HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPW-2009-11-18BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS PROCEEDINGS
CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK
Regular Meeting 4:45 p.m. November 18, 2009
PRESENT:
Mayor Peterson
Commissioners (5) - Jenkins, Brock, Schlather, Tripp, Wykstra
OTHERS PRESENT:
City Attorney - Hoffman
Superintendent of Public Works - Gray
Acting Assistant Superintendent of Streets and Facilities - Benjamin
Assistant Superintendent of Water and Sewer – Whitney
Common Council Liaison – Zumoff
Information Management Specialist - Myers
Alderperson Myrick
Alderperson Schuler
Alderperson Tomlan
Assistant Civil Engineer – Yost
EXCUSED:
Deputy City Controller - Andrew
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 February 4, 2009 Board of Public Works Committee of the Whole
Meeting Minutes - Resolution
By Commissioner Wykstra: Seconded by Commissioner Brock
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the February 4, 2009 Board of Public Works
Committee of the whole meeting be approved with noted corrections.
Carried Unanimously
Approval of the August 12, 2009 Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes -
Resolution
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the August 12, 2009 Board of Public Works meeting
be approved with noted corrections.
Carried Unanimously
Motion to Table with Power to Act at the December 2, 2009 Committee of the
Whole Meeting on the Approval of the October 7, 2009 Board of Public Works
Meeting Minutes - Resolution
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
RESOLVED, That the Approval of the October 7, 2009 Board of Public Works
Committee of the Whole meeting be tabled with Power to Act at the December 2, 2009
Committee of the Whole meeting.
Carried Unanimously
Approval of the October 14, 2009 Board of Public Works Meeting Minutes -
Resolution
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 14, 2009 Board of Public Works meeting
be approved with noted corrections.
Carried Unanimously
Approval of the October 21, 2009 Board of Public Works Committee of the Whole
Meeting Minutes - Resolution
By Commissioner Wykstra: Seconded by Commissioner Schlather
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of the October 21, 2009 Board of Public Works
Committee of the Whole meeting be approved with noted corrections.
Carried Unanimously
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 2
ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA:
Supt. Gray requested the addition of the following items:
Item 10.1 – Power To Act – Approval of Columbia Street Pedestrian Bridge Approach
Plaza – Resolution at the December 2, 2009 Committee of the Whole Meeting.
Item 7.1 Approval of Encroachment Agreement/License for 423 E. Lincoln Street
Resolution for today’s meeting.
No Board Member objected.
MAYOR'S COMMUNICATIONS:
Mayor Peterson reported on a New York State Conference of Mayor’s sub-committee
meeting that she attended in Auburn today regarding truck regulations.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
Collegetown Waste Reduction Proposal:
Sarita Upadhyay, Chelsea Clarke, and Alderperson Myrick addressed the Board to
present their proposal regarding waste reduction in Collegetown. They distributed their
proposal to Board members and the Mayor as follows to highlight areas of concern:
“Beginning in the Fall of 2008 the Cornell Greek Community began a weekly program
known as Collegetown Cleanup. As a part of this program 20-30 members of the
Cornell Greek Community would meet every Sunday to clean up the streets
Collegetown. Through this process it became apparent that the area had a serious
waste problem and this problem stemmed primarily from a lack of public trash and
recycling receptacles. The 3 trash cans that do exist are dilapidated and often
overflowing. Collegetown contains the highest population density in the city of Ithaca
and includes a number of restaurants, bars, and other businesses that make the area a
lively and heavily trafficked area at all times of the week. Given this information as well
as the understanding that the area contributes a large amount in city tax dollars that it
seems it would be reasonable to request more attention be paid to the regular upkeep
of Collegetown.
Goals: Foster a sense of community (community building), Environmental education,
Increased exposure to recycling, Prevention of street litter, Overall beautification of
Collegetown
Desired Specifications in Trash Cans:
• Small enough holes for trash containers to prevent household trash from being
deposited
• Receptacles are clearly labeled with trash and recycling to make the recycling
process easier
• Openings on recycling receptacles are fitted to prevent trash from being
deposited (i.e. circular holes).
• Design allows for artwork to be incorporated
They also presented a map of proposed possible locations for additional trash
receptacles in the Collegetown area.
