HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-1990-05-144 3 : �
1
COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Special Meeting 11:00 a.m. May 14, 1990
PRESENT:
Mayor Nichols
Alderpersons (10) - Booth, Daley, Cummings, Hoffman, Peterson,
(48�;
Johnson, Golder, Romanowski, Blanchard,
Schroeder
OTHERS PRESENT -
City Clerk - Paolangeli
City Controller - Cafferillo
Superintendent of Public Works - Thadani
City Engineer - Gray
Assistant Civil Engineer - West
City Attorney - Guttman
Deputy Director, Planning and Development - Mazzarella
Tompkins County Board of Representatives - Culligan
Board of Public Works Commissioner - Berg
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
�.w Mayor Nichols led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the
American flag.
Mayor Nichols announced that this meeting was being called by six
members of Common Council: Daley, Blanchard, Cummings, Booth,
Peterson, Romanowski.
Alderperson Hoffman asked if there was any objection to public
comment at this meeting.
No Council member objected.
Mayor Nichols made the following statement to Council:
"The problems that we face now in completing the Hudson Street
Reconstruction Project are not the actual design but the lack of
trust between the residents of Hudson Street and City officials.
Additional difficulties have been created by the attempt of
Common Council to become involved in every design detail.
I anticipate that the present design of the "Therm curve" and the
Coddington Road intersection will be preserved. The key item
that remains is the needed commitment by the City that
everything possible will be done to meet the legitimate requests
for action that will decrease the speed of traffic on Hudson
Street.
The appropriate body to specify the placement of Stop signs,
directional signs, and other traffic control signage is the Board
of Public Works. As a member and the Chair of that Board, I give
the residents my word that I will do everything within my power
to incorporate the kind of signage suggested in the May 12, 1990
statement of the South Hill Civic Association.
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Hudson Street Reconstruction Project
Alderperson Daley asked Mayor Nichols to
Hudson Street Reconstruction project as it
give an
is now.
update on the
Mayor Nichols explained that the status as
it is
now is that we
have a design that the engineers and
the contractor are
following. That design, however, is inconsistent
with Council's
resolution. He stated that if there is no
action
taken today by
the Council, he does not see how we can
proceed
with anything
above Pearsall Place.
Alderperson Hoffman asked if there was any objection to public
comment at this meeting.
No Council member objected.
Mayor Nichols made the following statement to Council:
"The problems that we face now in completing the Hudson Street
Reconstruction Project are not the actual design but the lack of
trust between the residents of Hudson Street and City officials.
Additional difficulties have been created by the attempt of
Common Council to become involved in every design detail.
I anticipate that the present design of the "Therm curve" and the
Coddington Road intersection will be preserved. The key item
that remains is the needed commitment by the City that
everything possible will be done to meet the legitimate requests
for action that will decrease the speed of traffic on Hudson
Street.
The appropriate body to specify the placement of Stop signs,
directional signs, and other traffic control signage is the Board
of Public Works. As a member and the Chair of that Board, I give
the residents my word that I will do everything within my power
to incorporate the kind of signage suggested in the May 12, 1990
statement of the South Hill Civic Association.
434
Hudson Street must be a safe street for traffic, a safe street
for pedestrians, a safe street for property owners and an
attractive street for the neighborhood. As Mayor I will direct
City staff to cooperate to meets those goals."
Alderperson Cummings stated that the Council is working with the
existing resolution of the April 2, 1990 Common Council meeting
which is as follows:
WHEREAS, the residents of the Hudson Street neighborhood have
petitioned for certain changes to the Hudson Street
Reconstruction Project as currently designed by John S. MacNeil
Engineers, and
WHEREAS, the South Hill Civic Association has worked to effect a
compromise solution which would protect the fiscal interests of
the entire City while ameliorating some of the negative impacts
of the Reconstruction, which impacts remain particularly severe
in the 100 and 200 blocks of Hudson Street, and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of Ithaca to preserve and
enhance the quality of life in our residential neighborhoods,
while maintaining our infrastructure consistent with reasonable
safety standards; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That in the future planning and design of major
projects, such as the Elm Street Reconstruction, the early
participation of the public will be sought in deciding the
options to be considered as well as in the on -going process of
choosing among specific design alternatives, and be it further
RESOLVED, That appropriate steps be taken to designate Hudson
Street as a bicycle route, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the following changes to the Hudson Street
Reconstruction Project be made:
1. WIDTH. The width for paving shall be narrowed from 30 to 27
feet for the project from Hillview Place to the Coddington Road.
From Columbia to Hillview the street shall be tapered as a
transition from 30 to 27 feet. The width from Columbia Street to
Aurora Street will be 30 feet.
2. Hudson Street shall be designated as a local collector
street, in accordance with its residential character.
3. TREES AND LANDSCAPING.
a). Tree removal shall be kept to 5 -8, as indicated on the
3/23/90 DPW proposal.
b). Earth disruption around remaining tree roots shall be
done carefully, by hand if necessary. Appropriate
protective fertilizing and pruning shall be done.
Supervision will be provided by the City Forester and
Shade Tree Commission.
c). A minimum of 38 additional trees shall be planted,
including an allee from the Therm drive to the City
line.
d). Substantial additional landscaping shall be implemented
under the auspices of the Parks Commission, Shade Tree
Commission, and the City Forester, working with
individual residents and home - owners to determine the
specific details. This will be done to reduce noise
and dirt and to help retain the residential character
of the street.
J
J
J
9
May 14, 1990
4. CURB LAWN. No pavers of brick, or any other material, shall
be used between the curb and sidewalk. Curb lawns shall be
grass.
5. CURVES. The radius of the Therm curve shall be limited to
the minimum legal standard for a local collector street. The
current designs for the curves at Giles and the school are
acceptable to the majority of residents.
(4a� 6. STOP SIGNS. Stop signs shall be installed immediately in
three locations: on Hudson at Aurora; a 4 -way on Hudson at
Columbia; and at the top of Hudson where it will be deemed most
effective, either at the Coddington Road, or Therm Road /Hudson
Place intersections, or below the Therm curve.
7. Additional informational signage shall be incorporated into
d). Legal posting of 15 mph school zone.
8. Crosswalks at school and stop signs shall be marked with a
permanent application technique, such as that utilized by
Cornell.
