifications upon which the building permit has been issued may be filed at any time prior to the completion of the work. If there is an increase in the value of the project as a result of the amendment, an additional fee shall be paid for that increase, based on the fee schedule above. If there is no increase in the value of the project as a result of the amendment, but additional plan review time is incurred, an additional fee of $25.00 per hour shall be paid for the additional plan review time. During the period of time that the work is going on for which the Qe building permit is issued, said permit shall be displayed on the property in such a location that it is readily visible from the nearest street. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City Charter. Carried Unanimously 24 December 6, 1989 * 18 3 Amendments to Section 27.45 of Chapter 27 Entitled "Housing Code" of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather ORDINANCE NO. 89 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 27.45 OF CHAPTER 27 ENTITLED "HOUSING CODE" OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUNICIPAL CODE. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, as follows: Section 1. That Section 27.45 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled "Certificate of Compliance" be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: A. The Building Department shall issue every three years a Certificate of Compliance with all applicable City and State codes to all rental dwelling units covered in Section 27.44. B. The Building Department shall not issue a Certificate of Compliance to any rental unit as described in Section 27.44 that is in violation of any applicable City and State code. C. Failure of an owner of any rental dwelling unit to hold a valid Certificate of Compliance for said rental dwelling unit shall be deemed a violation of the Housing Code. D. A fee of $25.00 per rental dwelling unit up to two bedrooms plus $15.00 for each additional bedroom shall be paid to the Building Department before a Certificate of Compliance can be issued. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of a notice as provided in Section 3.11(B) of the Ithaca City Charter. Carried Unanimously * 18.4 Environmental Review for Negative Declaration By Alderperson Booth: Seconded WHEREAS, the matter of amending for the purpose of creating the being considered by this Common -2c Z by Alderperson Peterson Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code R -2c zoning district is currently Council, and WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) and a Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF), and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an "unlisted" action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), including the Part 617 regulations thereunder, and may be a Type I action under the City Environmental Quality Review Act (EQR Section 36.5 (B)(5)), and WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the environment; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, be and it hereby does adopt as its own the findings and conclusions as set forth on the Short and Long Environmental Assessment Forms dated November 9, 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 I rn 7 25 December 6, 1989 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 Cummings stated the question has been raised that in reading the environmental review, it sounds like it will be- imposing R -2c only in R -3 zones. Alderperson Booth explained that what the proposed negative declaration says is that the evaluation is in the context that most of these amendments will probE.bly be in R -3 zones that will then be amended to R -2c. Some of th,_ `changes that the committee asked Deputy Director Mazzarella t:) to reflect the fact that. in reality amendments might i.n other districts and while his negative declaration did ,iJt change to a very large r„y degree, it did change ta• reflect thaT : :;ct.. He stated ghat any arert of the city, theoretically, C01_110 . amended to R -2c. == Further discussion followed on the r-i oor on c he ±Mier or not the ° public had been fully inform,_�d .bout 'UO L :..,�� Ong change. Alderperson Cummings riote6 for the "r•d that rill agenda from the Planning and Development k:'c;min ` _ always go to all the n�.ighborhood civic associations s:_ i R -2r zcning has been arinounced many times. Further discussion followed on the Ayes (9) - F >cottj , K3Yleer., Johnson, Lytel , Cummings, Peterson, Hoffman, Nichols, Romanowski (400", Nay (1) - Schlathe- Carried * 18.5 Amendment to Chapter 30, Entitled "Zoning of the Cit, of Ithaca Municipal Code Pe ilii.nq to the _Creation of a New Z oninq District, the 11R -2c Zon1w District" and the Adoption of Other Related Amendments By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen GUHNANCE NO. 89 - p-V ORDINA14CE AMENDING MCTIONS 30.3, 30.21, 30.25 and 30.26 OF CHA -TER 30 ENTITIM "ZONING' OF THE CITY OF ITHACA MUN I C: _C RAL CODE BE 17' ORDAINED AND i�TED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York that an ordinance amending Sections 30.3, 30.211 30.25 and 30.26 at. Chapter 30 entitled "Zoning" of the City of Ithaca Municipal ande be adopted, as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDIM SECTION 30.3, DEFINITIONS. 