Public Art:
• Public art will be incorporated into the trash and recycling receptacle design in a
further attempt to beautify the streets of Collegetown
• Art will focus on a message of environmental preservation and community
building
• Local students (Elementary, Middle School, High School and University) will be
solicited to participate in an art contest where the winner’s art will be displayed
on the new trash/recycling receptacles in Collegetown.
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 3
Educational Component:
• Posters in Collegetown Restaurants
• Distribute posters/flyers to homes and at campus events
Funding to purchase the receptacles and produce the artwork will come from:
• Cornell Public Service Center Grants
• Cornell Fraternities and Sororities
• Student Agencies
• Collegetown Businesses and Landlords
In order for the project to be successful we will need some assistance from the city of
Ithaca in regards to:
• Installation of the receptacles
• Regular emptying of receptacles
• Possibly increasing the number of pickups or picking up receptacles outside of
regularly scheduled pickups on Tuesday and Thursday mornings.
• Work with landlords to educate tenants”
Alderpersons Tomlan and Schuler addressed the Board to express their support for this
proposal and suggestions for funding, changing the pick up schedule in Collegetown to
help support this effort, and how that change would affect city wide pick up of trash and
recycling. They encouraged the Board to support this proposal by finding ways to fund it
and implementing a possible “pilot” program to see how the changes would work.
Commissioner Schlather asked what the timeline is for the proposal and what the group
is looking for from the City to implement the plan.
Ms. Upadhyay stated that they would like approval from the Board of Public Works for
the proposal and that they are looking at sometime next semester to start the program.
She further stated that they are also applying for grant funding through Cornell
University to help fund the purchase of the receptacles.
The Board thanked Ms. Upadhyay, Ms. Clarke, and Alderperson Myrick for their work
on this project and expressed their preliminary support for the suggested plan.
Commissioner Wykstra requested that this item be placed on a future Committee of the
Whole meeting agenda.
COMMUNICATIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE THE BOARD:
Alderperson Schuler addressed the Board regarding abandoned shopping carts
throughout the City. The abandoned carts affect merchants, residents, Ithaca Housing
Authority, TCAT, and Streets and Facilities staff. There is a large “graveyard” of
abandoned carts located at Streets and Facilities on Pier Road. She stated that she
has been in touch with Reamers, a local recycling agency, who would pay the City for
the old carts, once owners signed off on them as far as wanting them returned. She
encouraged the Board to consider ways to address this problem because of the
possible revenue that might be provided to the City.
Frost Travis, representing the Downtown Ithaca Alliance board, addressed the Board
regarding the elimination of the one-hour free parking in City garages and the impact it
would have on businesses downtown. He stated that due to recent construction projects
in the downtown area and the current economy that merchants are struggling. He stated
that eliminating the free parking will only make things more difficult for them to continue
to operate.
Beverly Baker, City of Ithaca, addressed the Board regarding the late notification to her
of today’s meeting regarding her appeal to the City concerning a sidewalk assessment
that had been made for her property at 309 N. Aurora Street. She stated that she only
received notice of the meeting today and that fortunately she was able to attend the
meeting, but usually her schedule would not have allowed her to without more notice.
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 4
She further stated that she was very surprised to see that copies of her cancelled check
and bank statement with her account numbers still on them had been copied and
distributed with agenda packets. She said those contain her personal information and
she was worried about that information being made public and the consequences that
might result from the distribution of her personal financial information.
RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC
Commissioner Schlather responded to comments made about abandoned shopping
carts. He explained that he had been on a sub-committee in the past with Carol Reeves
and others to discuss this same topic. He stated that they had never put into action any
of the ideas discussed. Commissioner Schlather volunteered (after the first of the year
as his gift to the Board/City since he is not seeking reappointment to the Board and his
term ends December 31st) to sit on any sub-committee that might be formed to work on
this issue - possibly with Alderperson Schuler. He further responded to comments
made regarding the elimination of the one hour free parking. He also responded to
comments made from Ms. Baker about her personal financial information being made
public, and stated that it was an unintended mistake and he apologized, and stated he
would shred and expunge that information from his records.
The rest of the Board members and the Mayor did the same.