9. There shall be a minimal taking of private property.
10. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION.
a) The City invites the South Hill Civic Association to
form a working subcommittee to meet on a regularly
scheduled basis with representatives from the Design
Engineering Firm, the BPW, DPW, and the 2nd Ward
Alderperson to provide oversight, working within the
parameters of the existing design engineering and
drawings, as modified by this resolution, for the
duration of the Hudson Street Reconstruction Project.
b) The City will work with the SHCA to examine zoning,
parking and enforcement laws and practices, making
adjustment to accommodate neighborhood concerns.
Alderpersons Cummings and Daley offered the following three
Amending Resolutions:
Amending Resolutions
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows: " That Item 1. WIDTH - shall read as
follows: "The width for paving shall be narrowed from 30 to 27
feet for the project from Hillview Place to the Coddington except
for the Therm curve as currently designed."
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows: "reconstruction component of the
work be ended short of the Coddington Road intersection."
RESOLVED! That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows: "Mayor be instructed to get the
necessary statements from the appropriate departments to satisfy
the requirements of the design engineer to allow the radius of
the wide -outs to be 15 feet at Pearsall Place and Grandview."
this project including:
a). Clear signage
indicating the
continuation of Coddington
4.�
Road into the
City.
b). "Stop Ahead"
signs in advance
of all new Stop signs.
i`
c). Retention of
existing truck
limitation sign at Aurora
Street and
implementation
of a similar sign at
Coddington Road.
d). Legal posting of 15 mph school zone.
8. Crosswalks at school and stop signs shall be marked with a
permanent application technique, such as that utilized by
Cornell.
9. There shall be a minimal taking of private property.
10. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION.
a) The City invites the South Hill Civic Association to
form a working subcommittee to meet on a regularly
scheduled basis with representatives from the Design
Engineering Firm, the BPW, DPW, and the 2nd Ward
Alderperson to provide oversight, working within the
parameters of the existing design engineering and
drawings, as modified by this resolution, for the
duration of the Hudson Street Reconstruction Project.
b) The City will work with the SHCA to examine zoning,
parking and enforcement laws and practices, making
adjustment to accommodate neighborhood concerns.
Alderpersons Cummings and Daley offered the following three
Amending Resolutions:
Amending Resolutions
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows: " That Item 1. WIDTH - shall read as
follows: "The width for paving shall be narrowed from 30 to 27
feet for the project from Hillview Place to the Coddington except
for the Therm curve as currently designed."
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows: "reconstruction component of the
work be ended short of the Coddington Road intersection."
RESOLVED! That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows: "Mayor be instructed to get the
necessary statements from the appropriate departments to satisfy
the requirements of the design engineer to allow the radius of
the wide -outs to be 15 feet at Pearsall Place and Grandview."
43(;
4
May 14, 1990
Alderperson Hoffman asked if it was appropriate to offer a
Substitute Resolution at this time.
Mayor Nichols stated that this would be an appropriate time.
Substitute Resolution
By Alderperson Hoffman: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder
WHEREAS, delays and unforeseen engineering, design and
construction problems have raised the possibility that the Hudson
Street project cannot be completed on time and /or within the
budget allocated by Common Council, and
WHEREAS, a very high level of public concern indicates that
serious issues of pedestrian and vehicular safety, and speed,
control and routing of traffic, especially as they pertain to the
southern portion of the Hudson Street project, have yet to be
resolved to the satisfaction of the residents of the area,
engineering staff, and City policy makers; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the 1990 Hudson Street project shall be terminated
at Pearsall Place, and be it further
RESOLVED, That appropriate signage warning of the Therm curve and
the Giles Street curve shall be installed, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the speed limit for the Therm curve and Giles
Street curve shall be posted at 25 mph; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works and the Department of
Public Works are directed to continue to explore issues of
pedestrian and vehicular safety and speed, control and routing of
traffic as they pertain to the upper portion of Hudson Street,
and to present alternative design proposals to Common Council by
October 1990.
Alderperson Schroeder remarked that he would like to have public
comment before the Council gets into the discussion of which
resolution to vote on.
Alderperson Schroeder's suggestion was agreeable to the Council.
Public Comments
Denise Rusoff, 209 Hudson Street, read the following statement to
Council:
"Hudson Street residents have made it very clear that we do not
want the street as designed. One hundred twenty people signed a
petition and a hundred or more came to each of two Common Council
meetings. We have said all along, no straightening, no widening
and yet here we are again, with a proposal to widen Therm curve
from its existing 26 feet roadbed to a 30 foot roadbed.
We hear, what's all the fuss about 2 or 3 feet? The fuss with 2
or 3 feet is simply this: according to Roger Yonkin, a 30 year
resident engineer with the Department of Transportation of
Tompkins County, Hudson Street as designed is 'impossible to make
safe' because of the geography of our hill, the sub - standard
Giles Street curve, and the residential character of our
neighborhood. We hear, 'the City faces increased liability' by
leaving the curve as is and yet as Darrell Harp, Chief Attorney
for the Department of Transportation in Albany says the City can
solve its liability problem by using such methods as 'reduction
of speed and more warning signs.'
You all know the process has been flawed. The design, too, is
flawed. It is my personal opinion that we have reached this
impasse because the engineers continue to use specifications for
a minor arterial road when re- designing Therm curve instead of
using specs for a local. collector street, a designation Common
Council gave Hudson Street over five weeks ago.
J
P_up
4 3 i+
5
The solution is straight forward.
now Dan Hoffman's resolution and the
Liaison Committee's proposal to
Pearsall Place.
May 14, 1990
Support Mayor Nichols, and,
South Hill Civic Association
stop the reconstruction at
To keep Therm curve safe, sign its speed down and enforce it.
Remember that you, every one of you, voted for this compromise
resolution. Now live up to your promises to Hudson Street
residents and someday, on that final day, when the paves are done
and the curves are in, come and knock on my door and I will take
all of you for a walk down Hudson Street."
Alan Boardman, 15 Hudson Place, referred to the previous
resolution that was passed regarding the 27 feet. He said that
there are two things concerning the resolution; the spirit of the
resolution and the letter of the resolution. The spirit of the
resolution was safety, the letter of the resolution was 27 feet.
He stated that when you attempt to apply 27 feet to the Therm
�1 curve, you find that it does not allow sufficient space for
vehicles to pass each other and that violates the spirit of the
resolution, which is safety. When the letter of the resolution
is in conflict with the spirit of the resolution, common sense
dictates that you alter the letter of the resolution, which would
-� involve making the curve 30 feet wide.
