[0:00] foreign

[2:51] [Music]

[2:52] thank you

[3:01] [Music]

[4:09] foreign

[6:06] [Music]

[6:54] foreign

[7:56] thank you

[8:47] foreign

[9:20] [Music]

[9:24] foreign

[9:31] [Music]

[10:01] foreign

[10:44] thank you

[11:16] foreign

[12:10] meeting to order for Monday December 5th

[12:13] 2022 and the first committee is finance

[12:16] thank you good evening everyone the

[12:18] first item on the finance the

[12:20] application for ReStore New York around

[12:22] 700 grand for mayor McCarthy

[12:25] thank you Mr chairman

[12:27] this is uh outlined the information

[12:30] given to

[12:32] the council

[12:34] Gilman's Metroplex has been a point in

[12:38] this is an application for up to three

[12:42] million dollars to

[12:44] facilitate the development of the

[12:47] proposed building in the 756 State

[12:51] Street

[12:52] indicates specific questions but this is

[12:55] a start of the process you can form with

[12:58] the criteria of this funding possibility

[13:02] where the capsules have to hold a public

[13:06] hearing and get a public comment on it

[13:09] so it asks for your favorable

[13:11] consideration at this point

[13:13] any questions concerns

[13:29] are there any question regarding this

[13:31] item

[13:36] s

[13:38] I'll move it okay all in favor

[13:40] aye the next item is the 2017 operating

[13:43] industry it's a business Improvement

[13:45] budget again we had a public hearing at

[13:48] 11 20 years

[13:50] are there any question or concern with

[13:52] regards to this

[13:53] second favor thank you the next item is

[13:58] the update the Opera contracts from this

[14:01] Quarterfield thank you so yes

[14:04] um I'm sure not only myself but others

[14:06] have been caught calls from people who

[14:08] they were allocated with me too so at

[14:10] this point I want to um I've asked

[14:12] mistia and uh also um Mr Golden if we

[14:15] could just have an update where we are

[14:16] with the contract so people can have an

[14:18] idea of when they can start seeing their

[14:20] contracts in the you know funding

[14:22] following that so I'm not sure which of

[14:23] you wish to start

[14:25] I'm happy to start it sure thanks

[14:27] [Music]

