Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2009-03-04BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Committee of the Whole Meeting 4:45 p.m. March 4, 2009 PRESENT: Mayor Peterson Commissioners (6) - Jenkins, Brock, 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 Information Management Specialist - Myers Acting Planning & Development Director – Cornish Asst. Civil Engineer – Yost EXCUSED: Common Council Liaison – Zumoff DAC Liaison – Roberts 2008 Sidewalk Assessment Public Hearing Resolution to Open Public Hearing: By Commissioner Tripp: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing on 2008 Sidewalk Assessments be declared open. Carried Unanimously The following people addressed the Board regarding their sidewalk assessment: Ann Erlich, regarding 122-124 Linn Street sidewalks Dominic Versage, regarding Brandon Place sidewalks Marty McElwee, regarding 340-344 Elmira Road sidewalks Pat Carlson, regarding 407 North Aurora Street sidewalks Donald Spector, regarding 118 Linn Street sidewalks Frank Mazurek, regarding Campbell Avenue sidewalks – there is a sidewalk on one side of the street there and he is concerned about equity in costs of property owners for maintenance of sidewalks that are used more by the public than the homeowners, where one side of the street has the cost and the other doesn’t. Bryn Lovejoy-Grinnell, regarding 120 Linn Street sidewalks, insurance requirements, and costs for homeowners Barbara Smith, regarding constructing sidewalks wider to accommodate multiple uses, and property owners being allowed to burnish sidewalks where repairs are needed Eric Rosario, Alderperson for the 2nd Ward, on behalf on Bryn Lovejoy-Grinnell regarding the cost of insurance property owners are required to provide in order to make their own repairs to sidewalks Many of the comments made by the above property owners focused on the 25% administrative costs they are charged when the city repairs their sidewalks, the lack of information provided to them when notified that repairs are required, the appeal process, and costs of required insurance coverage. Asst. Civil Engineer Yost explained that a “Task Force/Sub-Committee” consisting of Commissioners Wykstra and Brock had been created to look at sidewalk appeals on a case by case basis in order to do more fact finding regarding each appeal, to meet with individual property owners, if needed, and to make recommendations to the Board. 2 March 4, 2009 Commissioner Brock suggested that if property owners have additional information about their appeal that they should submit it to them. She stated that each appeal would be reviewed in depth and responded to. Mayor Peterson thanked the speakers for their comments. Resolution to Close Public Hearing: By Commissioner Tripp: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra RESOLVED, That the Public Hearing on 2008 Sidewalk Assessments be declared closed. Carried Unanimously Assistant Civil Engineer Yost explained that the next steps in the appeal process include the following: 1. The Task Force has been created and property owners can make arrangements to address the members individually if they feel it is necessary. 2. Recommendations from the Task Force would be presented to the Board at a Committee of the Whole meeting where questions can be asked and the property owner would be notified of the meeting and could attend if they wish. 3. Proposed resolutions for action by the Board will be prepared for consideration at a voting meeting. Assistant Civil Engineer Yost reported that there is a list of 629 sidewalks scattered throughout the City in need of repair that need to be prioritized for inclusion in their 2009 work plan. She then explained the process the sidewalk crew follows for marking sidewalks for repair and how property owners are notified repairs are required. Mayor Peterson requested that staff provide the Board with a “sample” packet that gets mailed to property owners regarding the need to repair their sidewalks. She felt that considering some of the comments that were made the Board should review the packets before they are mailed out for 2009 sidewalk work. Commissioner Schlather stated that he would be in favor of the City taking over the cost and responsibility for sidewalk repair and maintenance. He encouraged the “Task Force” to defer to the homeowner as much as possible when reviewing appeals, especially where city trees are the cause for damage to the sidewalk. He also urged staff to provide as much information to property owners as is available regarding requirements for sidewalk repair, the appeal process, and what contractors are available to do the work. Commissioner Tripp stated that she agrees with Commissioner Schlather regarding process and suggested that another sub-committee be set up to look into prioritizing sidewalk work or the installation of sidewalks where there are none currently. She further stated that she would be happy to be part of this sub-committee as well. Superintendent Gray arrived at 5:35 p.m. Commissioner Wykstra stated that he agrees with Commissioner Tripp, although he is not sure another sub-committee would be needed. He further stated that he and Commissioner Brock plan to look at this process in a broader sense considering the comments that have been made and the appeals that have been received. Commissioner Brock stated that as she and Commissioner Wykstra go through the appeals they plan to look at the process. She agreed that a new task force might be needed to revisit city policy on the sidewalk program and whether the city could take over the responsibility for sidewalks. She noted that Ithaca is promoted as a pedestrian and bicycle friendly community and the Board and City need to look at how that can be supported. She further noted that the responsibility for repair and maintenance of city sidewalks is a huge burden on property owners. 