Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2007-04-11BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 4:45 p.m. April 11, 2007 PRESENT: Mayor Peterson Commissioners (5) - Dotson, Chapman, Schlather, Tripp, Wykstra OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney - Hoffman Superintendent of Public Works - Gray Assistant Superintendent of Streets and Facilities - Ferrel Assistant Superintendent of Water and Sewer – Whitney Common Council Liaison – Coles DAC Liaison – Roberts Executive Assistant – Grunder Planning & Development Director – VanCort Deputy Planning & Development Director – Cornish Environmental Engineer – Gibson Economic Development Director – DeSarno EXCUSED: Superintendent of Public Works - Gray Commissioner Jenkins PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Peterson led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Dotson RESOLVED, That the Board grant itself Power to Act on the approval of the minutes listed below at their meeting of April 18, 2007: September 7, 2005 through December 21, 2005 February 1, 15, March 1, April 19, and May 3, 2006 January 4, 18, March 15, April 5, May 17, and June 7, 2006 Carried Unanimously ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: Mayor Peterson requested the addition of item 11B The Authorization for Additional Funding to Continue on with the Scoping and Other Studies for the Environmental Review Process – Resolution. No Board member objected. MAYOR’S COMMUNICATIONS: Mayor Peterson stated that she received an e-mail from some residents of Giles Street concerned about speeding and safety in their neighborhood. She further stated that neighbors met with various officials, including herself and Mary Tomlan, Third Ward alderperson regarding issues on Giles Street, especially now that the South Aurora Street bridge is closed. She explained that some recommendations were made and some of the neighbors feel that the City is not responding quickly enough to them. She explained that their recommendations had been forwarded to Engineering Aid Kent Johnson for follow up. She reported that there is additional police enforcement on Giles Street to keep motorists from speeding in that 30 mile per hour zone as well. She stated that these concerns are relevant to current discussions regarding the City’s water source options with Six Mile Creek and the water shed area off of Giles Street. Mayor Peterson explained that Bob DeLuca, from Tompkins County Mental Health had met with her regarding the closing of the Green Garage and the closing of the surface lot used for parking by employees, county cars, handicapped parking for visitors and clients to the Mental Health Building. Mr. DeLuca wanted to know if there would be a way that the City would allow the County to park its cars in the Cayuga Garage so they could move them off of their small parking lot that they have East of the Mental Health April 11, 2007 2 Building to open up that lot for clients of the Mental Health Building, handicapped parking, and for drop-offs. She further stated that Mr. DeLuca had explained that in the mental health field often the first visit for the first intake of a client is really important and if there is difficulty getting to the Mental Health facility that could be just enough to push somebody over that edge of a decision, and they would not stop because it’s too hard to get there for an appointment. She stated that she personally does not see any problem with parking the cars in the Cayuga Garage at this moment and the question then become an inter-municipal question do we charge for each spot or do we agree to allow the County to park there for about seven months or so free of charge during this difficult time to assist with their visitors and clients. DAC Liaison Roberts stated that he is the Chair of the Mental Health Board and that the County has noted a drop-off in appointments and an increase in “no shows” because of the difficulty with parking. The people that are affected by this have psychiatric histories and physical disabilities and very little resources and they need to be able to park close to the building. The construction and the changes around the area have directly affected the clientele of the building and creating a little more parking would help resolve some of those problems. Discussion followed on the floor regarding what agreements may already be in place with the County for parking and what the cost would be to allow the County cars to park in the garage for free. Further discussion followed as to whether the garage has the room to accommodate these vehicles. The Board agreed that there isn’t anything that would preclude the County from parking their vehicles in the garage and paying for the spaces in the meantime, if they wish to free up the small parking lot next to their building for their clients. The Board agreed to add this request to the agenda for the sub- committee that has been meeting to discuss parking. COMMUNICATIONS AND HEARINGS FROM PERSONS BEFORE THE BOARD: Doria Higgins, Town of Ithaca, addressed the Board regarding the decision that needs to be made regarding the City’s water supply. Jan Aguirre, Town of Enfield, addressed the Board regarding the motorcycle ban in City parking garages and proposals that could be considered to eliminate the ban. Monica Roth, Cornell Cooperative Extension, addressed the Board regarding their citizen pruning program for the City of Ithaca which has been run since 1991 and is all done on a volunteer basis. She requested a monetary contribution from the City to help support the program. RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC: Commissioner Tripp responded to the comments made regarding the Citizen Pruning program and when the Board might be able to discuss this topic. Commissioner Schlather responded to the comments made regarding the motorcycle issue and questioned whether the City did actually “ban” motorcycles from city garages. Asst. Supt. Ferrel responded in the affirmative that that was done. Commissioner Schlather stated that the parking sub-committee is going to meet on April 19, and this clearly is an important issue that the committee has been trying to resolve, and he apologized that it had not been done yet. He stated that increasingly people are using motorcycles for fuel efficiency and lots of other reasons and the Board recognizes that so he would ask that this item be added to the agenda for the April 19, 2007 sub- committee meeting. Mayor Peterson stated that agenda already has six items on it, including the request from Tompkins County Mental Health building and that she would try to include this item on that agenda as well. 3 April 11, 2007 BUILDINGS, PROPERTIES, REFUSE, AND TRANSIT – RESOLUTION: Request to Declare a Strip of Land in the 100 Block of South Aurora Street as Surplus Property Commissioner Schlather stated that there is a request that the Board act on the resolution below today. He further stated that the Board already discussed this and decided what they felt was appropriate. He further stated that he is not sure what useful purpose is being served in re-considering and re-discussing that which the Board spent a huge amount of time on less than a year ago. He further stated that the Board did not wish to limit it to just the air rights, they wanted the sliver of land left the way it was designed and not just a ten foot clearance. His point is that he is not going to move this resolution because there are other things that the Board needs to get to this evening that should bear more consideration. Director of Planning and Development VanCort explained that what is being proposed is not quite as Commissioner Schlather has described it. He further stated that what is being suggested is that there would be at the ground going up probably two stories, a open section that would be as wide as the widest point between the sidewalk and what is shown on the drawing at the most southerly point, that width would be maintained all along where the building is proposed to be built. He explained that above that for a small sliver of 454 square feet, the building would come out over that space at the twenty foot level or so. He stated that if the Board is worried about site lines or if it is worried about that feeling of being claustrophobic, it’s not going to be that way, it’s going to be a very open space from the sidewalk to way higher than the arcade along the Rothchild’s building or anything like this in downtown. He stated that he doesn’t see this as a big problem from any of the arguments that were made against it earlier and it’s quite different from the previous proposal. The reason that the owner of the Rothchild’s building is asking for it is because he is looking at a new development proposal where that small amount of space makes a big difference for them. Commissioner Schlather stated that the resolution states ten feet and commencing no less than ten feet above ground level, and it covers the remainder of the area that the Board had previously argued so at length about and considered. He further stated that it is being referred to as a small sliver, but it is the only sliver that the City was able to salvage for the public good from the original declaration of surplus. Commissioner Schlather stated that the original proposal was to take the area to the East. He further stated that the Board then talked about trying to move it into the bus stop. The Board finally agreed that the end point would be at the side of the bus stop just as it’s shown on this document, leaving a very small modest sliver which was roughly equal to the distance between the side of the road and the southern most portion of the eastern edge of the land so that it would be somewhat uniform all along. He further stated that the Board agreed that was going to be reserved for the City. Now, less than a year later, the resolution is back before the Board and it states that it wants that sliver of land. He is saying two things, one is that the Board has a lot of pressing issues to discuss this evening and therefore he doesn’t feel inclined to spend a lot of time dealing with this issue. Secondly, the Board already discussed and resolved this issue. Alderperson Coles stated that this resolution refers to rooms and she thought this project was for housing and asked what had changed. Director of Planning and Development VanCort explained that the developers are now talking about the possibility of a hotel on this site and suggested that the resolution below be brought back to the Board for next week’s Committee of the Whole meeting. Request to Declare a Strip of Land in the 100 Block of South Aurora Street as Surplus Property WHEREAS, on July 12, 2006, the Board of Public Works passed a resolution declaring as surplus a small, L-shaped parcel of City owned land adjacent to the Rothchild Building, on the west side of South Aurora Street (shown as the cross-hatched area on the attached drawing – Exhibit A - dated 7/12/06), and recommending to Common Council that any conveyance of said surplus property be subject to certain listed conditions regarding public works functions; and 4 April 11, 