[14:28] where the water departments putting

[14:30] together the the contracts for the

[14:34] um the recipients who we can go right

[14:36] into contract with there were no

[14:37] contingency funding contingencies

[14:40] um so we're preparing those contracts we

[14:42] got the uh programmatic information last

[14:44] week from the development department so

[14:45] we could obviously incorporate that into

[14:48] the agreement once they're drafted we'll

[14:51] have development take a look to make

[14:52] sure that it fits

[14:54] um you know their schedule in terms of

[14:56] compliance monitoring Etc and then we'll

[15:00] send it to well and obviously we'll give

[15:02] it to the mayor for review and we'll

[15:05] send it off to the recipients for their

[15:07] review and execution

[15:09] as it applies to those who are

[15:13] those recipients who have contingencies

[15:16] related to

[15:17] their funding that is that they had

[15:20] funding they had to get lined up I can't

[15:23] speak to that I don't know if um if

[15:25] missia can

[15:28] let's go

[15:37] so I think in terms of the contingencies

[15:40] we had a year right from when the

[15:42] council resolution was signed to meet

[15:44] those requirements

[15:46] um so I would just say we just need to

[15:48] be mindful of

[15:50] the if a project is not in a position to

[15:53] happen you know there has to be a sort

[15:55] of a deadline for that reception to

[15:57] establish that when we do the contract

[15:58] so that we can make sure that everybody

[16:01] is understanding you know what that data

[16:03] is when everything has to be ready how

[16:05] we can help and then so that we're all

[16:08] on the same page about what that date is

[16:11] that's that's what I would say

[16:16] said I believe a letter went out to

[16:19] those recipients letting them know that

[16:22] there are funding contingencies so that

[16:25] they're aware of what they need to do as

[16:28] well as I think in order to be mindful

[16:31] for them of what they're going to have

[16:32] to do once they have the funding in

[16:34] place certain documentation they're

[16:36] obviously going to have to submit to the

[16:37] city so I think part of what was sent in

[16:40] the mail included what they had to get

[16:41] in order from a paperwork standpoint so

[16:44] that once they do have the funding you

[16:46] know set up that they can you know just

[16:49] submit everything to the city so we can

[16:51] get rolling with the contracts

[16:53] so you said the letter went out I believe

[16:57] they went out in the mail yeah I didn't

[16:59] come from my office that was incorrectly

[17:01] send it out because it's being prepared

[17:03] to go out

[17:05] oh it's not gone yet correct

[17:09] you've passed all that without any input

[17:11] from really into professional staff so

[17:14] we've got to go through and sort out

[17:16] some of these details how do we make it

[17:17] work and what are the actual numbers

[17:19] that would allow these projects to uh

[17:23] move forward and actually be completed

[17:27] well I'm not sure if we um we definitely

[17:30] talked to the staff regarding but but

[17:32] um for those who Mr Holden did address

[17:35] this for those that there are no

[17:37] contingencies those letters have have

[17:40] they has anything gone out to those

[17:42] folks we're moving those to contract

[17:44] s yeah we've begun requesting certain

[17:47] things that they would need in order to

[17:49] go to contract and have gotten a lot of

[17:51] that information for the ones that are

[17:53] ready to go

[17:54] um so that's underway do we have kind of

[17:57] a timeline on that I had spoken to the

[18:00] attorney who's preparing in my office we

[18:02] hope to have the drafts out at the end

[18:04] of this week so they can be obviously

[18:07] reviewed and get any input from the

[18:10] development department to make sure that

[18:12] we're on the same page

[18:17] thank you any other question regarding

[18:19] this

[18:22] go ahead I would recommend that once we

[18:25] get this all in order that we have folks

[18:27] who did get funding to come and have

[18:29] like a quarterly update to let us know

[18:31] where they are what they're similar to

[18:32] what they do is uh like cdbg they send

[18:35] the report so that we know where they

[18:36] are with the project so we're not just

[18:37] like putting money out there and then we

[18:39] have no idea how the project is moving

[18:41] forward so I know that's something that

[18:43] we need to take another step we need to

[18:45] take down the road but I just want to

[18:47] make sure that we're making sure that

[18:48] we're keeping track of of the money and

[18:51] that it's being spent or or if money

[18:53] that needs to be recouped and you know

[18:55] the projects are moving forward so I

[18:56] just wanted to keep in mind that I think

[18:57] that's something you definitely need to

[18:58] put into place as well as part of this

[19:01] so I would say you know whatever that is

[19:04] we would want to have in the contract if

[19:06] it was something you were requiring

[19:11] generally yeah I mean there are

[19:13] obviously counting up you know for the

[19:14] purpose of auditing

[19:16] um the programs and what is being used

[19:17] for uh and in addition I believe

[19:20] um a lot of these projects are going to

[19:21] be reimbursement based so they're going

[19:23] to have to provide documentation to uh

[19:26] the city before we would reimburse them

[19:29] for those costs I don't know if that's

[19:30] every single project but I believe I

[19:33] think from what we spoke about it seemed

