►
From YouTube: Thursday, August 27, 2020 5:30PM Planning, Economic Development and Land Use Committee
Description
The Committee reviewed Ordinance 9.61.20 and Resolution 72.81.20. Ordinance 9.61.20 is a zoning map amendment proposes to rezone parcels located at 90 Second Avenue, 88 Second Avenue, 86 Second Avenue, 84 Second Avenue, 76 Second Avenue from Mixed-Use Neighborhood Edge (MU-NE) to Mixed-Use Campus/Institutional (MU-CI), as well as rezone parcels located at 8 Leonard Street, 10 Leonard Street, 12 Leonard Street, 4 Leonard Street, 15 Scott Street, 13 Scott Street, 11 Scott Street, 9 Scott Street, 7 Scott Street, 10 Krank Street, 15 Krank Street, 1 Scott Street, 10 Scott Street, 8 Scott Street, 6 Scott Street, 4 Scott Street, 33 Krank Street, 37 Krank Street, 45 Krank Street, 32 Leonard Street, 17 Leonard Street, 16.5 Leonard Street, 24 Leonard Street, 22 Leonard Street, 20 Leonard Street, 18 Leonard Street, 2 Leonard Street, from Townhome (R-T) to Mixed-Use Campus/Institutional (MU-CI). Resolution 72.81.20 will be used upon completion of the SEQRA coordinated review of the Ordinance 9.61.20 zoning map amendment. The resolution is currently intentionally left unfinished as coordinated review is being investigated.
B
So
why
don't
we?
I
think
what
we'll
do
is
well
we're
here
to
discuss
ordinance,
961,
20
and
ordinance
amending
chapter
375
of
coda
city
of
albany,
changing
the
zoning
classifications
and
amending
the
zoning
map.
Accordingly,
we're
also
we'll
also
be
discussing.
Resolution
number
72
are
a
resolution
regarding
the
state
environmental
quality
review
act.
It's
a
the
secret
seeker
and
that's
a
review
of
ordinance
960
120.
B
C
D
B
E
Okay,
thank
you.
I
really
wasn't
planning
on
speaking.
I've
submitted
the
written
comments
and
I
appreciate
you
taking
those
into
account
as
we
set
forward
in
the
comments
you
know
at
the
stage
of
what
you
are
and
unless
I've
missed
something.
What
you
have
on
the
website
is
a
blank
seeker
resolution.
So
I'm
not
sure
what
you're
planning
on
doing
with
that
or
your
process
of
going
forward,
but
I
think,
given
the
the
magnitude
of
this
project
at
accenture,
going
to
be
recommending
anything,
it
clearly
has
to
be
a
positive
declaration.
E
I,
as
I
pointed
out
in
my
letter
and
again,
if
I'm
missing
something
I
apologize,
I'm
recently
been
retained,
but
the
reference
shadow
study
in
the
eaf
doesn't
seem
to
actually
exist.
It
certainly
isn't
on
the
city's
website,
so
it's
not
available
for
the
public
to
review
which
at
a
bare
minimum
requires.
You
can't
take
any
action
so
that
people
have
a
chance
to
review
it.
I
don't
know
if
you've
seen
it.
E
It
was
fairly
odd
in
the
fvaf
that
the
applicant
goes
through
and
discusses
the
various
elements
of
potential
areas
of
impacts
and
gives
a
brief
summary
of
what
they
believe
the
impacts
will
be
or
won't
be.
In
regards
to
the
shadow
study,
it
says
nothing,
it
literally
says
nothing.
It
says,
see
the
shadow
study
which
doesn't
seem
to
exist,
which
you
know.
As
I
said
a
letter,
you
have
to
be
a
rocket
science,
there's
nothing
bigger
of
a
red
flag
of
a
potential
impact
than
leaving
something
like
that
out.
E
So
my
clients
have
sent
in
their
letters.
I
know
you
have
a
petition.
You've
got
comments
from
the
neighborhood.
