Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2006-11-08BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 4:45 p.m. November 8, 2006 PRESENT: Mayor Peterson Commissioners (5) - Jenkins, Chapman, Schlather, Dotson, Wykstra OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney - Hoffman Deputy City Controller - Andrew Superintendent of Public Works - Gray Assistant Superintendent of Streets and Facilities - Ferrel Assistant Superintendent of Water and Sewer – Whitney DAC Liaison – Roberts Assistant City Attorney - Dunn Executive Assistant – Grunder EXCUSED: Common Council Liaison – Coles PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Peterson led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of the August 10, 2005 Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes - Resolution By Commissioner Wykstra: Seconded by Commissioner Dotson RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the August 10, 2005 Board of Public Works meeting be approved with noted corrections. Commissioner Chapman stated that there is a problem with the timing of approving these minutes as they are so old at this point. He thinks the Board should revise the way they consider and approve the minutes. Mayor Peterson stated that is an issue that she and Supt. Gray have been discussing and that she suggested to Supt. Gray that all the minutes be done and up-to-date by December 31, 2006; and knows that will be difficult to accomplish. Commissioner Chapman stated that to him it would be appropriate to keep up with the current minutes, approving minutes of meetings that were held recently and then filling in with approval of the older minutes; at least then the Board is working with recent history and not looking back fifteen months. Supt. Gray requested that this discussion be held at next week’s meeting and the Board agreed. A Vote on the Resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: Supt. Gray requested the addition of item 9A under Parking and Traffic entitled “2007 Parking Rates – Power to Act”. No Board member objected. MAYOR'S COMMUNICATIONS: Mayor Peterson asked Board members if they received a letter from the Tompkins County Environmental Management Council about the off-leash dog park. She wanted to make sure everyone had since this is a discussion item for Power to Act later in the meeting. Board members responded that they received the letter. Board of Public Works – November 8, 2006- Page 2 Mayor Peterson stated that Common Council approved the 2007 budget on November 1st with no changes to the Department of Public Works budget. Assistant City Attorney Dunn addressed the Board to update them on the new sidewalk in front of the Hilton Garden Inn. She stated that Asst. City Engineer West and Traffic Engineer Logue spoke with Mark Grainer, from the New York State Department of Transportation, concerning it and had what they characterized as “a fairly worthwhile conversation”. City staff suggested to Mr. Grainer that one way to solve the problem would be to extend the curb at the corner of Tioga and Seneca Streets with a bump out and then the area on Seneca Street would be wide enough to park cars without the increased danger of them being hit by other vehicles traveling on Seneca Street. She further stated that representatives from New York State Department of Transportation felt this was an acceptable way to resolve the problem, since Seneca Street is actually a State road. She distributed to the Board a draft letter that she has written to the State that outlines the City’s proposed solution to the problem. City staff has also sent TCAT the proposal to see if buses would have any problems with this proposed solution as they turn from Tioga Street onto Seneca Street. She further noted that one of the things that she thinks is very important, from the City’s standpoint, is the sentence where it says “however, if NYSDOT is willing to authorize the City to proceed in the State’s stead, the City will require the Hilton Garden Inn to make the necessary modifications” and then this very important part “at its own expense” (the Hilton’s own expense). She further stated that maybe she should change the wording a little bit so that it says “at the Hilton’s own expense” so there is no confusion whatsoever. She asked the Board to review the letter and provide feedback to her Mayor Peterson stated that this is a topic that the Board has been interested in and are interested in pursuing. She further stated that she would like to discuss with Asst. City Attorney Dunn some details of the letter. Mayor Peterson asked the Board if they would object to her working with Assistant City Attorney Dunn to finalize the letter. No Board member objected. DAC Liaison Roberts stated that the Disability Advisory Council has been concerned about how the Hilton Garden Inn entrance disrupts the path of travel along Seneca Street and would be very supportive of any improvements to accommodate safe travel on the sidewalk. COMMUNICATIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE THE BOARD: The following people addressed