Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-07-11 Common Council Meeting Agenda1OFFICIAL NOTICE OF MEETING A Regular meeting of the Common Council will be held on Wednesday, September 7, 2011, at 6:00 p.m. in the Common Council Chambers at City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. Your attendance is requested. AGENDA 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 2. ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: 3. PROCLAMATIONSIAWARDS: 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 5.1 Dredging /Southwest Property Update — Senior Planner Lisa Nicholas 6. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 7. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR — COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR: 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: City Administration Committee: 8.1 Controller's Office - Request to Approve Civil Service Agreement for the Year 2011 -2012 - Resolution 9. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 9.1 Local Landmark Designation of John Snaith House — 140 College Avenue — Resolution 9.2 Local Landmark Designation of Grand View House — 209 College Avenue — Resolution 10. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: 10.1 Request for Waiver of Penalty Fee - Resolution 10.2 Planning and Development— Amendment to Personnel Roster — Resolution 10.3 Common Council - City of Ithaca Policy Statement on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles - Resolution 10.4 A Resolution Authorizing Enrollment by the City of Ithaca in the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium - Resolution 10.5 Resolution Amending and Adding an Addendum to the City of Ithaca Purchasing Policy - Resolution 10.6 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 39 Entitled "Contracts' 10.7 City Controller's Report Common Council Agenda September 7, 2011 Page 2 11. REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES: 12. NEW BUSINESS: 12.1 Request of Downtown Ithaca Alliance to Permit Wine, Beer, and Hard Cider Tasting and Sale of Bottled Wine, Beer, and Hard Cider at the 2011 Apple Harvest Festival — Resolution 13. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER — FILED RESOLUTIONS 14. MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS: 15. REPORTS OF COMMON COUNCIL LIAISONS: 16. REPORT OF CITY CLERK: 17. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY: 18, MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS: 18.1 Approval of the August 1, 2011 Special Common Council Meeting Minutes — Resolution 18.2 Approval of the August 3, 2011 Regular Common Council Meeting Minutes — Resolution 18.3 Approval of the August 18, 2011 Special Common Council Meeting Minutes — Resolution 19. ADJOURNMENT: If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 274 -6570 at least 48 hours before the meeting. i Vie Conley Holcomb, CIVIC City Clerk Date: September 1, 2011 a c� Up T fem .1-r- 5,1 TO: Common Council FROM: Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner RE: Extended Dredging Tlmeframe and Use of SW Site DATE: August 29, 2011 Obiective of this Update Council voted in July, 2010 to proceed with use of the Southwest Site as a Sediment Management Facility (SMF) under the assumptions that it would initially be approximately 20 acres, shrinking to a permanent maintenance footprint of 8 -10 acres, and that the duration of the restoration dredging would be 3 -6 years. New information developed In the process of engineering the SMF permanently enlarges its size to 23 acres and lengthens the duration of the dredging project to approximately 20 years. Other factors, enumerated below, also impact the project. Staff submits this update and respectfully requests Council for guidance on proceeding with the Southwest Site. Current Status We are nearing completion of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for development of a SMF on the City-owned Southwest Site. As part of the DEIS, the City is working with EcoLogic and TG Miller to develop a conceptual -level site design and protocol for managing the sedimentation basin and the quality of the return flow, and has met with Canal Corporation to discuss the timing of the project. This effort has revealed several important considerations. • The size and placement of sedimentation basin(s) on the site are constrained by the existence of power lines, legacy buried waste materials and jurisdictional wetlands. • The current estimates are that a sedimentation basin could not exceed approximately 23 acres due to the site constraints. • The permanent maintenance facility, originally envisioned as occupying approximately 8 acres should remain at, or close, to 20 acres. • Sediments deposited within the Inlet and Flood Control Channel are a mixture of 35% sand, 45% silt and 20% clay-sized particles. The fine- grained materials (silts and clays) take longer to settle. Water residence time is the key variable for basin sizing, and ultimately determines dredging production rate. • Preliminary calculations indicate that a basin of +/- 23 acres can handle a maximum of 80,000 cy in one season, given the sediment texture. This estimate was competed using conservative assumptions. With sitespeciflc information (a settlement test) the estimate of annual basin capacity could be refined. The project team has requested assistance frotn Canal Corporation and NYSDEC in getting ACOE to complete the settlement test. • Even with the annual discharge to the basin capped at 80,000 Cy, additional measures such as addition of polymer would be needed to meet the anticipated discharge limit on suspended solids (turbidity) for a return flow to the Relief Channel. • Calculations indicate that the drying time for the sediments will be 18 -24 months. I • Canal Corporation is responsible for removing about 70,000 CY of sediment to restore navigation (a channel 100 ft wide and 10 ft deep, within their jurisdictional area) and is willing to remove a total of 300,000 cy from the lower reaches of Cayuga Inlet for the partial restoration of flood control capacity. If a larger dewatering site were available, they would contract the dredging and remove the 300,000 cy in one continuous, probably 2 