Commissioner Jenkins reported that leaves are being raked and piled close to and into
the streets into very high piles which obscure visibility. She wondered if a public
announcement of some sort could be made, possibly on News 10 Now, about when
leaves will be picked up and how they should be prepared and left for pick up. She said
that the leaves are flowing onto the street and are hampering parking which becomes
very difficult now that odd/even parking is in effect.
Acting Asst. Supt. Benjamin responded that crews would begin pickup and removal of
leaves on Sunday, November 22nd. He explained all the work and time that is involved
in that project.
Commissioner Brock responded to comments about the leaves being piled near or onto
City streets and expressed concern that this would become a bigger problem because
residents will not want to pay for tags for the removal of bagged leaves. Mayor Peterson
stated that if the leaves are not bagged and tagged properly that residents would be
ticketed and fined. CC Liaison Zumoff noted that that requirement is not definite at this
point as the Board of Public Works has to discuss it still.
Commissioner Brock noted that she had seen advertisements in place on the Clock
Towers on The Commons and wondered if they are already there why the City can’t
proceed with the Trust Company’s offer to donate funds for the repair of the towers and
place their advertisement on them as well. City Attorney Hoffman reported that an
application has been submitted for an appeal from the Board of Zoning Appeals to allow
the Trust Company to legally advertise on the clock towers. He stated that the Board of
Zoning Appeals will meet on December 1st and then the Board would be able to take
appropriate action afterwards.
BUILDINGS, PROPERTIES, REFUSE, AND TRANSIT:
Request for Encroachment Agreement/License at 423 E. Lincoln Street -
Resolution
By Commissioner Tripp: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra
WHEREAS, Robert D. Terry, the owner of the property at 423 E. Lincoln Street (Tax
Map Parcel No. 12-8-1), in the City of Ithaca, has requested an encroachment
agreement/ license for a replacement porch and stairs (on the east side of the house, at
the second-story level) that would extend approximately six feet into the City right-of-
way for Lake Street, with a total length of approximately 24 to 26 feet; and
WHEREAS, the proposed porch would replace an existing porch that serves the second
story of the house (and includes stairs below it, to the ground level), and which was
damaged last month as a result of a truck accident at the site; the replacement porch
and stairs would be constructed in essentially the same location, but would have a
larger north-south footprint); and
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 5
WHEREAS, there is also a paved walkway along the entire east side of the house,
which passes beneath the porch and which is wholly or primarily within the City right-of-
way; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works originally approved the issuance of a revocable
permit for the porch and walkway encroachment to a former owner, Carol Sisler, in
1976, and to the subsequent owner, Richard Lazarus, in 1985; and
WHEREAS, the permit issued to Mr. Lazarus does not specify that it runs with the
property, and is based on the porch as depicted on a survey map (“Resurvey for
Richard T. and Nancy Lazarus…Tax Parcel 12-8-1…”) prepared by Manzari & Reagan,
and dated May, 1997; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Terry reports that the Building Department will not issue a building
permit for the replacement porch without a new encroachment license from the City;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. Terry proposes to extend the replacement porch by between four and
five feet on both the north and south ends (but not to extend it any further east than the
existing porch), and to construct a roof over the current porch footprint (to protect the
stairs from snow and rain); and
WHEREAS, the existing porch and walkway are at least six feet from (i.e., west of) the
sidewalk on the west side of Lake Street, as would be the proposed, replacement porch;
and
WHEREAS, the Superintendent has reviewed the request and does not anticipate any
conflicts due to the existing or proposed encroachment at this location, in the
foreseeable future; now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works hereby authorizes the Mayor, upon
consultation with the City Attorney, to sign an encroachment agreement/license for the
existing walkway and the proposed replacement porch on the east side of the house at
423 E. Lincoln Street, revocable upon six months’ written notice by the City in the event
that the encroached upon land is required for a City purpose, and containing the usual
terms and conditions; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the encroachment agreement/license 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 and/or
use fees expected to be established in the near future by this Board, in order to comply
with new City requirements enacted in May 2009.
City Attorney Hoffman explained that he was contacted by Robert Terry, who has
owned the old "Cornell Pottery" building at the southwest corner of E. Lincoln and Lake
Streets, since about 1997. He stated that a couple of weeks ago a tractor trailer tried to
go up Lake Street, had trouble, and then tried to back down. The driver lost control and
the truck heavily damaged a City guardrail and the deck on the east side of Mr. Terry's
house at 423 E. Lincoln Street.