Mr. Boardman referred to a diagram that he had placed on the
Council member's desks showing two cars passing each other on the
Therm curve. He stated that if the City does not intend to
reconstruct the curve he does not intend to let the matter rest
as is.
Mr. Arnold Rusoff, 209 Hudson Street, stated to Council that none
of the residents are claiming that the curve should never be
fixed. He said that what they are asking is, that the curve be
fixed properly and the street be designed properly. Mr. Rusoff
stated that even though he is not a highway expert or an
engineer, he can read out of books of design as well as anyone
and found the following statement: "Wherever possible, all local
and collector streets should enter the collector and arterial
streets at right angles to reduce the traffic hazard." He said
that the residents are being told that their local collector
street as designated by law, is the one that is the curve and
Coddington Road is entering at right angles. That does not seem
to him to be meeting this set of specifications.
Mr. Rusoff stated that there is some question that the design as
given to the residents now may not be safe and that should be
enough to reconsider it before the Council just races ahead and
gives the neighborhood something that might cause more problems.
James Houghton, 111 Hudson Street, stated that he is going to
address Council with the assumption that Alderperson Hoffman's
resolution will not be accepted and that the resolutions that
Alderperson Daley is putting forth are being looked at. He said
that he would particularly like to address the curve and the
intersection at the top.
Mr. Houghton said that when the 30 feet is being discussed,
there
we
are really two issues. At the bottom the biggest factor with
the
30 feet was the lack of space. The major impact of the 30
feet
at the bottom was to essentially remove the grassy area to
bring
the road right up against the sidewalk. At the top there
have
been two problems. One is the fact that the residents were
under
the impression when they agreed to the compromise that 27
feet
could be maintained and that does not seem to be the case within
the parameters of putting a curve in there. Mr. Houghton
said
that as far as the curve goes however, the residents have
been
told by the City Engineer that the radius of the curve
is a
function of what is necessary for the 30 mph City speed limit
and
that the width of the curve is a function of the radius.
The
R
May 14, 1990
problem that we are facing at the top of the hill is that the
notion of having Coddington Road feed into Hudson Street directly
via a curve is, he believes, fundamentally an unsafe situation.
Mr. Houghton further stated that it seems reasonable to say that
if you have to come to a signaled intersection and make a ninety
degree curve when you are going from Route 79 to Route 96B, that
it is not a given that you should be able to go from Coddington
Road directly onto Hudson without ever encountering an
intersection via a continuous curve. The problem that the
residents have stated with the curve at the top is that the
curve, as it now exists, is an unsafe curve, both because of its
configuration and because a curve there is fundamentally a bad
idea. What we need at this point is an intersection. He stated
that the intersection that has been proposed for the project for
Coddington Road and Hudson Street favors Hudson Street. As it
stands now, Coddington Road becomes Hudson Street and the 100
block of Coddington Road will be realigned to a ninety degree
angle.
Mr. Houghton asked Council if they go with the re- design of the
curve, that they do leave the intersection as it stands now and
proceed with a commitment to look at putting in an intersection
that forces people coming down Coddington Road to stop and turn
onto Hudson Street rather than just continue around the curve.
He said that he thinks that is the most effective traffic control
that we can achieve up there.
John Schwartz, 510 Hudson Street, spoke to Council regarding
past accidents in the Hudson Street area. He stated that he
supports Alderperson Hoffman's resolution with the inclusion that
the engineers be instructed to go back and come forward with a
date to return with a proposed re- design. He stated that without
that he is very concerned that the problem will simply stop at
Pearsall forever and that is not a solution either.
Ari VanTienhoven, 9 Hudson Place, spoke in favor of Alderperson
Daley's proposed resolution. He addressed the issue of the
danger of the curve. He said that if the curve is left that way
by stopping at Hudson Place, nothing will ever be done. He urged
the Council to vote for Alderperson Daley's proposed resolution.
Donald Culligan, Tompkins County Board of Representatives, stated
that he will support Alderperson Daley's resolution because he
believes the curve is very dangerous and he believes that the
place for a Stop sign is at the Therm drive, not at the top of
the street. He said that he fears that if the City stops at
Pearsall Place it will be many, many years before anything is
done at that curve.
Guy Gerard, College Avenue, spoke to the Council on the history
of the Hudson Street project. He stated that the residents of
Hudson Street trusted this Council to support them in the
compromise that was made. It is up to Council to protect the
residents faith in the Council by protecting the spirit of the
agreement. Mr. Gerard also asked about the speed limit and asked
that someone follow -up on this question.
Marie Porceddu, 641 Hudson Street, spoke to the Council on the
dangers of the curve and the number of accidents that have
occurred at that location. She stated that she does not think
the answer is to remove the curve and widen and straighten the
street. She feels that will only prevent people from having to
slow down. Mrs. Porceddu said that when the City considers its
liability, which she understands is one of the major issues, she
would like Council to consider that the Hudson Street /Therm curve
is not now signed up to State standards and if it is changed to
lr�
IIt!)
7 May 14, 1990
make it a more unsafe situation, maybe it would be protecting the
City from liability legally but she does not think that it would
be protecting the City from liability in terms of the people that
would be injured or killed from the speeding.
Mrs. Porceddu stated that the residents are concerned about the
safety on the curve, below the curve, and at the bottom and that
is why they became involved. She said that if the Council
decides to go with Alderperson Hoffman's resolution, it should be
definite that there should be a re- design of the Hudson Street
curve along Therm at some later date. If instead Council goes
with Alderperson Daley's resolution, she thinks it is really
important to think seriously about the Coddington Road inter-
section.
Alderperson Blanchard asked the City Attorney for his views about
the 25 mph versus 30 mph.
City Attorney Guttman stated that the City may not establish a
speed limit applicable throughout the whole City or an area less
than 30 mph. They may set a speed limit on a specific road of no
less than 25 mph and they do have the authority to sign Hudson
a Street to be 25 mph. City Attorney Guttman stated that on a
curve or anywhere else, if engineering agrees it is a dangerous
situation, a sign can be put in place for less than 25 mph but
that is an advisory sign only, it is not a speed limit.
City Attorney Guttman stated in terms of the 27 foot - 30 foot
radius, the radius is not a function of the speed limit, it is a
function of the curve. He said that if there is a lower speed
limit, there can be a tighter curve but then there would be a
need for a wider roadway.
(400'.1 City Attorney Guttman further stated that on the question of
liability, he spoke to Mr. Harp about this after Mr. & Mrs.