year, operation. However, due to the small capacity of the SMF, Canal Corporation will be required to mobilize a dredge operation several times- each for a short dredging period —which is highly inefficient. They have given a commitment to begin dredging in the Fall of 2012 and to - over time - remove the 300,000 cy. However, due to their statewide commitments and backlog of dredging, they cannot commit to mobilizing a dredging operation to Ithaca every other year for the eight years required to complete the project. (300,000 cy/ 80,000 cy = 4 years %a two year dredging/drying/ removal cycle = 8 years). • Considering the 80,000 cy annual capacity of the proposed SMF, the time needed for sediments to dry and be removed from the basin, the quantity of sediments dredging needed to restore both navigational access and flood protection (estimated as 663,000 cy), dredging could extend beyond 20 years. This estimate assumes that the SMF as currently designed is the only recipient of dredged material from the southern tributaries, and that the project is continuously staffed, managed and funded. • No maintenance dredging is factored into the 20 year time period required for removing the accumulated sediment from the stream channels. Other new information to consider: The recent discovery of hydrilla and invasive aquatic plant species in the Flood Control Channel and associated waterways: The discovery of this highly invasive plant means that mechanical dredging will likely be more challenging, and that the potential for in -water disposal is completely off the table. TO: Common Council FROM: Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner RE: Update: Housing on the Southwest Development Site DATE: August 29, 2011 Current Status We have concluded a series of site investigations as listed in the attached table. The conclusion of the investigations- when considered together- is that the City's vision for the property as an urban neighborhood with 600+ units of economically integrated housing, is not feasible for the site. The attached milestone table shows the work that has been accomplished since March 2006, and lists some potential next steps. SW Site Investigations and Conclusions The conclusion of the Investigations -when considered together- is that the City's vision for the property as an urban neighborhood with 600+ units of economically integrated housing, is not feasible for the site. Some major factors contributing to this conclusion are as follows: • The far northern of the site (area 7) is unsuitable for residential development due to its environmental conditions and the constraints of the high tension power lines. • Areas 4, 5 & 6 of the site have significant geotechnical and potential environmental challenges. Subsurface conditions in these areas will require extensive soil preparation as well as deep foundations. Some environmental exceedences where found in the is area and there is also a concern in Area 6 of potential methane and the need for venting due to its proximity to the former dump site. • The remainder of the site, Areas 1, 2, & 3 are the most developable from a geotechnical perspective. However, 9.08 acres of jurisdictional wetlands present an intractable regulatory and environmental barrier. Also, the position of the wetlands —at the eastern boundary of the site isolates any potential development behind it This is contrary to the idea of a neighborhood —style development, connected to the surrounding urban fabric. In addition the Vision stipulated that approximately 20 acres Flood plain forest in Area 1 should be permanently preserved. The project as envisioned would require significant public and private investment. The high cost of site preparation and foundation construction due to subsurface conditions would increase the upfront investment costs. The project was envisioned at scale that would rationalize the development of infrastructure, and support bus service, neighborhood commercial and a live- work environment. This scale was not achievable due to the site constraints. Dredeine Considerations The smaller- than - expected annual dredging capacity of proposed 23 -acre Sediment Management Facility (SMF) on the northern portion of the site means that the SMF will exist in its proposed configuration for over 20 years. Preliminary engineering also indicates that it will not be feasible to significantly reduce the size of the SMF when it converts to a permanent maintenance facility. Staff recommendation for moving forward Although it is clear that the original vision is not possible, we do not know what is technically and financially feasible for the site In order to determine this we need an analysis that synthesizes the technical data with potential development scenarios, time horizons and associated costs. This type of analysis would best be done by issuing an RFQ and procuring outside professional services -since available staff time and resources are constrained and since the capital project still retains money that was intended for the master planning of the site. Studies Completed and Data Compiled For the SW Development Parcel between 2007. 2011 Study Consultant General Conclusions Boundary 8 Topographic Survey TG Miller Phase i ESA 1Tech Identified 7'recognized environmental concerns' and several data gaps. Subsurface Explorations and Divided the site into 6 areas according to subsurface Preliminary Geotechnical Station characteristics and outlined a site preparation development Engineering Evaluation strategy for each area All areas require a minimum of deep foundations or preloading. (See attached map and table) Phase 2 ESA The study concluded that most of the site is not impacted by contaminants above action levels. However, there are areas which have constituents above action levels requiring oversight Shallow Test Pits Deep Test Pits Soil Vapor Survey Soil Borings Trech from NVSDEC to determine future steps to be taken in order to safely develop the stie. The report recomended that the City Soil Borings apply to the NVSDEC Brownfield's Program for any potential future remediateion work. Monitoring Wells Soil Gas Surveys Environmental Soil Sample Asbestos Analysis Monitoring and 17 soil sample taken - all tested negative