Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2007-06-13BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 4:45 p.m. June 13, 2007 PRESENT: Mayor Peterson Commissioners (5) - Jenkins, Dotson, Chapman, Tripp, Wykstra OTHERS PRESENT: Deputy City Controller - Andrew Superintendent of Public Works - Gray Assistant Superintendent of Streets and Facilities - Ferrel Assistant Superintendent of Water and Sewer – Whitney Common Council Liaison – Coles Executive Assistant – Grunder EXCUSED: Commissioner Schlather City Attorney Hoffman DAC Liaison – Roberts PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Peterson led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of the Minutes of the May 23, 2007 Board of Public Works Meeting- Resolution By Commissioner Jenkins: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the May 23, 2007 Board of Public Works meeting be approved with noted corrections. Carried Unanimously ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: Superintendent Gray requested the addition of item 8B under Highways, Streets, and Sidewalks entitled “Update on Elmira Road Sidewalks”. No Board member objected. Mayor Peterson noted that the discussion of items 11A & B under Water & Sewer would be somewhat restricted because the City Attorney is not here and much of that material involves him. She further noted that several senior staff members would be meeting on Monday, June 18, 2007 to discuss these items as well. MAYOR'S COMMUNICATIONS: Mayor Peterson invited Mike Hall to update the Board on the work of the Martin Luther King Designation Committee. She explained that Mr. Hall facilitates the discussions of the committee which consists of eight members. Mr. Hall is not a voting member. Mayor Peterson further noted that Commissioner Jenkins served on the committee to represent the Board of Public Works. Mr. Hall explained that the committee was created to examine suggestions for honoring Dr. King following the Board’s initial consideration of a proposal to rename State Street. The committee developed a vision statement to focus on as they discussed its goals. The committee consisted of a very diverse group, put together by Mayor Peterson. There were some strident members who supported re-naming the street, and some who wanted no part of it. Both sides felt the committee had been stacked in favor of the other side. As a result of their deliberations, the committee is recommending that the Board consider a Martin Luther King, Jr. Freedom Walkway. The idea behind the Walkway is to tie neighborhoods together and encourage people to cross from where they spend most of their time and are comfortable and familiar with into another part of the community to meet and learn about their neighbors. The vision the committee foresaw was an access or common point on the west end of the Board of Public Works – June 13, 2007- Page 2 Commons which would provide information about the Freedom Walkway for those people who were interested in following it and learning about the community. It would be marked with prominent markers so that if the markers were followed along existing city streets, they would take people to places that are prominent from the standpoint of history, the civil rights movement, and historic to our community. The purpose of the Walkway is to tie some of the local points of interest into the broader memorial for Dr. King being built in Washington, D.C. The Walkway would make it clear that the citizens of Ithaca were part of the struggle for civil rights, and justice. Along the walkway would be informational signs at appropriate points identified by New York State historical markers that would explain the significance of a local point of interest. The committee had excellent discussions with the Tompkins County Library and there was agreement by their Board to receive a proposal to create a space within the library, yet to be defined, where citizens could go to read about the Walkway, and the people and sites that were associated with it before actually taking the journey. The committee thinks it is very important that the youth of the Circle of Recovery be recognized because it was their inspiration that helped the community begin this discussion, which has continued beyond the subject of the potential renaming of State Street. Mr. Hall noted that as a long time resident, it is his belief that the community has diversified more rapidly than it has proactively become inclusive. This type of proactive step makes the community healthier and stronger. It needed the gifted eyes of the youth to help us see the opportunity and develop it. The committee also thinks that it is important that youth in the community be involved in the development of the Walkway and he would encourage support and involvement from the Ithaca City School District. There is a big education component in the development of The Walkway. If better behaviors are encouraged, better values instilled, and the kinds of things that Dr. King stood for throughout the community are adopted, especially with the youth of our community, then the committee would have done something of significance. The committee further recommends that the local efforts undertaken to honor Dr. King tie into the National Memorial for Dr. King being constructed in Washington, D.C. He reported that he had an opportunity to make a presentation at the CEO roundtable, and to the Chamber of Commerce Board and there was significant interest on the part of both organizations to this idea. The Chamber of Commerce stated that if we do move forward with the Walkway they would want to promote it as a progressive and visible part of our community and a reason for people to visit Ithaca to learn about its role in the