Rusoff had given him the facts that they had received over the
weekend. He said that it depends on what question is asked or
how the question is phrased. What Mr. Harp told him was that in
his original discussions, he was either not told or did not
realize that there had been a history of accidents at this curve
and that this had been determined by whatever means to be an
existing dangerous curve. Atty. Guttman stated that essentially
Mr. Harp said if you are aware there is a dangerous situation,
then the City has certain obligations. Essentially Mr. Harp's
advice to Attorney Guttman was the same as Attorney Guttman had
given to Council in executive session.
Alderperson Cummings stated that it is clear to her that the City
needs to make top priority a transportation /strategic plan, and
an assessment of the City's streets, the street patterns and the
traffic burden they now bear and are likely to bear in the
future. We are operating on this project without expressly
stated policy guidelines. The engineering staff has certain
policy guidelines which they can work with, but those are
general. We need some very specific policies for our City.
Alderperson Cummings stated that she believes the Council to be
(660" in agreement that the goal on Hudson Street is to move traffic
more slowly, more safely and to find some way to prevent an
increase of traffic on the street. She said that she is
convinced that the 30 foot pavement width on the Therm curve is
an appropriate way to do that. In terms of safety, she believes
the grade and embankment changes are necessary; the radius
changes are necessary. Alderperson Cummings said that she
believes what we will be getting there will be a road that
visually looks much narrower; we currently have a wide open space
with no curbs, and shoulders sprawling out to a width of 38 to 42
feet. We will be getting 30 feet contained within curbs with
sidewalks (one side), and with trees. The visual clue that you
are entering the City will be there very strongly with this
g May 14, 1990
design before us. She urged Council members to go forward with
the 30 foot curve because it is the right design, because we have
the money in place to do it now and the crews are in place to do
it now. She does not believe the City will get a substantially
better curve design by delay. She, in fact, believes that
through delay, we are very likely to get nothing.
Alderperson Hoffman remarked that Council heard quite a bit a
month ago about the impact of delays on the costs of this
project; whether it could be finished on time, etc. and he
wondered what the prognosis is right now for being able to
continue or to finish the project as the engineers have now
designed it. He asked if there is no longer any doubt that it
can be finished and are there any economic projections on trying
to finish the entire project as now designed. He also asked, if
there are additional changes, such as the Coddington Road
intersection this year, what are the financial impacts of
trying to incorporate that into the project.
City Attorney Guttman responded that what is guaranteed is that
we are going to end up, whatever we do, with negotiations and an
arbitration with the contractor over the amount of cost -over.
City Attorney Guttman emphasized that the Council cannot discuss
numbers publicly as that gives the contractor ammunition to use
during those negotiations.
City Attorney Guttman stated that according to the City Engineer
we have already received $41,000 as the contractor's claim for
the first two weeks of delay. A lot of the numbers we will not
know until the end of the project. It ties into what the weather
is going to be this summer, when he excavates is he going to hit
rock or loose soil. Those things are found out as you do a
project; that is why there are contingencies in a project.
City Attorney Guttman further stated that in terms of continuing
the whole project up through Coddington Road, it is his
understanding that if everything goes exactly perfectly, there
is a chance that you will be able to get the final level of
pavement down this Fall. There is a very good likelihood,
depending on the weather etc. that you will not be capable of
getting the final level pavement down this Fall. He said that
one of the cost estimates that the City_ Engineer has prepared
internally discusses that. He thinks the City Engineer is
confident that you will be able to get the secondary layer down
this Fall and has factored in some numbers for remobilization by
the contractor in the Spring to put the final pavement on top.
Alderperson Hoffman stated that based on what City Attorney
Guttman has said, he is not reassured about our financial
prospects and he thinks it may be just as prudent or perhaps more
so to limit the project and be sure that it can be finished this
year rather than take a chance with continuing it and possibly
incorporating other changes into it which will only increase the
expense.
Alderperson Hoffman asked City Attorney Guttman, in reference to
his remarks on the liability issue, what action the city must
take once the City acknowledges a dangerous situation.
City Attorney Guttman responded that it is under general
negligence law, and the City's obligation is to act as a
reasonably prudent individual. City Attorney Guttman stated,
once again, that if the Council wishes to discuss this issue, he
would advise that it be done in executive session.
J
lr�
441
9 May 14, 1990
Alderperson Romanowski stated that the Council has a
responsibility to both neighborhoods and the City at large. He
thinks our greatest responsibility is to the health and welfare
of everybody in the City, whether they are passing through or
they live here. He said that next is the economic health and
that is secondary to the actual health and welfare.
Alderperson Romanowski said that he has a personal interest in
this curve because relatives of his were seriously injured in an
accident at this curve and he does not want to walk away from
this project and have it on his conscience that he did not do
everything in his power to address every safety issue that he
possibly can in the City, no matter what Ward it is or what
section, or no matter how much political heat he might have to
take. He stated that a modern up -to -date safe road does not
cause speeding. Irresponsible, immature drivers cause speeding.
He thinks vigorous law enforcement and correct placement of
signage and a judicial willingness to impose stiff fines is most
important. He stated that he also thinks the educational
(E1 institutions, which give the fodder for this immature and
�- irresponsible driving need to do a better educational job with
- people they have going to these institutions.
•j Alderperson Romanowski further stated that he calls on the Mayor,
and the Police Department to address this problem of speeding
because it is not only Hudson Street, it is all over the City.
Alderperson Romanowski said that he thinks the City has taken
every possible step that we can take to address the concerns of
this neighborhood on Hudson Street. He said that he has
confidence in our Engineering Department that we will get through
this problem, we will get a safe road, and we will have this
project done.
Alderperson Booth asked in respect to the resolution that
Alderperson Hoffman has introduced which calls for stopping the
project at Pearsall Place in 1990, if that is done does that
change the nature of the contract in such a way that the City
might be open to the argument that we have to re -bid the project
under the State's bidding laws.
City Attorney Guttman stated that he has looked at it very
quickly. He has not gotten a firm answer on it but it is his
understanding that an argument can be made that a contractor
could sue the City. However, he thinks we would at least have a
defensible position, that this was a project that had been
started. We are modifying the project within the scope of what
we can afford to do at this time and it is a continuing project.
He stated that the possibility of being sued by another
contractor obviously does exist.