for asbestos Consulting Associates Geophysical Survey Report Physical Applications Incorporated Identified areas containing buried metal Schematic Site Preparation and Recommended lightweight two-story, two-unit buildings on the Foundation Design Stoben southern portion of the site and outlined a potential phasing Recommendation plan Wetlands Delineation Ron LeCain Identified 12 wetlands comprising 12.6 acres on site Wetlands Jurisdictional Army Corps of Determined that 5 wetands comprising 9.08 acres in the Determination Engineers southeastern portion of the site are under the jurisdiction of the ACOE. The cumulative conclusion of the above studies is that the originally proposed vision for the property as adopted by Common Council and described in the SW Vision Statement is not feasible. This is due pnmanly to the fact that the most developable potions of the site for housing as Identified in the Site Characterization Report are located in the same area as the jursidictional wetlands. The remaining most developable areas for housing in the southern portion of the site are not large enough to support the vision and were also specifically identified in the Vision Statement as a part of a 20 acre buffer area to be permanently preserved. As of 8/3112011 Southwest Development Milestones as of 8/3112011 MILESTONES Date South West Vision Statement Adopted By Common Council March 2006 South West Selection Committee Formed November 2006 Request for Qualifications for a Master Planner & Developer December 2006 Selection Process April & May 07 SW Selection Committee recommends McCormack Baron Salazar (MBS) as the Preferred Master Developer to Common Council July 07 Capital Project 722 established October 07 Request For Proposals for Preliminary Site Investigations October 2007 CC Authorizes transfer of Property to IURA November 07 Selection Of MBS for Preliminary Site Investigations December 2007 U Final Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Report March 2008 Final Geotechnical Report April 2008 m Amendment of Capital Project #722 June 2008 0 Execution of Contract for Phase 2 ESA Sept. 2008 _ °m Notice to Proceed Sept. 30, 2008 m Wetland Determination Sept. 30, 2008 'o Development and Review of Work Plans for Site Investigations Oct. 1, 2008 Work Plans Revised and Finalized for Site Investigations Nov. 10, 2008 a DEC Acceptance of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for SW Site Nov 12, 2008 Contractor Mobilization on Site Nov. 17, 2008 Site Investigations (test pits, soil boring, monitoring wells, geotechnical work & soil gas surveys) Nov. 17-Jan 6, 2008 Laboratory Analysis of soil, water and gas samples Dec.10 08- Jan 23 09 Draft Site Characterization Report April 20, 2009 DEC review of Draft report May 2009 Wetlands Jurisdictional Determination November 2010 Site Characterization Report Reviewed and Finalized July 2011 Preliminary Project Feasibility Analysis and Report Jul 2011 Presetnation of Report to Council, IURA, BPW July 2011 y Determine amount left in capital project ( +/- $330,000) Allocate capital project rn Detennine best use for property - procure professional services to synthezize studies Z Planning & Implementation Uroa* #5,1 Q 8.1 Controller's Office - Request to Approve Civil Service Agreement for the Year 2011 -2012 - Resolution RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Controller be authorized and directed to execute an agreement between the City of Ithaca and the Ithaca City School District for performance by the City for services in connection with Civil Service matters, for the period July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012, in an amount of $58,060, payable to the City of Ithaca on or before November 1. 2011. &actr AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made the _ day of . 2011, by and between the CITY OF ITHACA, a municipal corporation of the State of New York, hereinafter referred to as the "City", party of the first part, and CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, CITY OF ITHACA, a municipal corporation of the State of New York, hereinafter referred to as the `School District", party of the second part. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Board of Education of the School District desires to enter into a contract with the City for the performance by the City of certain services, to avoid duplication and unnecessary expense, particularly services in connection with Civil Service matters on behalf of the School District, pursuant to Section 2503, subparagraph 16, of the New York Education Law, and WHEREAS, the total number of classified Civil Service employees on the payrolls of the City and the City School District for the final payroll period in December, 2010, was 949, and WHEREAS, the actual annual expenditures for the Civil Service Commission of the City of Ithaca for the 2010 fiscal year of the City was $103,383; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: That for the services rendered and to be rendered by the City for the School District during the School District fiscal year, which is July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012, the School District shall pay to the City a lump sum of $58,060, payable on or before November 1, 2011. 2. In consideration of such payment, the City agrees: (a) to furnish the School District the part-time services of the Civil Service Commission of the City of Ithaca and the members of its staff, and the City Clerk and the members of her staff; and (b) to handle the records and perform any other necessary Civil Service services relating to Board of Education employees in the classified service, including examinations and tests when required. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed by their respective duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK 0 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK By: Assistant Superintendent of Business Services ATTEST: School District Clerk 2010 Agreement for Prorating of Expenses Of the City Civil Service Commission For the Handling of the Records, Examinations, Etc. ITHACA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT CITY OF ITHACA m me 2010 CIVIL SERVICE EXPENSES 533 416 949 SOCIAL SECURITY /MED. $57,794'7.65% $5,186 RETIREMENT $67,794' 11.3% $7,661 DAYCARE $0 WORKERS COMP. $67,794' .50 $339 HEALTH /DENTAL INSURANCE 1287 TELEPHONE ($2,277' 25% OF TOTAL EXPENDITURES) SUPPLIES ($16,632' 25% OF TOTAL EXPENDITURES) .ADVERTISING ($8,437' 25% OF TOTAL EXPENDITURES) EQUIPMENT /EQUIP. MAINT. ($10,752' 25% OF TOTAL EXPENDITURES) TOTALEXPENSES COL DISTRICT ($103,383' 56.16 %) OF ITHACA ($103,383' 43.84 %) TOTAL CITY OF ITHACA- 8 /19 /10— Civilserviceagree 56.1 $67,794 1 $26,065 $569 $4,158 $2,109 $2,68 $58,060 $45.323 $103.383 9. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 9.1 Local Landmark Designation of John Snaith House, 140 College Avenue — Resolution WHEREAS, asset forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) may designate landmarks and districts of historic and cultural significance, and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2011, the ILPC conducted a special public hearing for the purpose of considering a proposal to designate the John Snaith House, 140 College Ave., as a local landmark, and WHEREAS, the designation of a local landmark is a Type 11 action under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and as such requires no further environmental review, and WHEREAS, the ILPC found that the proposal meets criterion "C.," defining a "Local Landmark," under the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance and on June 28, 2011, voted to designate the John Snaith House as a local landmark, and WHEREAS, asset forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Board shall file a report with the Council with respect to the relation of such designation to the master plan, the zoning law, projected public improvements and any plans for the renewal of the site or area involved, and WHEREAS, a copy of the Planning Board's report and recommendation for approval of the designation, adopted by resolution at the meeting held on July 26, 2011, has been reviewed by the Common Council, and WHEREAS, Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code states that the Council shall, within ninety days of said designation, approve, disapprove or refer back to the ILPC for modification; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council finds that the designation is compatible with and will not conflict with the master plan, existing zoning, projected public improvements or any plans for renewal of the site and area involved, and be it further RESOLVED, That the John Snaith House, 140 College Ave., meets the definition of a local landmark as set forth in the Municipal Code, as follows: A structure, memorial or site or a group of structures or memorials, including the adjacent areas necessary for the proper appreciation of the landmark, deemed worthy of preservation, by reason of its value to the city as: A. An outstanding example of a structure or memorial representative of its era, either past or present; B. One of the few remaining examples of a past architectural style or combination of styles; C. A place where an historical event of significance to the city, region, state or nation or representative activity of a past era took place or any structure, memorial or site which has a special character and aesthetic interest and value as part of the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of the City of Ithaca, including sites of natural or ecological interest and be it further RESOLVED, That the Ithaca Common Council approves the designation of the John Snaith House and the adjacent areas that are identified as tax parcel #68.-6-2 as a local landmark. RE: Local Landmark Designation of the John Snaith House, 140 College Ave. RESOLUTION: Moved by N. Brcak, seconded by E. Finegan WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) designated the John Snaith House, 140 College Avenue, as a local landmark, at a special meeting held on Tuesday, June 28, 2011, and WHEREAS, prior to approving said designation, the ILPC reviewed the New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form applicable to the John Snaith House, which form was dated June 20, 2011, and which includes the Narrative Description of Property and the Narrative Description of Significance, and which was prepared by Mary Tomlan, and WHEREAS, following the issuance of the said New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form, Mary Tomlan made certain corrections and clarifications to it, resulting in a revised version of the form, incorporating said modifications, which version is dated July 26, 2011, and WHEREAS, most of the afore - mentioned corrections and clarifications were included in material presented to the ILPC by Mary Tomlan at its special meeting on June 28, 2011, and WHEREAS, the corrections and clarifications included in the July 26, 2011, version of the New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form do not change the basis or rationale for the ILPC's designation of the John Snaith House; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Commission hereby approves the above - referenced corrections and clarifications to the New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form, as set forth in the version dated July 26, 2011, and as prepared by Mary Tomlan, and be it further RESOLVED, That the New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form, dated July 26, 2011, including the Narrative Description of Property and the Narrative Description of Significance, as prepared by Mary Tomlan, shall supersede the June 20, 2011, version and shall serve as the primary documentation of the designation of the John Snaith House as a local landmark, which designation is hereby reaffirmed for the purpose of clarity. RECORD OF VOTE: 5 -M Yes No Abstain N. Break 0 0 E. Finegan S. Jones M. McGandy S. Stein q, JOHA_I/YAITH HOU 'L PHOTOGRAPHI- Top. VIEW FROM iiORTKEA%T AT COLLEGE AVENUE AMR COOK , l7 T IMTEf}jECTIOM. RIGHT: UATEL OVER fOUTHJECOAU /TORY WlM AMD ARO OVER CENTRAL EMTRAMCE, BOTH OM EAJT FACADE. E,,,L #� I mby My�(��P! ftt�wpo�ty4. An t LEFT: DETAIL OF EAfT FACADE MAtVARD ROOF WIADOW. A6 t RIGHT: VIEW FROM WFIT (BLAIRJYREET). LEFT: DETAIL OF EAJTER/IMOfT CMIM/1ExoAjbuU FACADE. PJELOW: VIEW FROMfOUTMEA/7. t JOH/Yf/ AiTi1 Hou,,,E LOCATIO/Y MAP. n G m P OAK AVE OAKAVE i OK�NJE 0 a G s — DWDEN RD I HAWWO PL B� - �GTHERINE ST z i qry 9 �F COOK ST a w w � < — 3 0 ORCHARD PL FSJ j J I,,NG PL q� ]m sr� rW yFR 41ICnELL ST sr eld tGHS`VSS N 0 125 250 500 Feel W+ E S June 28. 