1. That the defink an for "Dwelling, one - family ", Section 30.3 (24) , shall be amendika.s follows: [ "Dwelling, ems- family" shall mean a building containing not more thar.ane dwelling unit occupied exclusively for residential. purposeshg an individual or family and not more than one (1) unrelated A&ividual, or by an individual or family and not more than two ( ;anrelated individuals if owner occupied in R -1 zones. In R -2 amkM -3 zones, a one - family dwelling may be occupied by an individaL or family and not more than two (2) unrelated individuals.] "Dwelling,_ cp4amily" shall mean a dwelling unit occupied e- clusivel}__fc _-psidential purposes by an individual or farni.ly and not more tjis one j 1 or a functional family uni.t... In the R -1 zones, occupancy by an 26 December 6, 1989 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. -_� -- Ill II .A. One - family detached dwelling. B. One family detached dwelling, zero -lot line - A building containing not more than one dwelling unit which is sited so that the side of the building is on or near the side nronerty line of the parcel on which it is built. I I I11 II B One - family detached dwelling, zero lot line. C. One family semi - detached dwelling - A building _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. 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.- I �a o I11 II D._ One - family attached dwelling._ 27 December 6, 1989 2. That a new definition for "Occupant" be added to Section 30.3 as follows: 104. "Occupant" (in R -2c zones only) 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 or members of a functional familv unit 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 ". 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 occupy a dwelling unit or building is based on the amount of habitable space in the dwelling unit or building and on the basis 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: Y f Number of Persons 1 2 3 4 or more ----------------------------- I`f_� 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 or members of a functional familv unit 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 ". 28 December 6, 1989 C. Under Column 2, Permitted Primary Uses, for the R -2 district, add the following: +18. 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 "3. 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 -lb 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.if. 8. For the R -3a zone, add 114. One - family attached dwelling, conversion: 7,000 for first 1- 3 units+ 750 for each addll unit plus 500 per room let for profit." 9. For the R -3a zone, renumber existing items " 3 . " , " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 5 . " , " 6 . " and "7.". 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" 3.if. J P_�r •y Y)I�' 29 December 6, 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." 16. For the R -U zone, delete "Two- family dwelling" and 14. For the R -3b zone, renumber existing items " 3 . " , " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 5 . " " 6 . " and " 7 " 17. For the R -U zone, add 113. One - family , . . (4wo" 15. For the R -U zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and (480.1 add "One- family detached dwelling ". 16. For the R -U zone, delete "Two- family dwelling" and 4. One - family attached dwelling: 1500 for the first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 300 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: 2000 for first occupant in each dwelling unit, plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 6. Other uses: 4000." 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 ". (400,11 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 ". 2. One - family add "One- family semi - detached or two - family 2,500 for dwelling ". ea c h 17. For the R -U zone, add 113. One - family 3. One - family attached dwelling: 16,500 for first 1 - 3 units (480.1 occupant in plus 1,500 for each add'1 unit." each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 18. For the R -U zone, renumber existing items " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 4 . " , " 5 . " and " 6 . " . H. Under Column 6, Minimum Lot Size, Area in Square Feet 4.; add under a new subdistrict heading 1IR -2c" as follows: "l. One - family detached dwelling: 2500 for first occupant, plus 500 for each additional occupant. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 1500 for the first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 300 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: 2000 for first occupant in each dwelling unit, plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 6. Other uses: 4000." 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 ". (400,11 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 ". 2. One - family detached dwelling, zero -lot line: 2,500 for first occupant plus 500 for ea c h additional occupant. 3. One - family semi - detached dwelling: 2000 for first (480.1 occupant in each dwelling unit plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 4. One - family attached dwelling: 1500 for the first occupant in each dwelling unit plus 300 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: 2000 for first occupant in each dwelling unit, plus 400 for each additional occupant in each dwelling unit. 6. Other uses: 4000." 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 ". (400,11 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 ". () -11 , F,, RE 7. go 0 10. 11. 12. 30 For the R -3a zone, attached dwelling: 50." December 6, 1989 add "2. One- family For the R -3a zone, renumber existing items "2. 11, 113. 11 and 114." to 113.11, 114." and "5.11. For the R -3b zone, delete "One- or two - family dwelling" and add "One- family detached or semi- detached dwelling or two - family dwelling ". For the R -3b zone, add 112. One - family attached dwelling: 40." For the R -3b zone, renumber existing items "2.11 , 113 . 