City Attorney Hoffman reported that the house is rental property, and Mr. Terry wants to
repair the porch as soon as he can, and definitely before winter. Mr. Terry has
everything lined up but has run into an obstacle. He can't get a building permit without
an encroachment agreement from the City, as the porch encroaches by about 6 feet
into the Lake Street right-of-way, according to a 1997 survey. (The survey does not
depict a sidewalk on this side of Lake Street; it is unclear if one exists there now. In any
case, if not, it appears that there would be room to construct one between the porch and
the curb.)
City Attorney Hoffman further stated that Mr. Terry also showed him a "revocable permit
and agreement" that the City issued to the previous owner, Richard Lazarus, in 1986, at
the time that Mr. Lazarus was purchasing the property from Carol Sisler (who
apparently had an encroachment permit dating back to 1976). The Lazurus permit was
not written so as to run with the land, nor does it contain all of the provisions we are
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 6
currently incorporating in such licenses (such as requiring insurance coverage). Mr.
Terry says the encroachment agreement was not brought to his attention when he
bought the property in 1997.
City Attorney Hoffman further reported that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission approved the proposed project as well and granted a Certificate of
Appropriateness to Mr. Terry for the project on November 16, 2009.
Mr. Terry joined the Board for the discussion of this item.
Discussion followed on the floor with the Board asking Mr. Terry and City Attorney
Hoffman various questions regarding the project. Further discussion followed on the
floor regarding insurance requirements and future license fees for use of City land that
the property encroaches upon.
A Vote on the Resolution Resulted As Follows:
Carried Unanimously
HIGHWAYS, STREETS, AND SIDEWALKS:
Approval of Uncontested 2005 Sidewalk Assessments – Resolution
By Commissioner Brock: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra
WHEREAS, during or prior to 2005, the City of Ithaca notified certain property owners
adjacent to deteriorated or damaged public sidewalks that said sidewalks had to be
repaired by the adjacent property owner, or the City would make the repairs and charge
the owner; and
WHEREAS, certain of those property owners did not undertake the required work, and
the City subsequently performed the work on those sidewalks in 2005; and
WHEREAS, after receiving assessments for said work performed by the City, 21 of the
affected property owners (from the 2005 work) did not protest their assessments to the
Board of Public Works during the appeal period which ended at the public hearing held
on March 14, 2007; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works has reviewed the final assessments and
approves the following assessment amounts including the 25% penalty required by City
Code:
Address Property Owner Tax Map # Charges
307Albany N Dong Shee Chong 60.-3-11 $564.18
114 Auburn David Moreland & Kelly Moreland 34.-2-4 $883.68
118 Auburn Adam G Perl & Helen Perl 34.-2-3 $1,109.46
302 Aurora N First Unitarian Society 61.-3-12 $2,448.60
321 Aurora N Theron L Johnson 62.-1-1 $1,228.57
322 Aurora N Larry B Wallace 61.-3-4 $799.31
825 Aurora N Scott Smith & Lisa Smith 28.-5-21 $1,932.08
604 Buffalo E William Macbain & Lisa Macbain 63.-8-23 $2,445.59
609 Cayuga N Harold Herman & Paula J Herman 34.-7-18 $1,890.82
1002 Cayuga N Michael D Cooper & Helena Cooper 14.-5-11 $3,174.86
402 Chestnut Richard W & Dorothy Anderson 74.-2-6 $7,104.03
401 Columbia Carla E Hegeman 82.-7-2 $1,728.21
324 Geneva N Kinga M Gergely 60.-3-4 $725.11
325 Geneva S Mary K McCullough & Mary Pat
Brady
80.-11-4 $246.34
507 Green W Unity House & Cayuga County 71.-7-16 $983.18
213 Second Micaela D Salort & Juliette Ramirez 45.-2-18 $927.50
310-318 Third Ithaca Housing Authority 44.-3-2.2 $3,817.25
308 Tioga N Ithaca Professional Building EW
King
61.-2-6 $5,692.07
218-220 University Peter Newell & Cherie Newell 47.-4-4 $4,000.12
205 Utica Meghan Anne Van Leeuwen & Kraig
Leonard Haverstick
34.-6-15 $1,851.39
502 Utica Stuart E Bergman 27.-2-10 $522.33
Total: $44,074.68
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 7
And be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works requests that Common Council accept the
recommendation of the Board of Public Works and approve the finalization of sidewalk
repair assessment for the properties in question, in the amounts shown, and authorize
the City Chamberlain to collect such assessments.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding the timing of these assessments since the
work was done in 2005, assessed in 2007, and now it is 2009 and what property owners
will think if they just receive these bills “out of the blue”. Further discussion followed on
the floor regarding when, if any, notification has been made to the affected property
owners of the process involved in sidewalk repair, and the billing for same. There was
concern about the timing of the notices being sent for work that was done four years
ago.