This
is
a
significant
project
that
requires
a
careful
review
and
it
requires
a
careful
review
that
an
environmental
impact
statement
will
give
you
that
allows
the
community
not
only
to
be
involved
but
to
consider
the
alternatives.
E
It
doesn't
simply
have
to
be
the
project
as
proposed
it
can
be
different.
It's
proposed
to
some
kind
of
a
planned
mixed-use
development,
but
an
alternatives.
Analysis
will
allow
you
to
look
at
different
things
of
different
scales
and
assure
that
there
actually
will
be
affordable
housing
in
the
mix,
because
I'm
not
sure,
there's
sufficient
assurances
in
your
legislation
for
the
zone
change
which
assures
that
it'll
have
a
mix
of
affordable
housing.
E
D
B
F
B
B
B
Okay,
so
one
you'll
see
that
little
the
little
boxes
over
to
the
right
it.
It
indicates
the
way
it's
set
up.
It
indicates
that
the
common
council
does
the
review
and
the
decision
later
in
the
process.
So
I
I
I
wasn't
able
to
get
a
hold
of
planning
staff
to
confirm
this,
but,
according
to
this
I
know
that
planning
board
is
the
application
has
just
been
submitted
to
the
planning
board.
I
think
it
was
in
june
and
they
met
with
they
met
on
it
tuesday
night.
B
A
C
B
G
Ahead,
so
the
recommendation
is
favorable
with
advisory
notes,
and
it
says
the
planning
board
suggests
that
the
common
council
consider
the
following
items
when
reviewing
the
proposed
zoning
map
amendment
and
there's
four
items
and
the
first
one
is
consideration
should
be
given
to
removing
the
portions
of
the
proposed
zoning
map.
Amendment
that
front
on
second
avenue
to
limit
the
visual
impacts
on
adjacent
properties.
G
Three
analysis
of
the
map
amendment
must
consider
quote
the
full
breadth
of
the
potential
build
out
scenarios,
including,
but
not
limited
to
the
76
project.
I
think
which
is
basically
saying
once
you
make
the
zoning
map
amendment,
there
could
be
any
kind
of
development
that
would
be
could
go
in
there,
then
that
meets
the
mixed
use
campus
institutional.
So
we
should
be
aware
of
the
fact
that
that,
while
we
might
really
like
aspects
of
this
particular
project,
there
could
be
other
projects
that
would
be
eligible
to
go
in
there.
Essentially
as
a
matter
of
right.
C
G
B
B
Okay,
and
also
that
was
you
know,
one
of
the
most
important
concerns
they
raise
is
that
if
this
project,
for
whatever
reason,
didn't
go
through
in
the
zoning,
we
did
do
a
zoning
amendment.
There
are
a
host
of
different
it.
Does
it
does
completely
change?
What
can
go?
What
also
can
go
into
that
this
area,
and
that's
something
important
to
consider
could
be
hospitals
could
be
all
you
know,
a
variety
of
different
types
of
development.
B
A
Okay,
I'm
also
going
to
allow
stephanie
to
join
in
on
this
as
she's,
because
they
have
presented
a
lot
on
this
they've
presented
on
this
in
various
days
that
we've
had
the
presentation
to
go
with
me
on
the
standards
and
as
the
common
council
is
aware,
the
the
standards
are
a
b
c
d,
e,
f
g
and
then
a
and
b
again,
because
particular
consideration
has
to
be
given
to
zoning
maps.
So
a
is
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
A
A
G
would
avoid
significant
adverse
impacts
on
the
natural
environment,
including,
but
not
limited
to
water,
air,
noise,
storm
water
management,
wildlife,
vegetation,
wetlands
and
the
natural
functioning
of
the
environment,
and
then
the
subsection
two
with
a
and
b,
is
compatible
with
existing
and
proposed
uses
surrounding
the
subject.
Land,
and
it
is
the
appropriate
zoning
district
for
the
land
and
b
would
result
in
the
development
that
is
adequately
served
by
public
facilities,
for
example,
streets,
potable
water,
sewage
storm
water
management,
solid
waste
collection
and
disposable
and
disposal,
school
parks,
police
fire
and
emergency
medical
facilities.