the Board regarding the proposed rules and regulations for the Proposed Off-Leash Dog Park: Herb Engman, Town of Ithaca. Eric Griffith, Town of Lansing Megan MacCallum, Town of Dryden Ken Zeserson, Village of Ulysses Seth Sicroff, City of Ithaca Empar Sicroff, City of Ithaca Brian Zapf, Seneca County Betsy Boush, City of Ithaca Alicia Plotkin, Seneca County Katrina Modeiros, Town of Ithaca RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC Commissioner Schlather wanted it noted for the record that the Board was just given the proposed regulations today. He stated that the Board would probably vote today to give itself Power to Act on this item at the next meeting. Mayor Peterson confirmed that it was not intended for the Board to act on the proposed regulations at today’s meeting and supported Commissioner Schlather’s recommendation that the Board give itself Power to Act on them for the Committee of the Whole meeting next week. Board of Public Works – November 8, 2006- Page 3 Commissioner Schlather requested that Ms. Plotkin, who is an attorney that he has great respect for, provide her analysis of the liability issues to the Board for its review as they discuss the proposed regulations. City Attorney Hoffman noted for the Board that he added a couple of asterisks to items listed on the proposed regulations where the two-person sub-committee didn’t reach agreement. He stated that he would be happy to provide the Board with his opinion on the liability and CEQR issues. CREEKS, BRIDGES, AND PARKS: Power to Act – Off Leash Dog Area – Resolution: By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Jenkins WHEREAS, Common Council has directed the Board of Public Works to adopt and post rules for use of the temporary off-leash dog area on or before December 1, 2006, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works gives itself Power to Act on items related to the off-leash dog area at its meeting on November 15, 2006. Commissioner Schlather requested a quick report from the sub-committee before voting on the Power to Act. City Attorney Hoffman reported that there was what he would call “a very constructive meeting”. There were several dog owners there, at least three of whom he believes were attempting to represent TCDog, as well as Herb Engman who had been suggested at an earlier Board meeting because of his prior involvement with the County Environmental Management Council and the concerns that group had about adjacent natural areas, as well as the Supt. of Public Works, himself, and Robert Sarachan who is part of the City Attorney’s office, and who prosecutes violations. The proposed rules had been circulated in an earlier version and they were modified somewhat as a result of discussion at the meeting. This was considered a sub-committee meeting of Commissioners Jenkins and Wykstra with guests. The guests were invited to participate and provide suggestions, which they did. There seemed to be agreement between the sub-committee members on almost all of the issues, but there were a few where there was friendly disagreement. One is in #11 on whether there should be a restriction or a prohibition of dogs under six months old and there was some back and forth on four months versus six months. Then in #12 whether the limit of two dogs per owner/handler was appropriate or whether three dogs should be the limit. In #13 whether the age at which children are supposed to be accompanied by adults should be twelve or something younger. He thinks under ten was another age that was mentioned, there was some discussion about whether anything needed to be said about children. He noted, for the Board’s information, the first sentence of #13 was added at the meeting and had not been proposed earlier, that was not initiated by staff. He invited Commissioners Wykstra or Jenkins to provide their input from the meeting as well. Commissioner Jenkins stated that she would start with #11 since the Board just received the information she would suggest that dogs under four months are not allowed; otherwise allow dogs four months and up since they can have their shots and be licensed at 4 months. She is still not certain of more than two dogs per person because to her three dogs is a pack and can have a pack mentality. Maybe after a certain amount of time operating the off-leash dog park that could change to three if there have been no problems, but she would suggest to start with allowing two dogs and then go from there. She is concerned about children under four years of age because when they are small and are walking at eye level with the dog and if the dog(s) are protecting the children and another dog comes up towards the child, she is concerned that there might be a fight between the dogs in order to protect the child. She would also suggest that children under 12 years of age be accompanied by an adult. Commissioner Wykstra stated that he is fine with four months of age for dogs with the evidence that has been presented as far as vaccinations, licensing, and maturity. He is a little bit leery about three dogs, but after hearing