struggle for civil rights. The issue of how to pay for the Walkway involves many approaches including grants, public monies, and perhaps subscriptions by people who are interested in the community and who want to show their support by way of donations. The most contentious item that the committee could not resolve to everyone’s satisfaction had to do with the renaming of State Street. Everyone was in favor of the Freedom Walkway, but some people could not walk away from the idea of the dual designation of State Street. In the end, the best that the committee could come up with was to say that they are suggesting a vision, not an implementation. He further noted that in his discussions with various groups such as the Chamber of Commerce and the CEO Roundtable, the reaction to dual designation was neutral. The reaction to the Freedom Walkway was very positive. Mayor Peterson asked if there was a vote on the recommendation or just a discussion that accepted the recommendation. Mr. Hill responded that in the end, they came very close to reaching consensus on the Walkway. He further stated that it was difficult for everyone to step away from the announced symbol of renaming State Street which is powerful to some people in the community, but which lacked the tying together of neighborhoods and some of the educational components that the Walkway brings to the table. He noted that he does not believe there will ever be complete agreement on this subject but they were able to conduct discussions, sometimes in a very spirited way, but committee members generally upheld the values of fairness, dignity, and respect. He stated that continued discussions need to be treated in that manner going forward. It is a powerful discussion, Board of Public Works – June 13, 2007- Page 3 very emotional for many people in the community, and their point of view whether it is minority or majority of where we go from here needs to be heard and respected. Mayor Peterson thanked Mr. Hill for his presentation. Commissioner Tripp thanked Mr. Hill and the committee for their work on this issue. COMMUNICATIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE THE BOARD: The following people addressed the Board in support of the proposal to widen some of the sidewalks and redesign the 100 block of North Aurora Street: Peter Ciferri, City of Ithaca, owner of Simeons Peter Browning, Town of Ithaca, owner of Viva Tacqueria Sandra Kuntz, Town of Ithaca, owner of Hal’s Deli Joseph Gaylord, City of Ithaca, Manager of American Crafts by Robbie Dean, he also spoke in support of the proposed hotel on N. Aurora St. Gary Ferguson, City of Ithaca, and Director of Ithaca Downtown Partnership, he also spoke in support of the proposed hotel on N. Aurora St. Douglas Gruen, City of Ithaca, owner of Blue Stone Bar & Grill John Schroeder, City of Ithaca, and he also urged the City to not cut down all the trees along the 100 block of North Aurora Street at one time because it would be devasting to the aesthetics of the street. He further addressed the Board in support of the proposed hotel project along N. Aurora St. Tomas Harrington, General Manager of Viva Tacqueria Fay Gougakis, City of Ithaca, addressed the Board regarding bike racks in the Green Street and Seneca Street parking garages. Gino Bush, City of Ithaca, addressed the Board regarding the recommendations from Martin Luther King Designation Committee. He wanted the Board to know that he thought the committee was stacked from the beginning against the Circle of Recovery group and their efforts to rename State Street. He stated that the Circle of Recovery group supports the dual designation of State Street as a compromise, and urged the Board to support that effort. Carolyn Grigorov, Town of Ithaca, addressed the Board regarding the potential loss of parking on North Aurora Street because of the proposal to widen sidewalks, the extra time the additional construction work on the street would take, and how that would affect businesses along the street. Pietzo Panseres, City of Ithaca, owner of Gino’s Pizzaria, addressed the Board regarding the potential loss of parking on North Aurora Street. He also urged the City to consider installation of public restrooms on the Commons to meet the needs of students late at night. Jan Aguirre/Terri Hoppenwrath, Town of Ithaca, commended the Board for its efforts to address the issue of parking for motorcycles in City garages. They noted the shortened gate arm at the Seneca Street garage is a good start, but identified some of the problems with the shortened arm. They noted concerns raised by riders concerning the possibility of long term metered parking, how that would work, the definition of long term parking, cost, how the program would be implemented, and when or if there might be parking for motorcycles in the Cayuga Street garage. They further asked if a public announcement could be made about the availability of these new parking areas and noted that improved signage for the new spaces would be useful as well. RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC Commissioners Tripp and Dotson responded to comments made about parking for motorcycles and bicycles in garages and questioned the status of those plans. Extensive discussion followed on the floor with staff answering questions about what work has to be done to provide parking for motorcycles and bicycles in city garages. Discussion included what signage is needed, the difficulties faced because of the different sizes and types of motorcycles, and how to accommodate all types of bikes in the garages. Board of Public Works – June 13, 2007- Page 4 Mayor Peterson noted that this item was not on the agenda and asked if someone would like to have Power to Act next