[19:35] like almost every project or every

[19:38] recipient is going to have to submit

[19:40] documentation before they receive the

[19:43] funds

[19:45] and we talked about establishing a

[19:47] similar quarterly report that they would

[19:49] submit right as a status update on the

[19:51] project with any background you know

[19:53] information and documents that we could

[19:56] you know track things along the way

[20:00] any other comments thank you thank you for the updates thank you

[20:05] motion to adjourn all in favor thank you

[20:10] next is City development and planning

[20:12] I'll call that to order that's my

[20:14] committee why do I always say I'm sorry

[20:19] I'd like to pull up or the city

[20:21] development and planning we have five

[20:24] items on the agenda

[20:26] first one is to discuss Revere Avenue

[20:28] paper Street development feasibility

[20:31] study Mr Wallen

[20:39] thank you uh several sessions ago we had

[20:44] the property owner one of the main

[20:46] Property Owners of rear Revere Avenue

[20:48] here to discuss petitioning the city to

[20:52] look at developing his street from a

[20:55] paper Street into a actual street

[20:59] so what we have here is a proposal from

[21:04] a firm CT male who I do have on the term

[21:07] contract I decided to look at CT mail as

[21:11] they are ms4 Slip firm so they have the

[21:15] best history and knowledge right now of

[21:17] the city from a drainage wetlands and

[21:20] permanent perspective we don't do a ton

[21:22] of work with them right now either so

[21:24] it's something where they're not too

[21:26] busy where we have some other firms that

[21:28] were working on more road projects I

[21:31] talked with the principal there about

[21:32] the proposal and what we were looking to

[21:34] do I think the scope and the fee is

[21:38] right right middle range what we were

[21:40] talking about the question I guess that

[21:42] we have now was for the council to

[21:44] determine if they'd like to move forward

[21:46] with this at this fee and if so how they

[21:50] would like to pay for this fee typically

[21:52] the cost is assessed on the property but

[21:55] I do not have the property owner here

[21:57] um I've kind of neglected to invite him

[21:59] that is my fault but I know when I'm

[22:02] talking with him and his letter has put

[22:05] that these properties that have no use

[22:09] and no access he's paid over he claims a

[22:12] hundred thousand dollars I have not

[22:13] verified that with Lindsay but he would

[22:17] say that he would look for the city to

[22:19] probably take on that cost for the

[22:22] design and then if it was feasible then

[22:24] he would work with us in the future on

[22:26] those costs as it goes forward so I

[22:29] guess this is a discussion for the

[22:31] council because I have this and I don't

[22:34] know the this is as far as I can take it

[22:36] right now without some kind of a lot of Direction I guess we're

[22:41] construction from the council

[22:45] discussion

[22:48] is there a president that the city would

[22:52] not

[22:53] pass this um funding request on to the

[22:56] homeowner or is there a member of

[22:58] instance where the city would like fair

[23:00] or Fair these costs

[23:03] well I would say that I this particular

[23:06] situation is the first that I have seen

[23:08] in 10 years that I've been city engineer

[23:11] you know 99 of the city has been

[23:14] developed the other areas where we have

[23:16] mostly paper streets like this or

[23:18] adjacent or in Parks so we've tried to

[23:20] reclaim them this particular street is

[23:22] an outlier whereas it really serves no

[23:26] purpose to the city from a you know

[23:28] Recreation or Park standpoint it's in

[23:30] between two housing developments which

[23:31] is why he's trying to develop it himself

[23:34] and the only

[23:37] I would say the only similar that we

[23:39] have right now would be our sidewalk

[23:42] Assessment program which we're going to

[23:43] talk about and right now we are not

[23:47] um assessing any of the soft costs onto

[23:50] the homeowners

[23:52] um so for instance I will tell you that

[23:53] due to the complications of North

[23:55] College Street which is one of the ones

[23:57] right now I'm working with an engineer

[23:59] on that project and it's probably at the

[24:03] end of the day is going to cost upwards

[24:04] of maybe ten thousand dollars to have

[24:06] all the design for that street to make

[24:08] sure all the properties are there and we

[24:10] have yet to include that against someone

[24:12] so I would say the president is really

[24:14] haven't been but it's also because we've

[24:18] been trying to do things a little more

[24:19] in-house but with this particular one

[24:21] was something I was going to talk with

[24:22] you guys about we haven't assessed

[24:24] anything yet to North College so do we

[24:26] want to do that or do we not

[24:28] um because what's ended up happening on

[24:30] the camp for instance was or Ardsley was

[24:33] we tried to do it a little quicker and

[24:35] faster and we got a lot more questions

[24:37] and the costs so now we're really trying

[24:39] to tighten up our front end and our

[24:41] design so we don't have that so that

[24:44] we're kind of a little bit but to put

[24:45] that extra time in I needed a little bit

[24:47] extra horsepower so we're going to have

[24:49] a lot more detailed planned for North

[24:51] College

[24:52] maybe for something like Ardsley

[24:55] um and I get the the gentleman's Point

[24:57] depending on the taxes but it is it is a tough line because it says that it