what he heard from the community that is using the space, he would support that. He does have concerns though if this becomes a well known and established dog park that is widely publicized with more people coming into it that the Board might need to re-visit the regulations to adjust them accordingly. Board of Public Works – November 8, 2006- Page 4 Commissioner Schlather stated that he had a question for the City Attorney about the request for CEQR review, and whether that will be necessary before the area is used for the proposed off-leash dog park. Mayor Peterson stated that she would start in answer to that and then turn it over to the City Attorney. She further stated that the resolutions in front of Common Council included a resolution for CEQR to proceed first before an off-leash dog area was established. A Common Council member moved to post-pone indefinitely that vote on the CEQR process and that motion was approved by Common Council. It was not recommended by the City Attorney or herself to proceed without CEQR; however, Common Council voted otherwise. City Attorney Hoffman stated that decisions about CEQR are subject to legal challenge and asked the Board if they wanted him to discuss that in open session? Commissioner Schlather responded that he wanted the Board to be as transparent as possible about this particular decision. He stated that his concern is that since the issue has now been squarely raised, he doesn’t think the Board can ignore it. He is also wondering whether violators of these rules are subject to punishment under the Ithaca City Code and if that is so, then he thinks perhaps there should be some sort of a warning on the regulations to that effect. City Attorney Hoffman stated that he did consult with Bob Sarachan, City Prosecutor, who prosecutes violations, it is his opinion that given the language that is already in the code and the Common Council decision to establish or create this exemption to the leash law and delegate rule making to the Board of Public Works that those things together make it possible to prosecute violators of the rules. He further stated that on the question of CEQR issues he is reluctant to go into the legal issues in open session. Commissioner Schlather stated that he does not wish that this be discussed in a private, behind the scenes sort of way. He further stated that either this is subject to CEQR, in which event it ought to happen, or it is not subject to CEQR, in which event the Board will defer to the wisdom of Common Council. Mayor Peterson asked the Board members if they were comfortable discussing this in open session? The Board agreed. Mayor Peterson stated that she raised this question with the City Attorney this morning during their weekly meeting. Her thought on this was that the Board is an advisory board to Common Council which made its decision and that is where it is right now. City Attorney Hoffman stated that he would comment since no one objects to having this discussion now. He did review the actions that are subject to CEQR and it was his opinion that exempting the Festival Lands from the leash law was an action subject to CEQR and he conveyed that opinion to Common Council and Common Council chose to proceed without environmental review, emphasizing that this was a temporary step that would last only for a year. That, as conceived by Common Council, did not involve any explicit physical change to the land. He would agree that both of those things would be considerations and limit the impact but that they do not change his opinion. He further stated that Common Council has chosen to proceed and create the exemption; given that has happened, it is his opinion that for this body not to enact rules would make the situation worse. That is his legal opinion. He noted that this body does not have the power to overturn Common Council’s decision to create an exemption to the leash law because that has already happened. As of December 1st, it will be legal to have your dog off-leash at the Festival Lands. It’s his opinion that it is not responsible for the City to fail to enact reasonable rules and notices that would mitigate certain impacts. He stated that none of this prevents the Board from communicating certain opinions to Common Council about things that have happened. He also addressed the issue of a fence and noted that while it may be true that a fence would mitigate or address some concerns about the impact of the off-leash dogs, he would also be nervous about authorizing something that does have a physical impact on the land without CEQR review. It’s not a good situation to be in, but he thinks that now that we’re Board of Public Works – November 8, 2006- Page 5 in that situation that to authorize something that clearly does have a physical and visual impact, etc. could be problematic. He noted for the Board that there is a four month statute of limitations for a challenge to the Common Council decision about environmental review. Commissioner Schlather asked if the City Attorney, by the next meeting, could craft some language with respect