Alderperson Booth stated that his other question has to do with
the 25 mph versus 30 mph speed limit. He stated that up until
this morning, Council had been informed, over a period of years,
that the minimum speed limit that could be set in the City was 30
mph and the Police Chief is still of that opinion. He said that
State Law does appear, although the wording is not abundantly
clear, to allow designated highways to be set at 25 mph.
Alderperson Booth asked if the Council had known that from the
beginning, would the design of Hudson Street, and particularly
the Therm curve, have changed?
City Engineer Gray responded that if the spirit of the resolution
was the absolute tightest curve and the least taking of property
by going to a 25 mph speed limit, you could go to a tighter
radius; he believes it was 250 instead of 275. He said that as
you go to a tighter radius the width of the pavement gets wider
and so there is a balancing act and he is not sure that it would
have substantially changed the discussion or the course of these
449
10
May 14, 1990
events either way, but the radius of the curvature would still be
substantially larger than it is now. If we had chosen the
absolute minimum based on 25 mph, the pavement would have been
wider than the 30 feet.
Alderperson Booth asked City Engineer Gray if the design would
have changed north of the Therm curve from what we now have.
City Engineer Gray stated that he is not aware that it would have
changed anywhere based on the difference. The one other really
tight radius curve is at the very bottom and that one is
physically held by all of the constraints that are there so that
one, as it is, won't be a 25 mph curve anyway. He said that he
would have to go back and look at all the others but he is not
aware that anything else would have changed.
Alderperson Booth stated that he would like the record to reflect
that he is not suggesting, for a moment, that we would have
adopted a 25 mph speed limit on Hudson Street. He thinks the way
the State law is set, we have that authority but the reality
would probably be we would receive an overwhelming number of
requests to set streets at 25 rather than 30 mph and that is
exactly what the State law intends that the City not do. It would
allow us to move individual streets down to 25 mph but he thinks
we would have to have very significant circumstances that would
justify doing that in particular cases. He can imagine every
residential street in the City, including the one on which he
lives, which would like to see that done. He stated that by
raising the question it doesn't suggest a conclusion that we
would have done that but he did want the City Engineer's answer
to be clear in front of Council.
City Attorney Guttman stated that the State law is very clear
that the City does not have the authority to set a general speed
limit at 25 mph; it can only be on specific designated roads.
Alderperson Peterson stated that it was her understanding that in
the April 2, 1990 resolution that Common Council passed, the
Therm curve section was left rather up in the air and when she
voted on it she wasn't aware that it was going to just be 27
feet. She stated that she has gone back and listened to the tape
to verify her understanding of what she voted for in the
resolution. She read the following statement by the Mayor to
Council from the discussion of that meeting: "Now I hope that
people realize that that (referring to the Therm curve in the
resolution) does not necessarily mean that it will be different
than it is already designed. We are going to look at it with the
committee and so on. It may already be that, I don't know for
sure, there may be some change but I don't know how major it will
be. I hope that is clear, that people are not assuming that it
will be changed markedly. I don't know the answer but don't
assume it."
Alderperson Peterson said that when she voted for the resolution
on April 2, it was with an awareness that very possibly the Therm
curve would be coming back on the table or not being able to fit
the configuration of 27 feet. Since then she has had several
meetings with the engineers and she thinks she understands what
the configuration is, what the constraints are for designing that
curve and she will go along with that section.
She stated that it is difficult to talk about it just one piece
at a time because she does agree with Mrs. Porceddu about
adequate signage up at the top to help mitigate all the other
problems. She said that she is very concerned about that curve
and she wants to make sure that there is totally adequate, maybe
more than adequate signage, to slow down the traffic up there in
addition to merely stating that the curve can go at the 30 feet.
D
I rn
443
11 May 14, 1990
Alderperson Schroeder stated that on the issue of safety, it is
clear that we have to consider Hudson Street as a whole and
consider the safety not only of drivers but also of pedestrians,
of the older people that live at Oak Hill Manor, of the school
children near the South Hill School. He thinks the current
engineer's design has raised serious safety questions. He said
that there is, first of all, the new 90 degree alignment of the
Coddington Road intersection. He thinks that the way the current
alignment works where the Coddington Road traffic would move
directly into Hudson Street raises a safety question. He thinks
that the new, smooth, widened Therm curve could encourage
drivers to increase their speed and to lull them into a false
sense of security not realizing that they are coming into a place
where older citizens live, that they are coming right up against
a school, they are eventually going to get to the Giles Street
curve which is a sharp curve, and he sees that as a serious
safety issue.
('kj Alderperson Schroeder further stated that we are raising the
possibility that while the Therm curve in the current design
might be safer for automobiles, we might be moving accidents
further down the street where the school is, near Oak Hill Manor
and perhaps the Giles Street curve. He stated that he believes
�.x..i that as a temporary measure and with additional signalization,
such as a Stop sign right above the Therm curve at Hudson Place,
with a 25 mph speed limit, with warning signage, the current
situation might actually be safer than the design that is
currently before Council. He thinks that eventually the City
needs to re- design the Therm curve. Alderperson Schroeder would
like it to be looked at again, with the new information we have,
the possibility of having a 25 mph speed limit, looking at the
regulations, looking at local collector streets versus arterial
streets, seeing how that could modify the Therm curve and
possibly the Coddington Road intersection.
Alderperson Schroeder stated that if the Council adopts
Alderperson Hoffman's resolution out of sincere concern about
the safety issues of the current engineer's design, and if the
Council did the temporary mitigation measures, such as reduction
of speed, more warning signs and so forth, he thinks the
liability question is addressed. Furthermore, by adopting
Alderperson Hoffman's resolution, he thinks we ensure that the
project will be done this year. He stated that for all the above
reasons, he would urge Council to support Alderperson Hoffman's
resolution.
Alderperson Golder explained that when he voted for the
compromise resolution on April 2, he was concerned about the
Therm curve because that seemed to be the vaguest part of the
resolution. He believed at the time, that the spirit of that
resolution was no straightening, no widening, maintain the
neighborhood, and make cars go slower with less cars and thereby
make it a safer street. He said that that is what he voted for.
Alderperson Golder stated that
he has been out of
town and
therefore has not been able to go
to all the information sessions
but he has been getting a lot
of information from
different
people and he thinks he can make
an informed decision.
He thinks
that what Council has to keep in
mind is that the residents are
asking and have been asking for
fewer cars and lower
speeds of
cars. He stated that as much as
he would like to get
this over
with, he thinks that we need to
look at the Therm curve and the
upper part of Hudson Street more and Alderperson
Hoffman's
resolution allows for that.