[25:02] should be assessed for him but he has

[25:03] been paying taxes for our properties

[25:05] that have been essentially vacant wooded

[25:07] land

[25:07] so

[25:11] it's Patrick

[25:12] um could you refresh my memory as to

[25:15] um what kind what does he hope to do in

[25:17] terms of the development I mean would he

[25:18] be putting up houses that would then be

[25:20] on there I believe he had the zoning

[25:22] change to multi-family so he's hoping to

[25:24] do something with a multi-family similar

[25:26] to what's adjacent he's between I

[25:29] believe the Hampshire house and Sheridan

[25:31] Apartments so I don't think he's looking

[25:32] for any kind of you know single family

[25:34] home development you know he owns most

[25:37] of the properties I know he is looking

[25:38] to consolidate as many as he can you

[25:40] know to make larger Parcels to do

[25:42] something you know there isn't uh

[25:45] discussion even if we could only develop

[25:47] you know some of the road or how we

[25:49] could do it you know he could take some

[25:51] of the road and try to dead end it and

[25:53] work with the other one property owner

[25:54] but because he doesn't know if this road

[25:57] is feasible right he hasn't been able

[25:59] he's gotten interest from people but he

[26:01] hasn't gotten any you know no one to

[26:03] sign anything because there's this

[26:06] open-ended well how would you access it

[26:08] how do you get to the property Is it

[26:10] feasible to do

[26:14] so he's asking us to absorb the Foster

[26:16] he has I mean I I if we had the original

[26:19] letter which I don't have he he gets

[26:21] into that about how much you just pay

[26:23] the taxes and things like that and if we

[26:25] want to push I can have him come I guess

[26:27] if that's the direction we want them to

[26:28] come but uh I just wanted to bring this

[26:30] to you so that you saw the next point

[26:33] that we're at

[26:35] and is there any so if we let's say we

[26:39] considered that where you you haven't

[26:41] identified a funding source out of your

[26:43] department that this would happen

[26:45] could happen from yeah I have some fun

[26:48] I have I have a fees for service line

[26:49] that are used for things like this so it

[26:52] wouldn't be a capital I have some

[26:53] operating money it would be nice to yeah

[26:55] and that that shouldn't be

[26:57] a huge I would say burden on me or the

[27:00] department we have money for services

[27:01] like this

[27:06] other question

[27:08] wings I think it'd be more of a comment

[27:10] I think I just want to make sure that

[27:11] we're aware of any other potential of

[27:13] paper streets because I'll make sure

[27:15] we're not just approving it based on

[27:17] this one one instance if there are

[27:19] multiple incidents out there what are we

[27:21] essentially saying yes to in the future

[27:22] and I also want to make sure I'm in

[27:25] favor of this but with respect to the

[27:28] sidewalk program making sure we're not

[27:29] considering things absent like other

[27:32] factors so with the cycle program like

[27:34] we're taking care of some of the fees

[27:36] what is that appropriate in this

[27:38] instance where we'd be considering

[27:39] paying a hundred percent of it so I just

[27:42] want to put that up there for food for

[27:44] thought yeah and I guess just this 6700

[27:48] if we were to carry this forward

[27:51] um and let's say that it comes out that

[27:53] yes it's feasible to construct this road

[27:56] um those then we get into an even more

[27:58] you know larger situation you're not

[28:01] constructing the road for under a

[28:02] hundred thousand dollars you're not

[28:04] designing a road for under 25 so all of

[28:07] a sudden the fees then get larger and

[28:10] that is where we have to have a more

[28:11] realistic discussion with the home of

[28:14] the property owners about okay if you're

[28:16] doing this for you know a reason to you

[28:19] know develop it then we have to talk

[28:21] with them I don't know if we'd have to

[28:23] get something like uh you know a

[28:25] metroplex involved or someone to

[28:26] Development Authority well you know just

[28:28] to make sure that this is this is a to

[28:31] me this is a small cost compared to if

[28:33] this leads to something more the cost

[28:35] could

[28:36] exponential larger

[28:39] and then those costs you know then this

[28:42] comes down to you know absorbing those

[28:44] but it is a public road if we do it but

[28:46] still it's a public road for the benefit

[28:48] of a property owner who owns all the

[28:50] properties around

[28:58] so I think it takes some further

[28:59] discussion because he would have to

[29:01] agree

[29:02] um I mean he wouldn't have to but we

[29:03] would need to have some agreement like

[29:05] would you have a part of that cost

[29:06] that's I suppose so that's just you know