2007 WHEREAS, at that time the Board decided that the City should retain title to a small triangle of land located between the then-designated surplus parcel and a retaining wall located slightly to the east of it (see Exhibit A); and WHEREAS, the owner of the Rothchild Building has indicated that in order to develop privately-owned land east of the Rothchild Building in an economically viable manner, it would be necessary to utilize the air space above the afore-mentioned triangle of land, by extending the stories above the ground floor of any new building on such land over the triangular space, either on columns (thus forming an arcade) or by cantilevering; and WHEREAS, the owner of the Rothchild Building has therefore proposed to purchase from the City said additional triangular parcel of land or the air rights above it, with the understanding that the City would retain a permanent right of ground-level public, pedestrian passage over the premises (either through the arcade or under the cantilevered portion of the building); and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has reviewed the proposed new disposition parcel, including the additional sliver requested by the Rothchild’s owner, and is of the opinion that such disposition would not have a negative impact on Department of Public Works operations, provided that the below conditions are met; and WHEREAS, since the adoption of the Board’s resolution on July 12, 2006, the plans (by others) to replace and upgrade the bus shelter located within the area then designated as surplus have been suspended indefinitely; and WHEREAS, it was determined by the Board in its resolution of July 12, 2006, that City ownership of the parcel approved for disposition on July 12, 2006, is not required for public works functions, provided that any conveyance thereof be conditioned upon the following: (1) the relocation of any utility line(s) now existing upon or beneath such land and associated easement therefore, to a location acceptable to the Superintendent of Public Works, or other arrangement acceptable to the Superintendent which provides for adequate and perpetual access to and maintenance of such line(s), all at no additional cost to the City as a result of the conveyance or future development of the land; (2) the transfer to any grantee of all responsibility (including cost) for maintaining or replacing the retaining walls now existing along or in proximity to the easterly and northerly boundaries of such land, and for restoring to grade level with the sidewalk any areas lying between the existing City sidewalk/plaza area and the exterior walls of any building constructed on the site by the grantee; (3) a written agreement binding the grantee, at the grantee’s sole cost, to assume responsibility for the demolition of the existing bus shelter which occupies a portion of such land, and, if such demolition is to occur prior to the construction of a replacement shelter (by others), to provide for temporary, covered seating comparable to that available in the existing shelter, in a form and location acceptable to the City; and (4) the maintenance of public access to the stairway to the Green Street parking facility, from the South Aurora Street sidewalk/plaza area; and (5) reversion of title to the City if the land in question is not used in the manner as approved by site plan review, within five years of conveyance by the City; now therefore be it 5 April 11, 2007 RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby reaffirms that continued City ownership of the parcel of the land originally sought for purchase by the owner of the Rothchild Building (as shown on Exhibit A), is not necessary, from a public works standpoint, provided that conditions (1), (2), (4) and (5), set forth above, are attached to any conveyance thereof and made binding upon the grantee and the grantee’s heirs, administrators, successors or assigns, together with a new Condition (3) as follows: “(3) a written agreement binding the grantee to assume responsibility (at the grantee’s sole cost) for the demolition of the existing bus shelter which occupies a portion of such land, and, if construction of a replacement shelter has not by that time been effected by others, to pay for all costs associated with the construction of a new shelter of a scale, capacity and quality comparable to that shown for the proposed replacement shelter depicted in the plans prepared in 2004, for TCAT, for “Site 2” on South Aurora Street (copy attached as Exhibit B), in a form and location acceptable to the City; and” and it is further RESOLVED, That continued City ownership of the air rights (commencing no less than 10 feet above ground level) above an additional, adjacent sliver of land, between the previously-designated surplus parcel and the sidewalk on the west side of South Aurora Street (shown as “Area of Air Rights – 454 Sq. Ft.” on a drawing prepared by Thomas Associates, dated April 5, 2007, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit C) is not necessary from a public works standpoint, provided that the above conditions are similarly applied to its conveyance; and be it further RESOLVED, That the afore-mentioned air rights are therefore determined by the Board of Public Works to be surplus; and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board hereby recommends that, in any case, space be reserved by the City for an urban-scale sidewalk (approximately 13 feet curb-to-building-face in adjacent blocks), adjacent to (i.e., easterly of) the previously-designated surplus parcel; and it is further