week or at the July meeting on this item. She suggested that a subcommittee meet with Superintendent Gray to create a resolution. Power to Act at the June 20, 2007 Committee of the Whole Meeting By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp RESOLVED, That the Board grant itself Power to Act at the June 20, 2007 Committee of the Whole meeting with a subcommittee of Commissioner Dotson and Commissioner Tripp to work with Superintendent Gray and staff to help formulate a resolution to address the parking of bicycles and motorized vehicles in the City’s parking garages. Carried Unanimously Commissioner Dotson extended her thanks to all the speakers for coming to the meeting. BUILDINGS, PROPERTIES, REFUSE, AND TRANSIT: Request for Encroachment Agreement at 506 Cliff Street - Resolution By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Jenkins WHEREAS, Ervin E. Shaul and Linda Shaul (“Shaul”) are the owners of the house and lot at 506 Cliff Street (on the uphill side of the street), in the City of Ithaca, and WHEREAS, at some time, possibly more than 20 years ago, a set of wood log steps was constructed to provide access from the house down toward the level of the street, apparently without any objection on the part of the City, and WHEREAS, these steps appear to extend into the public Cliff Street right-of-way by approximately 2.5 feet (and for a distance of approximately 6 feet), as does a portion of a wire fence attached to the steps which extends approximately 25 feet to the south, roughly parallel to the street line, all according to a survey map prepared by Howard Schleider, dated November 4, 1986 (and as resurveyed on March 13, 2007), and WHEREAS, Shaul is in the process of selling the property and has requested from the City permission to maintain the encroaching steps (and, presumably, the fence), and WHEREAS, Public Works staff has reviewed the request and does not anticipate any conflicts due to the existing encroachment at this location, in the near future, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby authorizes the Mayor to sign an encroachment agreement/license for the encroaching portion of the wood log steps and wire fence at 506 Cliff Street, containing the usual terms and conditions, plus a requirement that the private property owner provide acceptable proof to the City, within six months of the date of the execution of the Agreement, that the steps are of suitable design and construction to accomplish their intended purpose in a safe manner, and, in particular, that they are equipped with a suitable hand railing for safety purposes, and be it further RESOLVED, That the encroachment agreement shall not be subject to a fee at this time, per the City’s current practice with regard to such agreements for existing, minor encroachments associated with residential properties, but that the agreement shall specify that at any time in the future it may become subject to new license/use fees or other requirements established by the Board as the result of its review of encroachments and license agreements, which review is anticipated to be conducted in 2007. Carried Unanimously Request to Declare a Modified Strip of Land in the 100 Block of South Aurora Street as Surplus Property - Resolution Superintendent Gray explained that the Attorney’s office has offered a substitute resolution in place of the original resolution. Resolution: Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commission Wykstra Board of Public Works – June 13, 2007- Page 5 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 Exhibit A - dated 7/12/06), and recommending to Common Council that any conveyance of said surplus property be subject to the following listed conditions regarding public works functions: (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; and WHEREAS, at that time the Board believed that the City should retain title to a small, triangular sliver 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, since that time, 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 secure title to both the previously-designated surplus property as well as a narrow strip of additional, City-owned land, extending to the north and to the east (including a portion of the afore-mentioned triangular sliver of land); and WHEREAS, the owner of the Rothchild Building has therefore asked the City (or the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, as the case may be) to make available for said owner’s purchase both the parcel declared to be surplus on July 12, 2006, as well as a portion of the afore-mentioned triangle of land and a sliver of land immediately to the north of the previously-designated surplus parcel (which are together shown on the attached Exhibit B, as “Area of Additional Proposed Extension – 273 Sq. Ft.”); and WHEREAS, also since the adoption of the Board’s resolution on July 12, 2006, the plans (by others) to replace and upgrade the bus shelter located partially within the area then designated as surplus have apparently been suspended indefinitely; and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has reviewed the proposed new surplus/ disposition parcel, including the additional slivers 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 conditions set forth below are met; now therefore be it Board of Public Works – June 13, 2007- Page 6 RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby finds that continued City ownership of the parcel of the land now sought for purchase by the owner of the Rothchild Building (as shown as “Approved” and “Additional” in Exhibit B), is not necessary, from a public works standpoint, and that such parcel is hereby declared to be surplus, provided that the following modified set of conditions