[29:09] basically of this cost

[29:11] um and well let's say we do the

[29:13] feasibility study and then it leads into

[29:16] you know okay down the road so who's

[29:17] going to pay for that okay for me to me

[29:20] should be part of the conversation as

[29:21] well

[29:22] um with the expectation that the city

[29:24] would trading that entire cost yeah

[29:27] that'd be something I could talk with

[29:28] them about

[29:30] and then we could come back uh you know

[29:32] sometime maybe after in the first of the

[29:34] year after I know you have

[29:35] you know maybe it's not the first one

[29:37] but in the future we can talk about it

[29:39] but I wanted to get this information to

[29:40] you so that we could talk about it

[29:43] um yeah I think we need to have further

[29:45] discussion is there any other thoughts

[29:48] would you like anything from him like uh

[29:50] for written proposal about what he would

[29:51] think uh how this would go forward

[29:53] something like that

[29:55] I think yeah okay

[29:59] yeah

[30:07] no okay item number two is uh

[30:11] award-bidden contact with Jerry Burrell

[30:13] Park improvements with Harbor

[30:14] construction Mr long sure so this was a

[30:18] complex project as you know we've been

[30:20] really trying to move forward with the

[30:22] improvements to Jerry Burrell Park

[30:24] um the project has been out to bid prior

[30:26] we did receive no bids we went back

[30:28] through we worked a bit uh and we

[30:30] received one bid from Carver

[30:32] construction who as you know we do a lot

[30:34] of work within the city

[30:35] um the bid was higher than our budget

[30:38] would allow we met with Virginia talked

[30:41] with Andrew and they do allow and

[30:44] procurement that if you have one bidder

[30:46] you can negotiate with that better so we

[30:49] sat down myself Kristin Ron we all met

[30:52] with them all and we talked about where

[30:55] they saw costs in the project and after

[30:59] some back and forth

[31:01] um they thought that there were some

[31:02] areas regarding some of the means and

[31:06] methods Sometimes some of the subface

[31:07] and the amount given their walking path

[31:09] and some other things that uh some of

[31:12] their stuff marks up so I mean there was

[31:14] some there was some meat on the bottom

[31:16] and so because of the importance of the

[31:18] project they looked to bring it down to

[31:20] the number that you see here 1.3 and

[31:23] that is uh more in line with our budget

[31:26] and so with that number we're looking to

[31:28] move forward because we just really want

[31:31] to move this project

[31:34] any questions comments

[31:37] I'll move this I'll second it all is in

[31:40] favor aye thank you Mr Wallace

[31:44] um next item on the agenda is

[31:46] nope

[31:51] okay is the update for the actual yes

[31:55] the Central Park

[31:57] um sidewalk project Mr motivary yeah

[32:00] thank you I asked to put us on the

[32:02] agenda just to update the entire Council

[32:04] because uh we had a meeting last week

[32:07] two meetings and I wanted to update the

[32:09] entire Council on where we are in terms

[32:11] of that and the way forward Vanessa

[32:13] welding is going to give us some ideas

[32:14] on the pathway forward in terms of what

[32:17] is going to happen that was discussed in

[32:19] the meeting but I think is why is that

[32:20] we discussed here and everybody's on the

[32:22] same page so the last one still want to

[32:24] just walk us through what is what are

[32:26] the next steps

[32:28] sure for clarity for anyone that is

[32:31] listening online it is Central Parkway

[32:34] not Central Park Central Park uh I just

[32:39] want to make the note says Central Park

[32:41] and that could be misleading so what

[32:43] we're talking about is Central Parkway

[32:44] essentially between Eastern Parkway and

[32:47] de camp we did have those meetings what

[32:51] we're looking to do is like I discussed

[32:53] earlier I'm working on North College

[32:55] Street sidewalk assessment a very

[32:57] similar program and what I'm looking to

[32:59] do is wrap that project up sometime in

[33:02] January and start working on this one

[33:04] there and after

[33:06] the concerns that were voiced were a lot

[33:10] about width of the travel Lane

[33:13] maintaining some kind of width of an

[33:15] island parking

[33:17] and just overall clearances down the

[33:19] road making sure it doesn't impact any

[33:21] more to some of the

[33:23] um the trees and the Aesthetics of the

[33:25] roadway

[33:26] I expressed to them my concern over

[33:29] right now curving shortages as this road

[33:32] would use approximately 5000 feet of

[33:34] curb due to the islands so that is

[33:38] something that I've been discussing with

[33:39] curbing still is in short supply just

[33:43] had a meeting last week about Brandywine

[33:45] Avenue and that is still even Brandywine