Commissioner Brock explained that the process for sidewalk repair notices,
assessments, and billing has been completely revamped to improve the efficiency with
which property owners are notified and billed for work, as well as appropriate notification
being made to the City Chamberlain’s office so that information is on file there when
properties are sold and tax searches are being done to avoid new property owners
being billed for work that they were not aware had been done or that they would be
responsible for. She stated that the sidewalk resolutions that are being considered by
the Board today are still from the former process that was in place at that time.
A Vote on the Resolution Resulted As Follows:
Carried Unanimously
Approval of Contested 2005 Sidewalk Assessments, Group 2 of 2 - Resolution
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
WHEREAS, during or prior to 2005, the City of Ithaca notified certain property owners
adjacent to deteriorated or damaged public sidewalks that said sidewalks had to be
repaired by the adjacent property owner, or the City would make the repairs and charge
the owner; and
WHEREAS, certain of those property owners did not undertake the required work, and
the City subsequently performed the work on those sidewalks, in 2005; and
WHEREAS, after receiving assessments for said work performed by the City, this
property owner (from the 2005 work) protested her assessment to the Board of Public
Works; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works heard the owner’s appeal of the contested
assessments prior to or during the public hearing held on March 14, 2007 and on April
22, 2009 at which time she indicated that she had paid the City’s contractor directly and
would provide proof of payment and what the payment was for; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has reviewed the protest/appeal and the
documentation submitted to date related to it, and has made the following
determination, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works approves the finalization of the
assessment to reflect the City’s cost plus the mandated 25% overhead, and requests
that Common Council direct the City Chamberlain to collect the assessment as listed
below:
Address Property
Owner
Tax Map # Current ChargeAlternate Levies
309 Aurora N. Beverly Baker 62.-1-14 $2,354.90 $954.90 $0.00
Commissioner Schlather explained his amendment to the last resolved clause and
noted that he would also include some language about fairness. He stated that the
fairness, frankly, no longer has anything to do with whether the money is owed or not. It
has to do with what he considers to be a mistake, an honest mistake. The publication of
personal financial information in this fashion should not have happened and it only
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 8
happened because the Board and staff were so adamant that the property owner keep
proving that payment had been made to the contractor. He noted that when the check
was provided that should have been enough. He stated that when the proof was finally
provided, and he applauds staff for being diligent in this regard, it should never have
been spread in the public record. The right of privacy trumps all of that and he thinks as
a token of apology on the Board’s part what appears to be about a $954 item be
forgiven on our part for her forgiveness.
Supt. Gray noted that while he feels thoroughly chastised, he thinks everything having
to do with the financial information was accurate. He explained why staff pursued this
item in this way, and why he feels differently about this. He explained that the City can
not go back to the contractor because the City does not have a contract with the person
she wrote the check to. That person was a sub-contractor to the person that the City
had a contract with. The other thing is, that in order to do work in the street right-of-way
and as seen in the notices sent to her that she or her contractor would need to obtain a
permit, had there been a permit for the work that she paid for, the City would have
known that she was undertaking that work, and that the City didn’t have to do it. City
staff would have at least asked why the City was being billed for it. The fact that we paid
for that work, and that she subsequently paid for it, really falls to her because the
obligation was for her or her contractor to obtain a permit, and put the City on notice.
Ms. Baker should not have been spending money in the street right-of-way without
getting the City’s permission. The City had no way of knowing that the work was being
undertaken. However, to counter balance that, the fact that we’re discussing this five
years later is not very good. The unfortunate thing is that there was no permit issued for
the work, and if she paid for and we paid for it, we paid for it because we contracted for
it and we directed the work to be done. There is still outstanding work outside of the
driveway that she thinks she paid for, and there was additional sidewalk work and that’s
the $900.00 shown on the assessment for the property.
