[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