11 and 114.11 to 113 . ", "4 . " and "5.11. For the R -U zone, delete "One- family dwelling" and add "One- family detached dwelling ". 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 "3.11, " 4 . " and " 5 . " to " 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: "l. 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": "3n. L. Under Column 9, Maximum Building Height, Height in Feet, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": "35 ". M. Under Column 10, Maximum Percent Lot Coverage By Buildings, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "1. 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 31 December 6, 1989 N. Under Column 11, Yard Dimensions, Front, Minimum Required, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": "10". 0. Under Column 12, Yard Dimensions, Side, One Side at Least, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c" as follows: "l. 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. 5. Two - family dwelling: 10. 6. Other uses: 10." 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 o f Depth, add under a new subdistrict heading "R- 2c": 112511. R. Under Column 151 Yard Dimensions, Rear, Maximum Required in Feet, add under a new subdistrict heading "R -2c": 1150 ". SECTION 4. AMENDING SECTION 30.261 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. 21120 32 December 6, 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. Amending Resolution By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather the RESOLVED, That under "D ", "one- family attached dwelling", maximum of six one - family dwelling units be changed to four one - family dwelling units. Nays (5) - Johnson, Killeen, Cummings, Lytel, Nichols Ayes (6) - Schlather, Romanowski, Booth, Hoffman, Peterson Mayor Gutenberger voted Aye, breaking the tie. Carried Motion to Table By Alderperson Nichols: Seconded by Alderperson Johnson RESOLVED, That the matter of amending Chapter 30, entitled Zoning of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code pertaining to the creation of a new zoning district, the "R -2c Zoning District" and the adoption of other related amendments be tabled. Ayes (6) - Lytel, Cummings, Nichols, Johnson, Killeen, Hoffman Nays (4) - Schlather, Romanowski, Peterson, Booth Carried * 18 6 Amendments to Fee Schedules for Parking Areas: Recommendation to the Board of Public Works By Alderperson Booth: Seconded by Alderperson Schlather WHEREAS, it is the best interests of the residents of the City of Ithaca to alleviate pressures on the City's real property tax base to as great an extent as possible by utilizing City revenues from other sources and by expanding those other revenues, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca should therefore collect appropriate user fees for City - provided services wherever it can fairly do so; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca hereby encourages the Board of Public Works to amend the parking fee schedules for the City's various parking areas by eliminating 11 existing "first hour park free" provisions, effective January 1, 1990, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council encourages the Board of Public Works to enact as soon as possible other appropriate parking fee adjustments. Carried Unanimously Amendments to Monthly... Charges for Unpaid Water Sewer, and General Fund Miscellaneous Accounts Receivable Report Alderperson Booth reported that the item that is referred to relates to some changes in fees which the Controller recommended during the budget session. There will be a resolution forthcoming. 19� D 33 December 6, 1989 REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES AND COUNCIL LIAISONS: * 20-1 Resolution to Common Council from Conservation Advisory Council Regarding Air Quality Testing Alderperson Johnson presented the following resolution from the CAC: "WHEREAS, the Conservation Advisory Council is concerned about the lack of information regarding local air quality, and WHEREAS, no database currently exists on local air quality, and WHEREAS, no air quality testing program is in place, and WHEREAS, an on -going testing program would define the current situation and provide the City with baseline data with which to compare future test results; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council explore ways to establish an ongoing testing program that should include testing for the common indicators of air quality, such as the following: 1. Inhalable particulates (e.g. from woodburning stoves, road deicers and traction agents). (County Health Department has a tape sampler John Anderssen says the City could probably use, but testing tubes for each test would need to be ordered in advance. DEC may be able to provide a better monitor.) 2. Ozone (the #1 air pollution problem in the U.S.). (Boyce Thompson Institute may be willing to do this testing free of charge. They already test for ozone at the Cornell Apple Orchards.) 3. Carbon monoxide (Cornell does not have a monitor. DEC might. They cost about $3,000 - $5,000.) 4. Hydrocarbons (e.g. from car exhaust) Motion to Refer to Committee By Alderperson Johnson: Seconded by Alderperson Killeen RESOLVED, That the resolution regarding Air Quality Testing be referred to the Planning and Development Committee, the Charter and Ordinance Committee and the Board of Public Works for review and report back to Council. Carried Unanimously Adjournment On a motion the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 P.M. Callista F. Paolang(�li John C. Gutenberger City Clerk Mayor ,p'7 1