Commissioner Brock explained the reason the sub-committee requested all the
detailed, personal information was because this was such a challenging process to try
to discern what was going on because she owns two different properties and separating
out what work was done on either one. She supports the alternate fee $954.00 that is
show in the assessment. She explained that the City committed to this work, it
contracted for the work, and made arrangements with contractors to do this work. The
City knows that Ms. Baker tried to circumvent the process, but we do have a procedure
in place for this type of work. She is the first to say that she would like to simply revamp
this procedure and change it, but dealing with what we have and wanting to be
consistent for all the people from the page before who are receiving assessments and
those after if we choose to be consistent and apply a 25% fee to those home owners
who do not maintain their sidewalks, she thinks it shows a certain disregard to just throw
it out, just because someone takes that step to write a letter. She thinks that if the Board
believes in this fee then it should support it as part of the process or it should get rid of it
for everyone, but she would hope that the Board could at some point choose to be
consistent in this process.
Commissioner Schlather apologized if he offended any of his colleagues or Supt. Gray.
His concern was not to be critical of them directly or personally, but rather to try to
emphasize the importance of what he considers to be a bigger principle which is the
right of privacy and how important that is in terms of how information once into the
public well tends to be distributed throughout the community, and that is what he was
concerned about. Secondly, he thinks there is a distinction between doing what we’re
proposing to do here for this property owner versus the others. On the face of it, none of
the others protested it, this property owner did and not only has she done it but she has
persisted over the past four years albeit intermittently, but nevertheless she has hung in
there. His third point and he thinks the phrase the Board should use and what he would
probably do is modify the resolution so that it would read very simply:
Amending Resolution:
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
RESOLVED, That the last Resolved clause be amended to read as follows:
“RESOLVED, That in the interests of justice, the Board of Public Works waives any
further assessment of this property for the costs at issue, including any overhead
charge.”
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 9
He explained that would accomplish what he would like to do which is in essence say to
Ms. Baker, whatever the underlying dispute, we have made a mistake here and we are
willing to acknowledge that in a tangible way because we believe that the bigger issue
needs to be acknowledged and that’s the acknowledgement on our part. It’s in the
interests of justice and simply says that we believe this is a fair way of putting this to
bed. Secondly, by putting a period after “including any overhead charge” and not
making any reference to trying to re-collect from the contractor, he acknowledges what
Supt. Gray said. That is that it is impossible and frankly it would just add more work to
staff to go in that direction, he thinks that tonight is the time to end this.
A Vote on the Amending Resolution resulted as follows:
Ayes (4) Schlather, Tripp, Jenkins, Wykstra
Nays (1) Brock
Abstentions (0)
Carried
Main Motion As Amended:
A Vote on the Main Motion As Amended resulted as follows:
Ayes (4) Schlather, Tripp, Jenkins, Wykstra
Nays (1) Brock
Abstentions (0)
Carried
Mayor Peterson left the meeting at 6:10 p.m. and did not vote on this issue.
Approval of Uncontested 2006 Elmira Road Sidewalk Assessments - Resolution
By Commissioner Brock: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra
WHEREAS, during or prior to 2006, the City of Ithaca notified certain property owners
adjacent to deteriorated or damaged public sidewalks that said sidewalks had to be
repaired by the adjacent property owner, or the City would make the repairs and charge
the owner; and
WHEREAS, the City performed the work on those sidewalks in 2006; and
WHEREAS, after receiving assessments for said work performed by the City, the
affected property owner (from the 2006 Elmira Road work) did not protest the
assessments to the Board of Public Works during the appeal period which ended at the
public hearing held on June 6, 2007; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works has reviewed the final assessment and
approves the following assessment amount:
Address Property Owner Tax Map # Charges
321 Elmira Rd City of Ithaca (Water & Sewer Division) 122.-2-1 $13,390.00
And be further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works requests that Common Council accept this
recommendation of the Board of Public Works and approve the finalization of sidewalk
repair assessments for the property in question, in the amounts shown, and authorize
the City Chamberlain to collect such assessments.