is attached to any conveyance thereof and made binding upon the grantee and the grantee’s heirs, administrators, successors or assigns (this determination and these conditions being intended to supersede those of the Board on July 12, 2006): (1) the relocation of any utility line(s) now existing upon or beneath such land and associated easement therefore to another accessible location acceptable to the Superintendent of Public Works, or other formalized arrangement acceptable to the Superintendent and City Attorney which provides for a permanent, feasible means of maintaining and/or replacing such line(s) without additional cost to the City as a result of the conveyance or future development of the land; (2) the elimination, per the design of any project for the subject parcel, of the structural need for the retaining walls now existing along or in proximity to the easterly and northerly boundaries of such land (e.g., by 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), or, in the alternative, transfer to any grantee of all responsibility (including cost) for maintaining or replacing said retaining walls; and (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 (outside the subject parcel) has not by that time been effected by others, to pay for all costs associated with the design and 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 (Exhibit C), 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 be it further RESOLVED, That the Board recommends that any intended or actual conveyance of the subject parcel be accompanied by either: (1) a provision for reversion of title to the City (or IURA) if the land is not used in the manner approved by site plan review, within five years of conveyance by the City or IURA; or (2) providing an option to purchase that can be exercised only upon approval of a site plan consistent with the above conditions, and that expires if not exercised within five years; 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 Board of Public Works – June 13, 2007- Page 7 RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works requests that the staff of the Department of Public Works be involved in the development of any conditions which are to be attached to the conveyance of the land in question from City ownership. Mayor Peterson clarified for the record that the Board will be voting today to declare this land as surplus property. This is the first step in relation to the proposed hotel project. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the options offered to Mr. Rimland for either five years or ten years and the fact that Commissioner Dotson read five years in the resolution. Director of Planning and Development VanCort recommended that Mr. Rimland be given the option of five years plus five years with a payment made for both options. He further stated that he and Mr. Rimland’s recollection is that a requirement for a bus shelter would be to replace the demolished one but not necessarily to pay for and construct one as originally designed. He explained that TCAT decided against that original design because it was extraordinarily expensive. He thinks making that a requirement of this project puts an awful burden on the buyer. He suggested a requirement that bus riders be accommodated in a manner acceptable to the Superintendent of Public Works, but not necessarily in the original design abandoned by TCAT. Commissioner Dotson stated that she thinks that it is important that the sidewalk mentioned be noted specifically as the South Aurora Street sidewalk rather than the Green Street sidewalk because they are at completely different levels since there are two sidewalks associated with the project. Commissioner Chapman stated that Commissioner Schlather asked last week that if the Board dealt with this issue that we grant ourselves Power to Act for next week. Commissioner Schlather has been very interested in this project and wanted to have a chance to review the resolution and vote on it. Commissioner Dotson stated that she has noticed differences in some things that were important to her in the previous resolution that are not included in this resolution. Discussion followed regarding the differences in the two resolutions distributed to the Board, the need for the City Attorney and Commissioner Schlather to participate in the discussion, and the request from Commissioner Schlather for the Board to grant itself Power to Act on this item at next week’s meeting. Mayor Peterson noted that with Common Council there is no such thing as “Power to Act” and that Common Council members are not able to put off voting on an item just because they will not be at the meeting. She stated that it was up to the Board to decide how they wanted to proceed, but that she finds it an unusual request. She thanked Commissioner Chapman for bringing it forward on Commissioner Schlather’s behalf. Commissioner Tripp stated that she would like to vote on this tonight. She knows the City Attorney will look it over carefully and thinks that the Board has clearly satisfied its obligation as the Board of Public Works about any need it may have for that little strip of property. Amending Resolution: By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp RESOLVED, That an additional Resolved clause be added to the resolution to read as follows: “RESOLVED, That the Board hereby recommends that in any case, space be reserved by the City for an urban scale sidewalk approximately thirteen feet from curb to building face in the lot adjacent to the easterly portion of the previously designated surplus parcel” Superintendent Gray explained that a discussion had been held about either a cantilever or a set of columns and the building expanding outwards. He