3 March 4, 2009 Mayor Peterson suggested NYCOM as a resource when researching this topic to see how other communities handle repair and maintenance of sidewalks, especially those communities that have switched over from it being the property owners’ responsibility to the municipality’s responsibility. She requested the City Clerk’s office conduct this research and provide information to the Board accordingly. Water Source DEIS Comments – Discussion Acting Planning and Development Director Cornish and O’Brien & Gere Consultants Rick Gell and Steve Eckler joined the Board for the review and discussion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) relating to the City’s water supply decision. The Board was provided with a bound document of the FEIS comments which was reviewed and referred to during the discussion. Superintendent Gray explained that Mr. Gell and Mr. Eckler would be attending all three of the March meetings to discuss this document with the Board. He stated that today’s discussion should focus on the first third of the comments pages 1-22 covering items 1 through 2.2.3. Mr. Eckler stated that the first section of the document is the introduction to the FEIS. The FEIS consists of oral and written comments and responses to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). He explained that the document is in order by date and index number, substantive comments have been highlighted, and there is a matrix at the back of the document to allow the reader to go back and forth to locate names of people who made comments. He explained that they followed State Environmental Quality Guidelines to differentiate between substantive and non- substantive comments. He stated that the Board needs to determine whether responses are adequate so that it can issue a notice of completion for the FEIS. Superintendent Gray also explained to the Board that this is an initial attempt by O’Brien & Gere to respond to the comments that were received. This is an opportunity for the Board to review those responses and let O’Brien & Gere know any areas that weren’t adequately covered or if they feel the document is not as complete as they would like it. Mayor Peterson left the meeting at 6:05 p.m. Commissioner Tripp asked if there were any comments that the consultants felt they could not answer adequately. Mr. Eckler stated that he and Mr. Gell met with Acting Director of Planning and Development Cornish and Superintendent Gray to see if there were additional studies or work needed to comply with the scoping document and they did not identify any. He noted that makes their job easier and eliminates any discretion that might be needed. He further noted that they did not have to produce any new information to answer questions or comments. He stated that ultimately this Board will need to approve the findings statement to make sure it adequately addresses mitigation plans. This process is very important as any conclusions are based on this record. Commissioner Schlather stated that his sense is that the consultants have done a good job in responding to comments and he is generally satisfied with the document. There was discussion on how the Board should proceed in its review of the document. Mr. Eckler stated that some issues have more comments than others so that might help the Board to focus perhaps on those items. City Attorney Hoffman asked where mitigation measures are addressed. Mr. Eckler responded that there were no new mitigation areas and that they referred people back to the DEIS where that was addressed. 4 March 4, 2009 Discussion followed on the floor regarding environmental impacts of the color of the roof on the largest building in the natural area and how that would be addressed in the design phase of the project. The color of the roof could have a negative impact if natural colors are not used. Mr. Eckler stated that they followed procedural requirements for SEQR and CEQR to summarize impacts and how they would be mitigated and that they would be documented in the findings statement. Commissioner Schlather stated that responses should include what color is used for the roof of the building in the natural area to address mitigation measures in order to limit impacts. City Attorney Hoffman agreed with Commissioner Schlather and stated that if the Board also agrees that is an important mitigation measure then the response should reflect that. Mr. Eckler stated that they would make a response in the record to reflect mitigation would include earth tones to match the natural setting for the roof color. Discussion followed on the floor regarding how the Board should prepare for next week’s meeting and Mr. Eckler distributed additional information for their review and discussion next week. Superintendent Gray noted that there would only be a few voting items on the agenda next week, and that most of the meeting would be devoted to this topic. Commissioner Schlather asked what the next steps would be after the Board finishes its review of this document. Mr. Eckler responded that they would draft responses that the Board has asked to be added to the document, a notice of completion would be done and then a findings statement would be issued. He noted that all involved agencies would need to issue findings statements or adopt the Board’s statements. ADJOURNMENT On a motion the meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Sarah L. Myers Carolyn K. Peterson Information Management Specialist Mayor