444
12 May 14, 1990
Alderperson Golder suggested that the Council, if possible, get
another opinion by another engineer or engineering firm that is
not involved emotionally with the problem and the lack of trust.
He also thinks some of the legal issues are still unclear and
need to be researched and for that reason he will support
Alderperson Hoffman's resolution.
Mayor Nichols advised the Council that the motion before them is
whether or not to substitute Alderperson Hoffman's resolution.
Alderperson Hoffman's Substitute Resolution
Ayes (3) - Hoffman, Golder, Schroeder
Nays (7) - Booth, Peterson, Cummings, Daley, Romanowski,
Johnson, Blanchard
Motion Fails
Mayor Nichols stated that the motion on the floor is the motion
as submitted which is to "change the resolution of April 2nd to
read: "The width of paving shall be narrowed from 30 to 27 feet
for the project from Hillview Place to the Coddington Road,
except for the Therm curve as presently designed."
Alderperson Booth stated that before a vote is taken, he would
like to know if Council is absolutely clear as to what "presently
designed" means?
Mayor Nichols stated that his interpretation is that it means
everything that you could possibly include as being part of the
Therm curve, including the taper at the top and the taper at the
bottom, would be according to the plans of April 23, 1990, sheet
#7. The Council accepted Mayor Nichols wording for the amending
resolution.
Amending Resolution #1
By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Resolution shall be amended to
read as follows:
"The width for paving shall be narrowed from 30 to 27 feet for
the project from Hillview Place to Coddington Road except for the
Therm curve, including the taper at the top and the taper at the
bottom, according to the plans of April 23, 1990, page 7."
Ayes (7) - Booth, Blanchard, Daley, Cummings, Romanowski,
Johnson, Peterson
Nays (3) - Schroeder, Hoffman, Golder
Carried
Amending Resolution #2
By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Schroeder
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Resolution shall be amended to
read as follows:
"Reconstruction component of the work shall be stopped at the
point at which it enters Pennsylvania Avenue."
Alderperson Blanchard asked Alderperson Daley if it is his
intention that the date for re- design is later on but still as a
part of this project, or are we talking about another project for
that re- design?
Alderperson Daley responded that as with the case of the Pearsall
stoppage, we have been told that any re- design at this point
would effectively stop the project at that point for this year.
He said that he would prefer that the process that is involved in
designing that intersection be much more along the lines that
Alderperson Blanchard proposed for Elm Street. He would like the
residents of Hudson and Coddington Road to be involved in it and
that we use the new process rather than the old process.
D
441)
13 May 14, 1990
City Engineer Grey stated that if the Council wants to pass a
resolution he would suggest that it be short of the Pennsylvania
Avenue intersection. That intersection actually is being
adjusted to try and make it square. There are some elevation
changes as well as alignment changes and it will take some time
to actually pick a point where we can get from the existing
pavement into the new pavement over a short distance.
Mayor Nichols asked City Engineer Gray to advise Council on the
feasibility of this amending resolution.
City Engineer Gray stated that with this particular item it is
just a question of deleting the last 500 feet of the project,
including the intersection work. He said that he cannot tell
Council what the monetary aspects will be. In terms of its being
feasible, it is possible.
Mayor Nichols asked about the issue of storm sewers, water mains,
0A electric poles, etc.
City Engineer Gray stated that had we moved that entire curb then
we would have been into all those problems, but basically, the
alignment above there, the actual road and that pavement, is
within just one or two feet, so he does not expect to run into
problems.
Alderperson Schroeder asked Alderperson Daley to include in his
amendment some direction to the Board of Public Works and the
Department of Public Works regarding a date by which the re-
design of the Coddington Road intersection is to come forward.
Alderperson Daley said that he thinks any re- design, because it
will be going into another budget year, is going to be a
(awool decision that we will probably have to make on capital projects.
He stated that he does not want to limit the process that
Alderperson Blanchard has articulated for Elm Street by setting a
date that may not coordinate with the way it will all work out.
He said that he would much rather see one that allows all the
residents on both Coddington and Hudson to participate.
Alderperson Schroeder asked if it could be stated in the
resolution when that process would begin. He would like
something that indicates that we are serious about doing
something about this intersection and that we are going to
proceed.
Mayor Nichols suggested that if Alderperson Schroeder wished to
prepare an amendment and move it that would be the proper way to
proceed.
Mayor Nichols proposed that Council take a few minutes to look at
the map and be sure they all know where it is they are proposing
to stop the project and what it will look like.
Recess
Common Council recessed at 12:25 p.m. and reconvened in regular
(MOS-1 session at 12:45 p.m.
Alderperson Hoffman asked for clarification of the amendment of
where the project stops.
Alderperson Daley responded that it stops at a point before
Pennsylvania Avenue, as close to Pennsylvania Avenue as can be
done within the engineering design.
Alderperson Hoffman stated that if we are anticipating any
revision of the Coddington Road intersection, don't we want to
pull that stopping point further back?
11
14 May 14, 1990
Alderperson Daley said that gives 500 feet to do it any way the
Coddington and Hudson agree on.
engineers and the residents of
have the design if the decision is made to
He stated we already
with the current one. He thinks some combination that
the
continue
either allowed it to tee the other way or more approximate
existing could all be done within that length of road.
Alderperson Hoffman asked City Engineer Gray if he agrees that
to do a tee of
500 feet back from Coddington would be enough
Hudson into Coddington.
City Engineer Gray stated that he is not convinced that it can be
it would take him two days at
done because of the grade. He said
the question.
the drafting board to answer
City Attorney Guttman asked City Engineer Gray, assuming that he
date
eventually wants to re- design the intersection at a later so
that it comes as close as possible to a tee between Hudson and
to the
Coddington Road, does he want the stopping point closer
Therm curve or closer to Pennsylvania Avenue?
City Engineer Gray stated that he would guess closer to the Therm
curve but he has problems with the alignment as it is because
is
there is already a kind of a jog and if the resolution passed
him a lot of latitude, he is not sure how he is
and it leaves
to close the gap. He said that his intentions at the
going
moment would be to try and get through the Therm curve if that's
passed and to make a transition back into the existing pavement
before Pennsylvania Avenue so that he is not rebuilding that one
twice and wouldn't rebuild the other ones twice. Mr. Gray
horizonal and vertical alignments
further stated that there are
he is not sure exactly how it would look.
and that extra curve so
Alderperson Hoffman asked Alderperson Daley if he would consider
wording that said the project would stop between Hudson Place and
Pennsylvania Avenue at a point determined by the City Engineer.