RESOLVED, That the Board requests that its concern about maintaining appropriate and safe lines of sight for those northbound on South Aurora Street, in the transition from residential buildings south of the Aurora Street bridge to the downtown core, be addressed in any sales contract and/or site plan review process for development of the site in question; and it is further RESOLVED, That this determination and recommendation be submitted to the Common Council for its consideration with regard to any disposition of the subject property; and it is further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works requests that the staff of the Department be involved in the development of any conditions which are to be attached to the conveyance of the land in question from City ownership. PARKING AND TRAFFIC: Collegetown Traffic Signal Consultant Award – Resolution WHEREAS, a Capital Project for the replacement of the Collegetown Traffic Signal at the intersection of College Avenue and Dryden Road was included in the City of Ithaca 2007 Budget as Capital Project #709 in the amount of $125,000, and WHEREAS, the Engineering Office received three proposals for design and construction inspection and recommended Fisher Associates as the consultant, and WHEREAS, the scope of work for the study is acceptable to the City of Ithaca and Fisher Associates at a cost not to exceed $19,500 for the base contract, $1,700 for an optional signal warrant analysis, and $9,500 for an optional construction inspection/management service, and WHEREAS, funds for the study are available from Capital Project 709, now therefore be it 6 April 11, 2007 RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works authorizes the Superintendent of Public Works to enter into contract with Fisher Associates for professional services related to the design and reconstruction of the traffic signal in Collegetown at a total project cost not to exceed $35,000. Power to Act on Collegetown Traffic Signal Consultant Award – Resolution By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works grant itself Power to Act on the Collegetown Traffic Consultant Award – Resolution at their next Committee of the Whole meeting scheduled for April 18, 2007. Carried Unanimously CREEKS, BRIDGES, AND PARKS: Golf Course Employee Rate Proposal - Resolution Mayor Peterson stated that she asked that this item be placed on the agenda and explained that she had met with the Police Department Union President last week to talk about employee rates for the City golf course and suggested that it would probably need to be a policy that would apply to all employees. The Board agreed to discuss this item at their Committee of the Whole meeting scheduled for April 18, 2007. WATER AND SEWER: Proposed CEQR Resolution for Upgrades to the City’s Drinking Water Source: Extensive discussion following on the floor regarding suggested changes to Parts I, II, and III of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Some of the suggested changes related to the following: pre-existing access road off Burns Road, public controversy, re-wording of the project description, settling lagoons, dam safety, de- watering site, dredging, impact on land, unique natural areas, L-shaped pre- sedimentation basin, next steps in the DEIS process, expansion of buildings at the Bolton Point facility, redundancy, impact of potential significant replacement of existing pipe within the next 100 years, impact on Six Mile Creek, eventual re-placement/re- lining of pipe within the next 100 years, using the word “re-build” in place of “re- placement”, Natural Areas Commission’s concerns, public concerns with the consolidation of municipal services and efficiencies, public safety about the loss of system redundancy and system reliability, the majority of which is distributed by gravity, public concerns about the need to consolidate municipal services and related efficiencies, and about preserving the Unique Natural Area of the Six Mile Creek watershed area or Six Mile Creek area, scoping and public meetings. WATER AND SEWER: Proposed CEQR Resolution - Evaluation of the City of Ithaca Drinking Water Upgrade Options Including: Purchase Option from the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission or Replacement of the City’s Existing Water Treatment Plant By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Dotson WHEREAS, the current water source for the City of Ithaca’s water distribution system relies upon the Six Mile Creek watershed and the filtration plant, built in 1903, located on Water Street in the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, due to the age of the filtration plant and impending changes in water quality standards, significant upgrades to the plant will be required in the near future, including replacement of the filtration plant, dredging of the upper reservoir and modifications to the intake system, settling lagoons and access routes to the raw water reservoir and pipeline, and WHEREAS, the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission (SCLIWC) operates a facility on East Shore Drive which provides drinking water to all or part of five municipalities, using Cayuga Lake as its water source and the SCLIWC and the City of Ithaca have executed a Memorandum of Understanding that indicates the willingness of the SCLIWC to expand its facility to provide water to the City, which includes decommissioning the existing system, purchasing finished water from the SCLIWC, April 11, 2007 7 which arrangement would require expansion of the SCLIWC facility and construction of a