to the violation issue that could be attached to this set of rules. He further stated that he would take to heart what the City Attorney had said otherwise. DAC Liaison Roberts stated that he would like to support Commissioner Schlather’s comments regarding an addition to the rules about violations and enforcement of the rules. Supt. Gray reported to the Board that the proposed off-leash area has been physically marked out and encouraged Board members to visit the area themselves to see how it delineates the area. A Vote on the Resolution Resulted as Follows: Carried Unanimously BUILDINGS, PROPERTIES, REFUSE, AND TRANSIT: Greater Ithaca Activities Center – Exterior Masonry Repairs – Award of Bid - Resolution By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Jenkins WHEREAS, bids were received on September 26, 2006, for masonry repairs of the Greater Ithaca Activities Center including repairs of brick facades and re-pointing of brickwork and, WHEREAS, the 2006 General Fund Budget included capital funds of $200,000 for the project and, WHEREAS, C&S Resources, Inc., 499 Col. Eileen Collins Boulevard, Syracuse, NY 13212 submitted a total base bid of $165,125.00, therefore be it, RESOLVED, That the contract for the Greater Ithaca Activities Center – Exterior Masonry Repairs – is awarded to C&S Resources, Inc., 499 Col. Eileen Collins Boulevard, Syracuse, NY 13212 for their low submitted bid of $165,125.00, and be it further, RESOLVED, That the Superintendent of Public Works be authorized to enter into and administer the contract. Carried Unanimously PARKING AND TRAFFIC: Power to Act - 2007 Parking Rates - Resolution By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Dotson RESOLVED, that the Board gives itself Power-to-Act on items related to the 2007 City parking rates at its meeting on November 15, 2006. Mayor Peterson asked if there had been a sub-committee meeting since the Board’s last meeting. City Chamberlain Parsons reported that the sub-committee reviewed all the contracts that had rates that the City must charge. They looked at the usage and discussed the usage at the Seneca Street garage, they discussed the Cayuga Green budget, and came up with rates that are listed on the proposed resolution. Her biggest concern was that Seneca Street garage is full and if the rates are raised sufficiently they are hoping that would move some people to the Cayuga Street garage and free up some transient parking at the Seneca Street garage. She stated that staff are hopeful that the Green Street garage will go on line in 2007, and rates will need to be established. She explained how rates had been proposed based on some City agreements that list August 1st as the anniversary date and the change date for rates. Board of Public Works – November 8, 2006- Page 6 Commissioner Schlather thanked City Chamberlain Parsons for taking all the comments and putting together a draft that has captured everything the committee discussed. He stated that the committee tried to put together a fully comprehensive resolution that could then be used as part of the historical record for future years with respect to where all the contracts are, what the provisions are, what the current rates are, and to pick up the anomalies. He stated that he believes the hotel contract is always tied to the August 1st anniversary date for the next 99 years. City Chamberlain Parsons stated she discussed the proposed rates with City Controller Thayer this afternoon. She noted that they both agree that because the City is not only changing rates, but it’s doing construction, usage patterns are changing, there is increased usage in some places, and a lot of equipment is being installed into places that will change revenues and the proposed rates reflect those things. The City Controller was comfortable using the proposed figures and felt the assumptions she made were sufficient as far as our budgeted numbers are because the best these can be are best guesses at this point. Commissioner Dotson brought up the only contentious point in the meeting which was centered around the frustration everyone felt with how the contracts didn’t reflect the parking rates that had been voted on last year. She noted that no one on the committee was really sure how that had happened, but there was a strong feeling that we do all that we can to see that these rates are enforced as carefully as possible, that the hotel parking agreement is enforced extremely carefully, and just the frustration about how many parking spots are contracted out at lower rates that we have little flexibility to either raise or lower them. She stated that the difference between the public rate and the contracted rates can be seen and there is a huge difference which is very frustrating. A Vote on the Resolution Resulted as Follows: Carried Unanimously Recyclable Paper Bags for Yard Waste - Resolution Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra WHEREAS, Chapter 196, Garbage and Refuse, adopted by Common Council in 1992, authorizes property owners placing yard waste for collection to use either