Alderperson Daley agreed and offered the following wording for
his amending resolution #2:
New Wording for Amending Resolution #2
the be stopped at a point determined by
"RESOLVED, that project
at a point between the end of the curve and the
the engineers
Pennsylvania Avenue intersection."
There was no objection to the change in wording. Therefore, it
was accepted.
Mayor Nichols stated that he does not think this is a sensible
thing to do at this time. He said that he really believes that
the design as it is, with proper signage, can accomplish what we
want to do. He said that he sees no reason, for example, why
there should not be a Stop sign at that intersection, why there
should not be a big overhead highway sign that says "For Route
96B, Turn Left ", "No Trucks ", etc. Mayor Nichols stated that he
does not foresee a design that we are going to come up with that
would be any better. He said that he does not think we are going
to gain much by this process, by adopting this amendment.
A vote on Amending Resolution #2 resulted as follows:
Ayes (5) - Peterson, Hoffman, Schroeder, Golder, Cummings
Nays (5) - Johnson, Blanchard, Romanowski, Daley, Booth
Mayor Nichols voted Nay, breaking the tie.
Motion Fails
Mayor Nichols suggested that Council direct the Board of Public
Works to come up with a set of proposals for traffic control,
signage, including Stop signs, speed limits, etc. to be brought
back to Council.
447
15 May 14, 1990
Mayor Nichols further stated that he can assure the Council as
Chair of that Board, that he will be trying to incorporate every
suggestion that has already been made by the South Hill Civic
Association, as well as some others that he has heard about
since.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Blanchard: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works is directed to develop a
comprehensive traffic control plan for the Hudson Street area
that will include signage, and the investigation into speed
limits, traffic control mechanisms and enforcement, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That the plan shall be done in cooperation with the
Ithaca Police Department to ensure that enforcement is one arm of
that plan, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the comprehensive traffic control plan be brought
t} back to Council as soon as possible.
Discussion followed on the floor on the amending resolution.
A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows:
carried Unanimously
Discussion followed on Amending Resolution #3.
Alderperson Daley stated that given the statements that we have
had in private with the design engineers, it might be most
appropriate that Council direct the Mayor to get the necessary
statements to satisfy those requirements of the design engineer
to allow the radius of the wide -outs to be 15 feet.
Mayor Nichols stated that what the Council is asking for is a
statement, essentially, as he understands it, from the Fire
Department that the 15 foot radius is acceptable to them. He
said that he will get whatever statement he can.
Alderperson Blanchard asked, if those statements are not
forthcoming, then do we go ahead with the wide -outs as designed
or will there need to be another meeting?
Mayor Nichols said that he will know by the June Council meeting
whether he has been successful or not with getting those
statements. He stated there is a question still remaining and we
have to see what we can do about it. We have a statement, made
on Council floor, but not in writing, saying effectively that
they would not put their stamp on a plan that had anything less
that the 25 foot radius. Mayor Nichols stated that he was told
in an informal discussion that if there were appropriate
statements from the Fire Department and the Department of Public
Works that they could live with, or words to that effect, then
they could ahead. There was no commitment in writing and he
thinks that is what we need to get.
(600e, Alderperson Hoffman urged Mayor Nichols and anyone else who is
involved to look at the driveways from the new Fire Stations into
Route 96 and look at the radius of the curve and the width of the
street there. He said they look to him to be narrower than
Hudson Street.
Alderperson Hoffman asked the City Attorney about the City's
obligation to correct or to make changes when we are doing a
reconstruction. How far does it extend from the street? Are we
obligated to change the entrance of other streets into the
project or only on the Hudson Street project?
4a1
16 May 14, 1990
City Attorney Guttman stated that the obligation that we are
talking about here comes from a prior knowledge that this was a
dangerous condition entering the Therm curve. He said that if
you don't have knowledge of something being in a dangerous
condition, you are under no obligation to change it.
Alderperson Hoffman asked City Attorney Guttman if he had any
knowledge that these intersections proposed for wide - mouthing are
dangerous?
City Attorney Guttman responded that he has no knowledge of that
at this point. He said that his understanding has to do more
with the serviceability of the road and the usefulness of the
road rather than the safety situation. He said that is what he
has been told.
Mayor Nichols commented that personally he does not see that they
have to be widened. He said that it is not that he is not going
to do what he can to do that, it is just that he does not want to
make a promise that he can't keep.
Alderperson Hoffman asked Mayor Nichols, if he doesn't get the
statements that he wants, will the wide - mouths go forward?
Mayor Nichols asked the Council if they want to be more specific
and say that the wide -outs should not go forward at this time.
Mayor Nichols then asked City Engineer Gray if from a practical
point of view, as far as feasibility is concerned, could we re-
design it with a smaller radius?
City Engineer Gray responded that it can be done. He said there
was a discussion held with the Design Engineer and discussions
with the Fire Department. If the Council wants a limitation in
this resolution, perhaps as Alderperson Hoffman suggested, the
curves should be whatever you can negotiate with the Fire
Department and the Design Engineer and that it not be any larger
than the new Fire Station.
Alderperson Booth suggested the Council direct the Mayor to use
all possible means to achieve the narrowest street entrances
possible and that the project go forward.
Alderperson Daley accepted the. change in wording and no Council
member objected. The wording for #3 Amending Resolution, will be
as follows:
Amending Resolution #3
By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Resolution be amended as
follows:
"The Mayor be instructed to get the necessary statements from the
appropriate departments to satisfy the requirements of the Design
Engineer to achieve the narrowest street entrances as possible."
A vote on the amending resolution resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
Discussion followed on Amending Resolution #4
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Blanchard
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows under the last Resolved Clause, #4
CURB LAWN: "No pavers of brick, or any other material, shall be
used between the curb and sidewalk. Curb lawns shall be
vegetation."
Carried Unanimously
17 May 14, 1990
Alderperson Daley asked that there be a resolution put forth to
ask that the Council request of the Budget and Administration
Committee that the process to hire the new Traffic Enforcement
Officer be finalized as quickly as possible.
Alderperson Booth stated that the City Controller and Police
Chief have discussed this matter. He said that he has suggested
to both of them that we make this decision in September.