[33:47] Avenue using a thousand feet of curb and

[33:49] that's going to be difficult so on my

[33:52] schedule right now for this project like

[33:53] I said is wrap up North College get that

[33:55] out to bid take the resources I'm using

[33:58] for North College turn them right to

[33:59] Central Parkway and once we get that

[34:03] going I would think that the turnaround

[34:05] for Central Parkway is going to be a

[34:07] little quicker than North College

[34:08] because the street is a little bit more

[34:10] uniform North College is very complex

[34:13] even though it's a lot shorter and then

[34:16] what we're going to do is put that out

[34:17] to bid get the bids back bring those to

[34:21] you here about what the bit is I'm going

[34:23] to put together some summary sheets that

[34:25] we can discuss and then I believe what

[34:27] we'd like to do that was discussed is

[34:29] get everyone back on a petition to sign

[34:32] off that they saw their cost and agree

[34:35] to their cost I know that in talking

[34:37] with Mr Golden there was some concern

[34:39] about new residents moving to the street

[34:41] which was also brought up by Mr Blue

[34:42] Rivera at the meetings and to make sure

[34:44] that we capture the four or five new

[34:47] residents and everyone on there so

[34:50] is kind of a hybrid of what we've been

[34:52] doing in the past it's a little bit more

[34:54] involved but it's probably going to give

[34:56] us a little bit better of a result on

[34:58] the back end so once we have all that

[35:00] done I do believe we need to call for a

[35:02] public hearing to create the district

[35:05] um so

[35:07] in a perfect world

[35:10] I would bring the bids back here in

[35:13] February and when I bring the bids to

[35:15] you we would call for the public hearing

[35:17] at that meeting and then we would try to

[35:20] get the petitions done by the public

[35:22] hearing which would give us about three

[35:23] weeks I believe or not

[35:25] four or four weeks to get to there that

[35:28] would save us the most amount of time

[35:30] because if we were to wait for the

[35:31] petitions to come back and then call for

[35:34] the public hearing that can really put

[35:37] us out and then we also have to worry

[35:38] about the bids becoming stale if we're

[35:42] not awarding the bid within 45 days of

[35:44] receiving it so that would be my

[35:47] recommendation if we could rally the

[35:49] street to get those petitions signed in

[35:52] that amount of time those three weeks

[35:54] which given the involvement on the

[35:55] meetings I think it should be possible

[35:58] but um so I would hope that we get

[36:01] everything to you sometime in March and

[36:04] we would be able to construct it this

[36:06] year but the wild card will be the Curve

[36:09] yeah just so I thought you have two

[36:11] homeowners who are working with us to

[36:14] get the updated application to have

[36:15] those five names added updated on the

[36:18] petition I'm done well that is in the

[36:20] words so that is not holding back

[36:22] anything that's in your uh

[36:26] so those are they commit themselves to

[36:28] make that happen and we commit ourselves

[36:30] to help them to get those updates the only other thing that came up that

[36:34] could be a point of contention with

[36:36] their homeowners is certain homeowners

[36:38] expressive interests if they're sidewalk

[36:40] was in good condition to leave it and we

[36:43] have not done that in the past

[36:45] and I would not recommend it

[36:48] but

[36:49] you know if if we could make it work we

[36:53] will but the sidewalk may look a little

[36:56] wavy if we were to do that because it'd

[36:58] be part of the reason that right into

[37:00] Camp look like they are it's a nice

[37:02] strict you know edging of the curve all

[37:04] the way down and so and I know that the

[37:08] idea with this assessment is is that

[37:10] once you get the percentage even if you

[37:12] did not sign off you would still get

[37:13] assessed the value so they just from a

[37:16] public perception you you know you could

[37:18] hear about that depending on which way I

[37:20] don't know if you guys want to go the

[37:22] other way we just haven't done that yet

[37:24] with a street like this

[37:28] personally I will leave that to you

[37:30] you're already export tonight

[37:33] that's my I don't know but you know the

[37:35] rest of the council so pick that out

[37:37] leave that out or we'll just bypass it

[37:41] uploaded your recommendation yeah I

[37:44] agree with that I don't know I mean they

[37:46] have a couple of numbers can I ask but I

[37:48] trust I trust your expertise I used to

[37:51] look like you know Mosaic of tiles going

[37:54] down the street so

[37:56] um but yeah a bit regressive Insurance

[37:59] in our church are there any upside work

[38:01] that was completed that you're skipping