stated there is no current proposal for a cantilever. There is something over the sidewalk now, but he would have to review the drawings to see what the space is to the building face. He noted there is probably thirty or forty feet of sidewalk in front of the Rothchild building Board of Public Works – June 13, 2007- Page 8 which will narrow adjacent to this building and towards the new bridge with a transitional area in between. Mr. Rimland stated their intent is to locate the building fourteen feet from the curb in order to provide adequate sidewalk space. A Vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Mr. Rimland stated that the bus shelter clause in this agreement was not discussed and was not in the prior resolution. He explained that he met with TCAT and they had to abandon their plans for the proposed bus shelter at this location because of the excessive cost of developing it. TCAT was going to re-evaluate and try to design something that was far less expensive but would accomplish the same purpose. He offered to participate in some fashion so that they could get this process moving along. He is concerned that if the resolution is worded this way, TCAT will just wait for him to install the shelter and he will be forced to pay 100% of the cost as opposed to participating in the cost. He noted that to build this particular bus shelter is far too expensive and TCAT would not do it. Mayor Peterson asked Deputy Director of Planning and Development Cornish if TCAT had abandoned their original design for the bus shelter at this location. Deputy Director of Planning and Development Cornish confirmed that TCAT has abandoned their plans for the originally designed bus shelter in this location. Mayor Peterson stated that it is difficult attaching a resolution to a plan for another entity that may be abandoned. She stated that TCAT has a budgeted amount for three shelters. A shelter is being constructed now on Seneca Street and is using quite a bit of the budgeted money, and there are plans for a new shelter on Cayuga Street as well. She stated that she too is a little uncomfortable linking this resolution to a specific plan when its status is in doubt. Mr. Rimland responded that he is certainly willing to participate in the project with TCAT, but to burden him with the entire cost, design fees, and everything else associated with it is not financially fair. Discussion followed on the intent of the original resolution with regard to the temporary bus shelter and whose responsibility it would be to pay for the design and construction of it. Superintendent Gray explained the idea was that the sale of the property was going to involve the demolition of the original bus shelter because it is located within what will be the new property line. The obligation for Mr. Rimland was to provide some similar covered seating until TCAT constructs a new facility. That intent and obligation is not included in the resolution being considered and to say that Mr. Rimland will now assume the full cost for the replacement of that shelter in its new design is not what was agreed to. Mr. Rimland is willing to participate in that cost, but to absolve TCAT of the cost completely was not the intent. Alderperson Coles stated that she thinks that Mr. Rimland’s cost for a temporary shelter, in her opinion, should equal the replacement cost for the shelter that is being demolished. Director of Planning and Development VanCort stated that it would be unwise to require a temporary shelter equal in value to what is demolished because that cost should go into the permanent shelter. Amending Resolution: By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp RESOLVED, That the item #3 under the first Whereas clause be amended to read as follows: “(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 Board of Public Works – June 13, 2007- Page 9 shelter (by others), to provide for covered seating for TCAT riders comparable to the available seating in the existing shelter in a form and a location acceptable to the City.” Carried Unanimously Amending Resolution: By Mayor Peterson: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp RESOLVED, That the option for the five years be exercised in the agreement. Carried Unanimously Amending Resolution: By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Chapman RESOLVED, That an additional Resolved clause be added to the Resolution as the third Resolved clause that reads “The Board notes Mr. Rimland’s willingness to participate in the cost of the design and construction of a new TCAT shelter at this location.” Carried Unanimously Main Motion As Amended: A Vote on the Main Motion As Amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously HIGHWAYS, STREETS, AND SIDEWALKS: Power to Act - 100 Block of North Aurora Street Resolution By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp RESOLVED, That the Board grants itself Power to Act on resolutions concerning the 100 block of North Aurora Street, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Board call for a public hearing at its meeting of June 20, 2007, for the purpose of assessing costs for sidewalks against adjacent property owners directly, as a part of the benefit assessment district or as part of a pedestrian mall. Carried Unanimously WATER AND SEWER: Power to Act – Demolition of a Building on Inlet Island – Resolution By Commissioner Dotson: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp RESOLVED, That the Board grant itself Power to Act on Demolition of a Building on Inlet Island at the June 20, 2007 Committee of the Whole Meeting. Carried Unanimously ADJOURNMENT On a motion the meeting adjourned. Sarah L. Myers Carolyn K. Peterson Information Management Specialist Mayor