2011 9.2 Local Landmark Designation of Grand View House, 209 College Avenue — Local Landmark Designation - Resolution WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-1 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) may designate landmarks and districts of historic and cultural significance, and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2011 and July 12, 2011, the ILPC conducted a special public hearing for the purpose of considering a proposal to designate the Grand View House, 209 College Ave., as a local landmark, and WHEREAS, the designation of a local landmark is a Type II action under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and as such requires no further environmental review, and WHEREAS, the ILPC found that the proposal meets criterion "C.," defining a "Local Landmark," under the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance and on July 12, 2011, voted to designate the Grand View House as a local landmark, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Board shall file a report with the Council with respect to the relation of such designation to the master plan, the zoning law, projected public improvements and any plans for the renewal of the site or area involved, and WHEREAS, a copy of the Planning Board's report and recommendation for approval of the designation, adopted by resolution at the meeting held on July 12, 2011, has been reviewed by the Common Council, and WHEREAS, Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code states that the Council shall within ninety days of said designation, approve, disapprove or refer back to the ILPC for modification; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Ithaca Common Council finds that the designation is compatible with, and will not conflict with the master plan, existing zoning, projected public improvements or any plans for renewal of the site and area involved, and be it further RESOLVED, That the Grand View House, 209 College Ave., meets the definition of a local landmark as set forth in the Municipal Code, as follows: A structure, memorial or site or a group of structures or memorials, including the adjacent areas necessary for the proper appreciation of the landmark, deemed worthy of preservation, by reason of its value to the city as: D. An outstanding example of a structure or memorial representative of its era, either past or present; E. One of the few remaining examples of a past architectural style or combination of styles; F. A place where an historical event of significance to the city, region, state or nation or representative activity of a past era took place or any structure, memorial or site which has a special character and aesthetic interest and value as part of the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of the City of Ithaca, including sites of natural or ecological interest and be it further RESOLVED, That the Ithaca Common Council approves the designation of the Grand View House and the adjacent areas that are identified as tax parcel #67.-1 -12 as a local landmark. RE: Local Landmark Designation of the Grand View House, 209 College Avenue RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Jones, seconded by M. McGandy WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) designated the Grand View House, 209 College Avenue, as a local landmark at its regular meeting held on Tuesday, July 12, 2011, and WHEREAS, prior to approving said designation, the ILPC reviewed the New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form applicable to the Grand View House, which form was dated June 20, 2011, and which includes the Narrative Description of Property and the Narrative Description of Significance, and which was prepared by Mary Tomlan, and WHEREAS, following the issuance of said New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form, Mary Tomlan made certain corrections and clarifications to it, resulting in a revised version of the form, incorporating said modifications, which version is dated July 26, 2011, and WHEREAS, most of the afore - mentioned corrections and clarifications were included in material presented to the ILPC by Mary Tomlan at a special ILPC meeting held on Tuesday, June 28, 2011, and WHEREAS, the corrections and clarifications included in the July 26, 2011, version of the New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form do not change the basis or rationale for the ILPC's designation of the Grand View House; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Commission hereby approves the above - referenced corrections and clarifications to the New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form, as set forth in the version dated July 26, 2011, and as prepared by Mary Tomlan, and be it further RESOLVED, That the New York State Buildino- Structure Inventory Form, dated July 26, 2011, including the Narrative Description of Property and the Narrative Description of Significance, as prepared by Mary Tomlan, shall supersede the June 20, 2011, version and shall serve as the primary documentation of the designation of the Grand View House as a local landmark, which designation is hereby reaffirmed, for the purpose of clarity. RECORD OF VOTE: 5 -" Yes No Abstain N. Brcak 0 0 E. Finegan S. Jones M. McGandy S. Stein ace GRA/YD VIEW I otyE PHOTOGRAPH,/.' �C r� I'Mtm by&th/ ,laM L,Wtl ,ft,- eact u�o b-) /, a FAR LEFT: 17ETAILOF Weir FA prj CE TRALTO . /AFAR LEFT: DETAIL OF PROJECTI AG P. WIITM OP" b/ALCOAV OR ,/b) m FACADE. eact 9;Z, GRAIYD View Houle LOCATIO/Y MAP P __Y OAK AVE OAK AVE t OA50AOL�� A op - - I'J I HARVMOPL iFir _. - CATHERINE ST �I Aq Hr 11 L 1 � I —I w -- - COOK ST o eoaST a _ � 3 �I Q PL If sr I b °ry fq q �'9 toNE�VSt MpCNE4 ST yr � N 0 125 250 500 Feat W+E S June 28. 2011 10. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: 10.1 Request for Waiver of Penalty Fee —Resolution WHEREAS, Common Council established guidelines for the waiver of penalty on taxes to assist in consistency when considering requests, and WHEREAS, the owner of 940 E. State Street has requested a waiver and refund of the penalty collected by the City of Ithaca on 2011 City and Tompkins County taxes, and WHEREAS, while the circumstances leading to his request do not fit the guidelines allowing waiver of penalty previously established by Common Council, it is apparent the owner intended to pay his taxes within the penalty free period, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the request to refund paid penalty is approved 10.2 Planner recently became vacant due to a retirement, and WHEREAS, due to fiscal constraints, the Vacancy Review Committee only authorized this position to be filled on a part-time basis, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the workweek of the position of Historic Preservation and Neighborhood Planner is hereby reduced from thirty -five (35) hours /week to twenty (20) hours /week, effective September 6, 2011. 10.3 Common Council -City of Ithaca Policy Statement on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles - Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca endorses efforts to improve working conditions and to eliminate illegal and exploitative employment practices, such as the operation of "sweatshops," and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is entrusted with assuring the prudent and economical use of public money in the best interest of the taxpayers and facilitating the acquisition of quality goods at the lowest reasonable cost under the circumstances and to guard against favoritism, improvidence, extravagance, fraud and corruption, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca affirms that the manufacture of apparel and textiles in violation of reasonable labour or human rights standards is an improvident, fraudulent, and corrupt practice, and purchase of such goods is not a prudent or economical use of public money, and WHEREAS, informed purchases of apparel and textiles manufactured in compliance with labour and human rights standards helps the City to fulfill its duties to use public money in the best interest of the taxpayer, to acquire quality goods at the lowest responsible cost, and to guard against favoritism, improvidence, extravagance, fraud and corruption, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca recognizes that the violation of labour or human rights standards in the garment industry, whether in the United States or internationally, is not "responsible," as that term is intended when applied to the selection of the "lowest responsible bidder' for a contract with the City, and WHEREAS, the State of New York gives local governments the authority to enact local laws, ordinances, regulations and policies not inconsistent with the provisions of the State constitution or any general law, pursuant to which authority the City of Ithaca may reasonably define what constitutes a responsible bidder, and may investigate a bidder's skill, judgment, and integrity in considering whether that bidder is in fact a responsible bidder, and WHEREAS, in its role as a market participant, the City of Ithaca seeks to assure that the integrity of the procurement process is not undermined by contractors or subcontractors who engage in or benefit from sweatshop practices, as such contractors are able to underbid responsible contractors who pay fair wages and maintain humane work environments and conditions, which practice places responsible contractors at a competitive disadvantage and may even dissuade them from participating in the City's procurement process, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca, as a market participant, also seeks to protect the interests of local residents, workers, and businesses, while respecting internationally shared concerns about human rights and workers' labour rights, by exercising its home rule powers to establish a sweatshop -free procurement policy statement so as to ensure that textiles and items of apparel (such as uniforms) procured by the City of Ithaca are produced in workplaces free of sweatshop conditions; now therefore be it RESOLVED, That, for the reasons set forth above, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca hereby adopts the following City Policy Statement on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles, and declares its intention to modify existing City policies and ordinances and to take other steps, as needed, to reflect and support the adoption of this position: Effective January 1, 2012, the City of Ithaca and every department and division within the City government shall take all steps within its authority to ensure that, whenever possible, City purchases of apparel or textiles, in excess of $1,000, are from contractors or suppliers confirmed to be "sweatshop- free" — i.e., whose products are confirmed by a credible, independent source to be manufactured or assembled without violating the wage and hour, labour, safety, health, environmental, building, fire, or anti- discrimination laws, rules, codes, regulations or standards that are applicable in the country of manufacture or assembly, or that are contained in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Core International Labour Standards (whichever is strider). 10.4 A Resolution Authorizing Enrollment by the City of Ithaca in the Sweatshop -free Purchasing Consortium WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca has on this date, by resolution, adopted a City Policy Statement on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles, and WHEREAS, in said resolution, the Council declared its intention to modify existing City policies and ordinances and to take other steps, as needed, in order to implement its Sweatshop -Free position, and WHEREAS, the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium is organized for educational purposes within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, for the purpose of assisting public officials and others who seek to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not spent on products made in sweatshops; and the Consortium serves as a coordinating body and resource center for public entities and other organizations that share this goal, by sharing information and providing a forum for collaboration in improving the economy and efficiency of procurement policies designed to eliminate sweatshop labour from supply chains, and WHEREAS, as a dues paying member of the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium, the City of Ithaca will utilize and refer to the resources of the Consortium and its other members, to assist prospective bidders that are seeking a contract to supply apparel or textiles to the City, and /or may ask the Consortium to perform a preliminary verification of the bidder's sweatshop -free status; now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby authorizes the Mayor to enroll the City of Ithaca in the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium, as a member city, to pay the annual dues therefore, and to participate in the Consortium's annual membership meetings. 