Alderperson Booth explained that adding that person near the end
of the year is doable in the context of the current budget. What
worries him is that the Police Chief is going to come to us with
a series of priorities and he does not think this is going to be
at the top of those list of priorities. He said that the
committee is going to have some real major Police Department
personnel issues to wrestle with and he would like to know what
those other priorities are before we make this commitment.
Alderperson Cummings referred to the April 2, 1990 Common Council
resolution Item 10 Community Participation. She stated there will
continue to be on -going Tuesday morning meetings and she asked if
(� there were any suggestions as to how they can get information in
a clearer fashion. She said that one of the concerns that was
raised by a resident was that we do not know what mode of
f' communication was ever used to communicate the prior resolution
to the Design Engineers. She asked if we simply gave them our
Council resolution and said, "you interpret it" or did we write
additional specs, or verbally transmit additional information.
Alderperson Cummings stated that we have had some very active
participation recently from our engineering staff and she would
like to make sure that our discussions are fully conveyed to the
design engineer so that the design engineers understand what we
are asking to have done and that they understand that it is
coming from broad and diverse resident input, from Council, and
with information incorporated from our engineering staff.
Mayor Nichols responded that written records should be kept of
those meetings. He thinks we have to spell out the process much
more specifically.
Alderperson Johnson stated that in regard to the issue of public
trust and the sense of frustration, he thinks it clearly points
out the need for the resolution that Council passed to ensure as
much public participation as we can by getting residents involved
in early planning processes. He hopes that the Planning and
Development Committee will make this a priority and bring it to
Council as soon as possible.
Alderperson Hoffman stated that at the beginning of this meeting
we were presented with two resolutions for resolving this
problem. He went on to say that the vote on his resolution was
taken under the assumption that the other resolution would
include a reconsideration of the Coddington Road intersection.
He said that he thinks that is a crucial component in this whole
decision; the decision to realign the intersection as now
approved in the amendment. He said that is going to have a great
affect on what happens on Hudson Street. It is going to funnel
even more traffic onto that street and he thinks the residents
have a right to question the good faith of this body given what
happened on that decision.
Alderperson Hoffman asked those who opposed his resolution based
on the assumption that the Coddington Road intersection was up
for discussion to reconsider that. He thinks a major switch
was made. He does not understand exactly why there were not the
votes to support that but he would ask the Council to reconsider
the resolution in light of that decision.
Alderperson Daley responded that he thinks that if the amendment
that Alderperson Hoffman made to the Coddington Road intersection
were to go back to Pennsylvania Avenue, he could support that.
(1
M
May 14, 1990
He said that his problem with that amendment as it ended up was
that we really still were eliminating over 20% of the entire
project and to do that at this point was not in the best
interest of everyone.
Mayor Nichols asked the Council if there were a motion to
reconsider.
Discussion followed on the floor. City Attorney Guttman advised
the Council that right now there is an amendment to stop the
project close to the Therm curve and he thinks it would be within
the Council's province to have a new resolution now to say that
the project will be stopped at a different point.
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Schroeder: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows: That the reconstruction component of
the work be ended at the Pennsylvania Avenue intersection.
Alderperson Cummings stated that she voted for the amendment the
last time; she will vote for it again this time but she does not
want misunderstanding. She said she is voting for it because she
likes angle intersections and she is not crazy about going to
right angle intersections - it is not a great design reason and
she does not believe that the Coddington Road, within the City,
is an appropriate funnel to take the traffic over to Aurora
Street. By her voting for this amendment, she wants the Council
to understand that she is not going to be voting to make that
road a major funnel and continuation of traffic because she
cannot send more traffic down Aurora Street.
Mayor Nichols pointed out that it is not clear to him exactly
what the engineering effect of this motion will be.
Alderperson Romanowski stated that if this is a new motion he
objects to it. We have voted the direction we are going and now
we are putting in a new direction altogether. He said the
engineers have left the meeting and we are doing something
completely opposite of the original motion.
Alderperson Schroeder argued that this was the original proposal
that City Engineer Gray responded to at the meeting, that he
thought it was feasible to stop at Pennsylvania Avenue. He said
the Council later moved it closer to the Therm curve.
City Attorney Guttman stated that his understanding was that the
City Engineer said it could be stopped at several points between
the end of the Therm curve and Pennsylvania Avenue. It gives him
more flexibility closer to the Therm curve.
A vote on Alderperson Schroeder's amendment resulted as follows:
Ayes (6) - Daley, Cummings, Peterson, Hoffman, Schroeder,
Golder
Nays (4) - Booth, Johnson, Blanchard, Romanowski
Carried
ADJOURNMENT:
On a motion the meeting adjourned at-1:25 p.m.
(LMMsta F. Paolang li
City Clerk
l`
Benja A�i—n Nichols
Mayor
(See attached page for summary of Amending Resolutions)
W
May 14, 1990
The following amending resolutions were passed at the Special
Common Council meeting on May 14, 1990:
Amending Resolution 11
By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Resolution shall be amended to
read as follows:
"The width for paving shall be narrowed from 30 to 27 feet for
the project from Hillview Place to Coddington Road except for the
Therm curve, including the taper at the top and the taper at the
bottom, according to the plans of April 23, 1990, page 7."
11151
Amending Resolution H-7-
�� By Alderperson Blanchard: Seconded by Alderperson Peterson
C0 RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works is directed to develop a
comprehensive traffic control plan for the Hudson Street area
that will include signage, and the investigation into speed
limits, traffic control mechanisms and enforcement, and be it
further
RESOLVED, That the plan shall be done in cooperation with the
Ithaca Police Departy ;, ?iit to ensure that enfort-i-ment is one arm of
that plan, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the comprehensive traffic control plan be brought
back to Council as soon as possible.
Loe Amending Resolution #3
By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Cummings
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Resolution be amended as
follows:
"The Mayor be instructed to get the necessary statements from the
appropriate departments to satisfy the requirements of the Design
Engineer to achieve the narrowest street entrances as possible."
Amending Resolution d Y
By Alderperson Daley: Seconded by Alderperson Blanchard
RESOLVED, That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be
amended to read as follows under the last Resolved Clause, #4
CURB LAWN: "No pavers of brick, or any other material, shall be
used between the curb and sidewalk. Curb lawns shall be
vegetation."
Amending Resolution
By Alderperson Schroeder: Seconded by Alderperson Hoffman
RESOLVED, That Amending Resolution #2 shall read as follows:
"That the April 2, 1990 Common Council resolution be amended to
read as follows: That the reconstruction component of the work
be ended at the Pennsylvania Avenue intersection."