containers of not more than 32 gallons nor greater than 70 lbs., or disposable plastic bags at least 1.5 mils in thickness but not more than 50 lbs. (§196-3.B), and WHEREAS, the Board and Mayor have received comments from staff that it would be more efficient to collect yard wastes in large heavy-duty openmouthed paper bags, which can be composted directly with yard wastes, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works requests that Common Council amend §196-3.C (1) to require either containers or paper bags as described above in the code, and be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council reconfigures this and future legislation to allow the Board of Public Works to develop and modify regulations which impact department operation in a manner anticipated in this Chapter and outlined in §196-11. Commissioner Schlather stated that this resolution, he thinks, needs to be reconstructed in fairly substantial sorts of ways; more importantly he thinks that the Board needs to do more homework as a Board. He thinks the Board needs to develop some data upon which it can then honestly say that it has investigated this and determined that it is more efficient and safe to use heavy duty, open mouthed, paper bags as opposed to plastic bags. He proposed that the Board sort of promulgate that this is what the City is thinking of doing and ask the public to comment and speak about it and then make a determination based on that input; hoping to get something done by December. He would move to table this or refer it to a sub-committee. The Board agreed to withdraw the resolution. Board of Public Works – November 8, 2006- Page 7 WATER AND SEWER: Initial Discussion of Water Report: Commissioner Schlather stated that the Board of Public Works is charged by the City of Ithaca Charter with the responsibility of making the decision as to the City’s future water supply. He further stated that Common Council may choose to make that decision, but as of right now they have not chosen to do so. He urged all of the Board to carefully read the reports from O’Brien and Gere to become very familiar with the underlying issues. He noted that the choices have been narrowed down to either rebuilding the current water plant or buying water from Bolton Point. He stated that there are good arguments on both sides and that he is not here to advocate for either side at this point. He noted that the Board of Public Works and Common Council held a joint meeting and a vote was made to authorize O’Brien and Gere to do a review of the two different options and provide recommendations either for or against each option. They have not done full environmental review on either option at this point and the question now is should an environmental review for both options be undertaken before a decision is made. Mayor Peterson stated that she would request that Alderperson Tomlan, who was on the sub-committee, put this item on the agenda for the Planning Committee to discuss with Common Council in order to hear what Common Council wishes to do. She further stated that she knows that some Common Council members, as the elected officials, wish to make the decision. She stated that she is sure that Common Council would want to hear recommendations and opinions from the Board of Public Works. Mayor Peterson stated that she would like to have O’Brien and Gere give a presentation on the two options to the Board of Public Works and Common Council in a joint meeting. She feels that this would be a good opportunity for everyone to hear the same presentation and have questions answered and discussed together as a group. She would like to avoid duplication of efforts by both the Board of Public Works and Common Council in reviewing the options because of timing for when a decision needs to be made. Supt. Gray stated that the Board also has an obligation to the public because of the rate structures and potential impacts from either decision, and this will be a useful opportunity to bring the public along in the learning process by also holding public information forums. Mayor Peterson stated that the sub-committee group was diverse and the different kinds of impacts were brought up in those meetings such as the different water quality issues from the different sources, the chemicals that are used for each source of water, the future potential for each of those water sources, redundancy, and going from three water plants down to two in the community if the purchase option is chosen and what does that mean; there are a lot of pieces to this issue and it is a very important decision for the City which could have impacts for the next 100 years. Further discussion followed on the floor regarding what information was available to the Board for review, the importance of the decision, how the decision will be made, what body will be the ultimate decision maker, how review of information should occur, and general questions about the process going forward. ADJOURNMENT On a motion the meeting adjourned Sarah L. Myers Carolyn K. Peterson Information Management Specialist Mayor