10.5 Resolution Amending and Addina an Addendum to the City of Ithaca Purchasina Policv WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, has, on this date, adopted by resolution a City of Ithaca Policy Statement on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles, and WHEREAS, in said resolution, the Council declared its intention to modify existing City policies and ordinances as needed, in order to implement its Sweatshop -Free position; now therefore be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Purchasing Policy be amended as follows, effective January 1, 2012: (1) Paragraph 4(F) (entitled "AUTHORIZED LIMITS AND CONTROLS ") of the City of Ithaca Purchasing Policy is hereby amended as follows: F. Award will be made to the lowest responsible bidder. The term 'responsible" means: financially responsible; accountable; reliable; sufficient resources; skill; judgement judgment; integrity; responsive; and moral worth. In deliberating the (2) The City of Ithaca Purchasing Policy is hereby amended so as to include the following as an Addendum: ADDENDUM: Policy on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles 1. Any purchasing contract for the procurement of apparel or textiles shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, including the City of Ithaca Purchasing Policy and Chapter 39 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. 2. To the extent allowed under General Municipal Law, Section 103, the City of Ithaca and its departments shall only purchase apparel or textiles confirmed to be sweatshop -free, as those terms are defined herein, unless: a) The Controller certifies that no confirmed sweatshop -free apparel or textiles are available and that the acquisition of the apparel or textiles sought is essential or time- sensitive, the contracting agency may select a supplier that is not confirmed to be sweatshop -free; or b) The purchase of apparel or textiles is for less than $1,000. 3. For purposes of this Addendum, "sweatshop -free" shall refer to apparel or textiles that are manufactured or assembled without violating laws, rules, codes, regulations or standards regarding wage and hour, labour, safety, health, environmental, building, fire, or anti - discrimination, that are applicable in the country of manufacture or assembly, or that are contained in the ILO Core International Labour Standards (whichever is stricter). 4. Apparel or textiles may be confirmed to be sweatshop -free by: a) Certification or otherwise credible data, information, or reports submitted to the City Controller from the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium or its agency members; b) Certification or otherwise credible data, information, or reports submitted to the City Controller from another comparable independent monitoring organization as selected by the Common Council or its members; or c) Self- certification by affidavit of the supplier or vendor that the apparel or textiles are sweatshop -free, provided that such certification is not contradicted by credible information received by the City Controller. 5. As a member of the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium, the City will receive information from the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium regarding manufacturers, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, or vendors found to have violated human rights or labour standards. The City Controller shall advise Department Heads of violation information from the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium, and Department Heads shall provide such information to all staff in a position to purchase City- required apparel. 6. The City encourages its officials and staff to strive to uphold the standards of the City Policy Statement on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles, in making purchases of work - related apparel. 10.6 An Ordinance to Amend The City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 39 entitled "Contracts" WHEREAS, by resolution approved on September 7, 2011, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca adopted a City Policy Statement on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles; and WHEREAS, in that resolution, the Council declared its intention to modify existing City policies and ordinances as needed, in order to implement its Sweatshop -Free position; now therefore ORDINANCE NO. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Chapter 39 ( "Contracts ") of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to read as follows: (1) Addition of the following as Subsection 39- 2(A)(12): (a) citations or other evidence of employment- related violations of said laws, rules, codes, regulations or standards: (b) credible information or reports from the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium or its agency members submitted to the City Controller: (c) credible information from interested third parties submitted to the City Controller: or (d) failure by the bidder or contractor to self - certify its compliance with applicable laws, rules, codes, regulations or standards. (2) Renumbering of the former subsections 39- 2(A)(12) through 39- 2(A)(14), so as to maintain the proper numerical sequence. (3) Insertion of the following new definitions into Section 39 -3, in alphabetical order: APPAREL OR TEXTILES All articles of clothing, cloth or