new water transmission main (pipeline) between the SCLIWC facility and the existing City distribution system, and WHEREAS, the choice between these two options involves broad policy concerns with far reaching implications involving drinking water quality, financial, planning, environmental, land use, energy use, intermunicipal cooperation, and neighborhood quality issues, as well as issues of governance related to pricing, treatment and supply of potable water, and is likely to determine a course of action for the next 50 to 100 years or more, and WHEREAS, both options are Type I Actions subject to environmental review under the provisions of the City Environmental Quality Review Act (CEQRA) Chapter 176 of the City of Ithaca Code as determined in §176-4 B. (1)(h) Any unlisted action (with the exception of minor subdivisions) occurring wholly or partially within 100 feet of any of the following: [2] …Six Mile Creek (including its associated gorge and rim area between the southern boundary of the City and Aurora Street)…and [3] Unique natural areas as adopted by Common Council; and §176-4 B.(2), Clear-cutting or removal of vegetation from more than ½ acre; and §176-4 B.(5) Any project or action which exceeds 25% of any threshold in this section, occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, recreation area or designated open space and both options are Type I Actions under the NYSDEC Regulations Part 617, State Environmental Quality Review, (SEQRA) §617.4 (b)(11) any Unlisted action that exceeds a Type I threshold established by an involved agency pursuant to section 617.14 of this part, and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2007, the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works declared its intent to undertake the environmental review of actions resulting from the upgrade or replacement of the City’s current water supply and to act as lead agent for that review, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works directed the Superintendent of Public Works, or his designee, to provide the required notice of the Board’s intention to act as lead agency to all other involved agencies, including the City of Ithaca Common Council, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, the Tompkins County Department of Health, the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission, the New York State Bureau of Water Supply Protection, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the New York State Department of Transportation, the Town of Ithaca, and the Village of Lansing, and WHEREAS, the involved agencies consented or did not reply within the designitated 30- day time frame as specified under the City of Ithaca Code §176-6 C. (1) Coordinated review, that the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works be designated lead agency for the environmental review for the project to upgrade or replace the City’s water supply system, and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2007, the Board of Public Works, in a vote of 6 in favor, 0 against, declared itself to act as lead agency for the environmental review of actions resulting from the upgrade or replacement of the City of Ithaca’s current water supply, and WHEREAS, on March 28, 2007 the Board of Public Works held a special meeting to review the Full Environmental Assessment Forms Parts I, II, and III, developed by staff, for the two water supply options being considered, and this was the sole item discussed at the regular meeting of the Board of Public Works on April 4, 2007, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That this City of Ithaca Board of Public Works, having declared itself as lead agency in this matter, hereby adopts as its own, the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Full Environmental Assessment Form Parts I, II, and III, and be it further 8 April 11, 2007 RESOLVED, That this City of Ithaca Board of Public Works, as lead agency, hereby determines that the proposed action may have one or more significant environmental impacts, that a Positive Declaration of Environmental Impact be issued, and that an Environmental Impact Statement be prepared, and be it further RESOLVED, that while scoping is not required as a part of either CEQR §176-8 A., or SEQRA §617.8 (a), this City of Ithaca Board of Public Works, as lead agency, hereby declares it intent to hold both an agency scoping session and a public scoping session, and be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution constitutes notice of this Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance and that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. Extensive discussion followed on the floor regarding the scoping process required and how specific the wording in the resolution should be. Amending Resolution: By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp RESOLVED, That the second to the last Resolved clause be amended to read as follows at the end: “RESOLVED, That while scoping is not required as a part of either CEQR §176-8 A., or SEQRA §617.8 (a), this City of Ithaca Board of Public Works, as lead agency, hereby declares its intent to conduct scoping as required by law, and be it further” Carried (4-2) Main Motion As Amended: A Vote on the Main Motion as amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously (6-0) REPORTS Staff provided the Board with updates on the status of activities within their departments. ADJOURNMENT On a motion the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Sarah L. Myers Carolyn K. Peterson Information Management Specialist Mayor