Carried Unanimously
Certification of Assessment Roll and Public Hearing Date Set for 2006, 2007, 2007
Elmira Road Sidewalk
By Commissioner Brock: Seconded by Commissioner Wykstra
WHEREAS, City of Ithaca completed sidewalk work as part of the 2006 Sidewalk
Program, the 2007 Sidewalk Program and 2007 work on the Elmira Road Sidewalk, and
WHEREAS, City Code requires a public hearing prior to the assessment of charges,
and
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 10
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works, City Attorney, Superintendent of Public Works
and other staff wish to allow property owners an adequate opportunity to share opinions
on the sidewalk repairs performed by the City, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works Certifies the following Assessment Roll
including the 25% penalty required by City Code:
Address Property Owner Tax Map # Charges
2006 Sidewalk
105 Lewis St Stephanie Hsu 27.-5-2 $250.00
2007 Sidewalks
402-404 Esty St. David W. Mitchell 51.-1-12 $7,844.65
216 Washington St Francine M. Wilson-Jasper 51.-6-9.2 $5,355.52
2007 Elmira Road Sidewalks
347 Elmira Rd. Katzkidd Investments 125.-2-1 $10,558.30
341-343 Elmira Rd Americo Real Estate Co 125.-2-2 $27,406.26
and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works sets a Public Hearing on December 9,
2009, to allow property owners to protest the proposed billing amounts for the work
performed in 2006 and 2007, and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works directs staff to notify the affected owners
of the proposed charges, public hearing date and protest options.
City Attorney Hoffman noted that Ms. Baker did not receive notification of today’s
meeting in a timely manner and asked whether these property owners have been
notified appropriately about the proposed assessments.
Supt. Gray responded that these property owners have not been notified because when
the Board calls for the public hearing staff will notify them at least ten days before the
hearing. These property owners will receive notification between now and the 30th of
November.
Discussion followed on the floor regarding the process that has been followed with the
properties noted above for sidewalk work and the notification process in place. It was
noted again that this past practice has been changed and will not occur in future
sidewalk work and assessment procedures. There was concern raised by the Board of
them certifying the assessments prior to the public hearing being held.
Amending Resolution:
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
RESOLVED, That the first Resolved Clause be modified to read as follows:
”RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works proposes the following assessment roll
including the 25% penalty required by City Code.”
Carried Unanimously
Commissioner Schlather requested a resolution be placed on the agenda for the
December 9, 2009 Board of Public Works Meeting, after the public hearing, that would
certify the assessment roll.
The rest of the Board concurred.
Amending Resolution:
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
RESOLVED, That the last Resolved clause be amended to read as follows:
“RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works directs staff to notify the affected owners
of the proposed charges, public hearing date, and protest options by mailing the same
no later than Tuesday, November 24, 2009.”
Carried Unanimously
Board of Public Works – November 18, 2009- Page 11
Main Motion As Amended:
A Vote on the Main Motion As Amended Resulted as follows:
Carried Unanimously
CREEKS, BRIDGES, AND PARKS:
Power to Act – Approval of the Columbia Street Pedestrian Bridge Approach
Plaza
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
RESOLVED, That the Board grants itself Power to Act on the approval of the Columbia
Street Pedestrian Bridge Approach Plaza at the December 2, 2009, Committee of the
Whole meeting.
Carried Unanimously
WATER AND SEWER:
Leaking Water Service, 235 Hector Street – Resolution
By Commissioner Schlather: Seconded by Commissioner Tripp
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has reviewed the written protests of Steven
Williams, 235 Hector Street, concerning the replacement of his water lateral in Hector
Street and its associated cost, and
WHEREAS, in the course of the discussion, Mr. Williams indicated that while he was not
happy, he had paid the City’s bill following discussion with staff about the policy that
resulted in the bill and about a number of questions about the bill itself, and
WHEREAS, Mr. Williams, in closing, stated that he would settle for having
improvements to the pavement in front of his house because the roughness of the
pavement and the high traffic load causes substantial noise and vibrations in his house
and neighborhood, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works declares the issue closed with Mr.
Williams’ payment of the bill and directs staff to contact Mr. Williams to review pavement
improvements that will accompany a sewer upgrade planned for Hector Street in 2010.
Carried Unanimously
ADJOURNMENT
On a motion the meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Sarah L. Myers Carolyn K. Peterson
Information Management Specialist Mayor