[38:02] or you're just thinking on that also not

[38:05] sure College North College on North

[38:09] College there's one section that we are

[38:12] looking at remaining as it is very

[38:14] unique

[38:16] um and I'll share it with you it was a

[38:17] actually it was an idea that was thought

[38:19] up in the field by one of the

[38:21] contractors that we walked it it is the

[38:23] former Church site which is now in

[38:26] business they have a nine foot wide

[38:29] sidewalk and a nice curve that they put

[38:33] in however it's a little higher and what

[38:35] we've determined is we may I'm not

[38:37] saying 100 but we may be able to

[38:39] actually cut

[38:41] the four feet of unnecessary sidewalk as

[38:44] our standard is five and then do a

[38:46] landscaping area with some trees and

[38:49] then make it up that that great

[38:50] transition with that which is possible

[38:53] you could you know the green spaces like

[38:55] on Ardsley Ardsley allowed us to skip

[38:59] houses we skipped several houses because

[39:03] on our zoo we have a curb and a grass

[39:05] strip and then the sidewalk but where

[39:08] you have the curb and the sidewalk you

[39:11] know integrated to really make the

[39:13] street look like what we would like it

[39:14] to look you cannot remove that curve and

[39:17] keep the sidewalk so it's it's difficult

[39:20] and you know we haven't had a lot of uh

[39:23] easy sidewalk assessments come across

[39:25] you know

[39:26] Ardsley was one of four so I'm looking

[39:29] forward to another similar to that

[39:31] because yeah it is it is easier to make

[39:33] it up when you have some some space to

[39:35] work with some buffer area

[39:40] um just one other thing when we were

[39:42] having this discussion during the

[39:44] meeting the

[39:45] um the residents of Central Parkway felt

[39:48] that they should get uh more of an

[39:50] assistance from the city than other

[39:53] streets had um simply because they were

[39:56] the main entrance into the park and

[39:58] people used it a lot so they did bring

[40:00] that up in terms of any part of the city

[40:02] was going to pay they thought they

[40:03] should get I mean somebody actually said

[40:04] 75 percent exactly

[40:07] um in terms of the part of the city

[40:08] would pay so I just want you to know

[40:09] that they strongly feel that because of

[40:13] their main way into the park and a lot

[40:15] of people use them that they should get

[40:16] more of insistence in terms of what the

[40:19] part that City pays so

[40:22] just letting you know that

[40:24] huh

[40:27] so let me weren't meeting you know I was

[40:30] at the upper unions from the other

[40:32] associationally went a little bit later

[40:34] no no that's okay yeah um so yeah just

[40:36] but I just wanted to make you aware that conversation did take place

[40:41] invitation once we have

[40:44] any more updates

[40:46] will let you back on us a little bit and

[40:49] if there's anything against that but

[40:51] they're working a lot I'm glad happy

[40:52] that we're getting on board and moving

[40:55] forward as a cyborg program because here

[40:57] we did for quite some time there

[41:00] number of years and I think they are so

[41:02] they're happy that it's finally they are

[41:04] skeptical because

[41:06] three years

[41:08] so you know there are a lot of questions

[41:11] there are a lot of people who are on the

[41:12] fence I think but they were concerned

[41:14] because they weren't getting any

[41:16] feedback and here we are now moving

[41:19] forward we're providing information to

[41:21] them and they're more uh you know

[41:23] relaxed

[41:24] product Awards in terms of moving

[41:26] forward

[41:28] involved yeah my recommendation at the

[41:30] meeting and to you now would just be to

[41:32] try to do the best decide on the side of

[41:36] uniformity

[41:37] um you know we've done the sidewalk

[41:39] assessment now a couple of times it was

[41:41] subsidized to a percent and we're going

[41:44] to be doing it before Central Parkway

[41:46] with North College and I think it takes

[41:48] a lot of pressure off of this table and

[41:50] myself if there is a

[41:52] uniform equations we talked about that we go forward with it it is what is

[41:57] I mean this is a it's still a great

[41:59] benefit it's a subsidized program but I

[42:01] could see if on Central Parkway we go

[42:04] above

[42:05] what we usually do then when we do have

[42:08] one I've heard on an Elm Street or an

[42:11] area that a city yet we're going to get

[42:13] more of the wire and I think you're

[42:16] opening up something that I wouldn't

[42:19] recommend so I don't know that equation

[42:21] I'm going to be able to provide you with

[42:22] numbers when I come but I

[42:26] I'd recommend uniformity in some regard

[42:29] makes sense

[42:31] yeah I think we're going to look at the percentage in terms of the camp how