goods, produced by weaving, knitting, or felting. or any similar goods. Refers to a supplier of apparel or textiles that are manufactured and /or or assembly, or that are contained in the International Labour Organization fILO) Core International Labour Standards (whichever is stricter). (4) Insertion of the following [underlined language] into Section 39 -3, in Subsection "A" (definition of "BIDDER, CONTRACTOR AND SUBCONTRACTOR "): A. Any person or business entity submitting a competitive bid for, receiving the award of, or submitted for approval as a subcontractor on • contract by any one of the contracting agencies. A subcontractor on • contract for the purchase of apparel or textiles shall also include any beneficiary of bankruptcy, assignment, transfer, sale of operations, or other sucoessorship intended to evade liability or responsibility for assertions or certifications made in a bid submitted to or contract with the City of Ithaca or a contracting agency. (5) Modification of the definition of "CONTRACT," in Section 39 -3, as follows: CONTRACT Any purchasing, construction, or service contract including those that are that 'A required to be let by competitive bid to the lowest reasonable responsible bidder, but not including the individual purchase of employment- related apparel or textiles, e.g. uniforms, by and for individual employees of the City of Ithaca pursuant to the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement. (6) Insertion of the following as Section 39-4: & 3911 Administration and Enforcement of Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Policy (A) Pursuant to the Policy Statement on Sweatshop -Free Procurement of Apparel and Textiles, adooted by resolution of the Common Council on September 7. 2011, the City of Ithaca and its contracting agencies shall enter into contracts to purchase or obtain for any purpose any apparel or textiles only with those bidders confirmed to be sweatshop - free, as that term is defined in this Chapter, except as set forth in subsection 39-4 (B). below, and subject to the provisions of subsection J below. (B) In the event that the City Controller has certified that no confirmed sweatshop -free bidders of apparel or textiles are available and that the acquisition of the apparel or textiles sought is essential or time - sensitive. the contracting agencv may select a bidder that is not confirmed to be sweatshop -free (C) For the purpose of implementing the City's policy, a bidder may be confirmed to be sweatshop -free by either of the following means: (1) Certification as such by the Sweatshop -Free Purchasing Consortium or other comparable independent monitoring organization as selected by the Common Council: or (2) Self- certification by affidavit of the bidder. provided that such certification is not contradicted by credible information received by the City Controller. (D) The City Controller shall collect and maintain information concerning the City's apparel and textile contracts that are awarded after the effective date of the enactment of this section, and shall ensure that the following information is available to the public, upon proper request: (1) For each such contract, a statement from the contractor that such apparel or textiles are manufactured in accordance with the sweatshop -free criteria set forth in this chapter: (2) A list of the names and addresses of each subcontractor to be utilized in the performance of each such contract: (3) For each such contract, a list of each manufacturing ooeration of the contractor and all subcontractors involved in performance of the contract, and the location, address, and telephone number of each such facility: and (4) For each such contract, a statement signed by the contractor showing that it agrees that it will, at the request of the contracting agency, allow independent monitoring of the contractors or any subcontractor's facilities, to verify compliance with the requirements of this section, and that the contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that its subcontractors comply with the independent monitoring requirements of this subdivision. where a contractor or subcontractor fails to perform in accordance with any or all of the requirements of this section, and there is a continued this section, to the contracting agency. contain a provision or provisions detailing the requirements of this section. (1) This section shall not apply to any contract entered into prior to the (J) This section shall apply except when federal or state law precludes the City of Ithaca from attaching the procurement conditions herein. Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective date. This ordinance shall take on January 1, 2012, and in accordance with law, upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. 12. NEW BUSINESS: 12.1 Reguest of Downtown Ithaca Alliance to Permit Wine. Beer, and Hard Cider Tasting and Sale of Bottled Wine. Beer, and Hard Cider at the 2011 Agole Harvest Festival — Resolution WHEREAS, the Downtown Ithaca Alliance has requested permission for wine, beer, and hard cider tasting and sales as part of the 2011 Apple Harvest Festival; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Downtown Ithaca Alliance be authorized to arrange for wine, beer, and hard cider tasting and sale of bottled wine, beer, and hard cider at booths during the Apple Harvest Festival on the Ithaca Commons, September 30 — October 2, 2011, and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Downtown Ithaca Alliance and participating wineries shall comply with all applicable state and local laws and ordinances, and shall enter into an agreement providing that it will hold the City harmless and indemnify the City on account of any claims made as the result of the sale or tasting of wine and hard cider on the Ithaca Commons, and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Downtown Ithaca Alliance or the participating winery or cider company shall agree to maintain liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 and Dram Shop Act coverage in the minimum amount of $1,000,000.00 naming the City of Ithaca as an additional insured, and shall provide evidence of such insurance to the City Clerk prior to the event.