[42:36] much um the city Porsche and we'll

[42:38] discuss that and I I'm a great

[42:41] ingredient we should stay within that

[42:43] level so nobody feel that uh one

[42:45] straight resident is getting more than

[42:47] the others I mean

[42:49] similarly it would also save time

[42:53] if we had this number ahead of time if

[42:57] you were to say that the sidewalk

[42:58] assessment level for the year 2023 is X

[43:02] then all of the homeowners could go and

[43:05] say this is what it will cost and we

[43:08] could do it before the bid and even if

[43:10] the bid's a little higher we're still

[43:11] you know I have a pretty good idea of

[43:15] what the number is going to be if it

[43:17] varies five or ten percent you know but

[43:19] this this bringing it and bringing it

[43:22] back and then it is adding work and it's

[43:24] going to add work to come to here

[43:26] whereas if you know we had some kind of

[43:28] uh Mr Mayor we talked about some kind of

[43:30] an equation where we had a number

[43:33] it would it would be able to come right

[43:35] at that first step into the city's

[43:36] number for 2023 is 50 a linear foot and

[43:41] this is what it would cost do you want

[43:43] to go forward and then we just do it

[43:46] yeah Miss boyfriend yes I think that's that sounds very smart because I

[43:52] think it also on the other end where we

[43:54] ended up having to you know we had

[43:57] numbers that weren't actually the

[43:59] numbers that had been given to the

[44:01] residents and so that's how we ended up

[44:03] you know

[44:05] subsidizing some of that in this case

[44:08] we'd be more proactive and and we'd be

[44:12] upfront with a cost and

[44:16] you know hopefully that would be the

[44:17] accurate you know what I mean that would

[44:18] be not something that we then have to on

[44:21] the other end make up you know for

[44:24] residents yeah I mean maybe that's how I

[44:27] always envisioned it John I don't know I

[44:30] know that we've talked about it when you

[44:31] were you know uh putting this program

[44:33] together with everyone and I I think in

[44:37] my opinion is even as a you know as a

[44:39] someone that is you know if you're a

[44:42] taxpayer and all these things is that

[44:43] these are people that are opinion you

[44:46] know they're going above and beyond

[44:47] their taxes and they are in pain right

[44:49] and so it's not that they're getting a a

[44:52] free this or free yeah they are putting

[44:54] you know their money down even if it is

[44:57] you know a dollar for 50 Cent ratio

[45:00] um it's still something and uh it would help it would help me I guess

[45:04] it's self-serving today but would help

[45:06] me because it would make the program

[45:07] simpler for me

[45:09] we can look up at the camp um I think

[45:12] it's a 20 percent of Florida business

[45:16] I can work with Chris yeah if you don't

[45:18] mind it will be an issue yeah we can

[45:21] apply that across the board if that's

[45:22] okay

[45:25] you worked on this program and we

[45:26] thought that I thought that's how we

[45:29] should go from the get-cup

[45:31] um people have money in the game as you

[45:33] say and uh to put the entire cost on the

[45:36] resident

[45:37] while we certainly as a city can't

[45:40] afford to do sidewalks across the city

[45:42] and pay for it ourselves

[45:46] putting money in the game I think

[45:47] changes things and to help residents to

[45:52] get sidewalks benefits everybody

[45:55] property values increase that increases

[45:58] our our tax

[46:01] levels in the city so it's a benefit all

[46:05] the way around and makes the city more

[46:07] walkable more usable and more attractive

[46:11] to property owners or it would be

[46:14] Property Owners that's how we can do

[46:16] that so we'll find out what's the exact

[46:18] percentage

[46:21] and I'm not saying it's anything that we

[46:24] do immediately I'm just saying is that

[46:26] we're going to have our past numbers

[46:28] we'll have our future numbers and then

[46:29] maybe after those we'll be able to make

[46:31] an informed decision on how we want to

[46:33] handle going going forward we'll get

[46:35] that to you thank you all right any

[46:38] other questions or comments no that's

[46:40] good thank you so much thank you guys

[46:42] appreciate it all right the last two

[46:44] items are property sales and I'll be

[46:46] done the executive session so I'll ask

[46:48] for a motion to recess second all in

[46:51] favor um

[46:54] so now I'm going to open claims

[46:57] um and we have one item on the agenda

[47:00] and we need to discuss that item in

[47:02] the executive session so

[47:05] um I'd like to ask that we have a motion

[47:07] to go into executive session

[47:09] second okay all in favor aye okay thank

[47:13] you

Schenectady City Council Committee Meeting, December 5, 2022

Transcript