A
And
then
my
recommendation
is
the
on
this
plant.
This
portion
is
that
the
zoning
map
amendment
proposed
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
as
presentations
from
the
developer
and
just
with
research
in
it,
the
turple
net
that
there
is
undevelopment
in
the
south
end
area.
This
will
provide
quality,
affordable
housing,
bringing
more
jobs
to
the
area,
utilizing
triple
net
zero
design,
a
new
bus
line
that
cdt
has
said
that
will
be
placed
in
the
area.
A
More
educational
advancement
opportunities,
bring
services
to
the
area
that
is
currently
not
available,
such
as
more
retail,
which
include
a
market
grocery
store.
Restaurant
cafe
neighborhood
services
such
as
a
bank,
medical,
dental,
urgent
care,
barbershop
salon,
dry
cleaning
therapy,
cultural
education,
a
stem
center
for
of
excellence,
daycare,
aquaponics
garden
and
amenities
such
as
a
co-working
space,
greenhouse
fitness
center
and
pool
that's
subsection.
A
does
anybody
have
any
questions.
B
G
So
I'm
based
upon
some
of
the
public
comment
that
we've
received,
I'm
wondering
how
this
is
compatible
with
that,
and
also
with
with
the
concept
of
essentially
having
stepped
up
kind
of
development
that
you
don't
all
sudden
plop
something
in
the
middle.
You
know
a
large
structure
in
you
know
on
a
particular
lot.
Normally
you
would
see
you
go
from
mixed.
You
know
residential
to
mixed-use
neighborhood
edge,
then
to
a
commercial
district,
then,
to
you
know
an
urban
district,
etc.
H
So
one
of
the
the
developments
as
we
were
preparing
for
this
meeting,
one
of
the
developments
that
I
learned
of
today,
which
I
hadn't
known
prior
to
the
preparation
for
this
evening's
meeting,
is
that
the
architect
who
designed
this
program
did
so
specifically
with
the
2007
segway
plan,
which
is
incorporated
into
your
comprehensive
plan
that
segway
plan
articulated
specific
requirements
for
that.
The
town.
H
They
took
all
of
those
criteria
from
the
2007
segway
plan
and
incorporated
those
into
the
development
and
the
design.
Here.
If
you
remember
in
our
presentation
on
july
9th,
we
talked
about
the
need
for
density
and
that
projects.
You
know
that
the
city
of
albany
has
been
seeking
private
development
and
private
investment
in
the
south
end
since
2007.
H
So
while
it
may
seem
like
it's
dropping
into
the
center
of
a
neighborhood,
when
you
walk
that
neighborhood
with
us
on
july
or
on
august
13th,
you
saw
what
was
there
that
neighborhood
is
in
desperate
need
of
investment,
and
this
this
new
investment
will
spark
investment
in
the
future,
and
I
do
think
you're
going
to
get
that
step
down
development.
There
are
vacant
properties
that
surround
this
site.
That
could
be
the
site
for
stepped
up
development,
but
that
that
singular
development
on
one
lot,
where
somebody's
building
a
two
or
three
story.
G
G
You
know
when,
when
I
hear
what
was
said,
you
know
about
the
seven
and
I
really
want
to
see
development.
I
mostly
think
in
terms
of
morton
avenue,
lower
morton
avenue
and
and
south
pearl
and
in
other
areas
that
are
currently
zoned
for
commercial
uses,
and
you
know
I
would.
I
can
envision
along
second
avenue,
creating
some
commercial
uses,
but
I
would
anticipate
it
in
terms
of
a
logic
and
orderly
flow
from
a
residential
district
going
to
something
like
munc.
G
As
opposed
to
going
to
something
you
know
campus
institutional,
but
so
I
so
that's
that's.
My
concern
is
that
we
heard
an
argument
for
essentially
any
place
in
the
south
end.
We
can
place
a
development
like
this
and
indeed
maybe
that's
you
know
what
some
people
think
is
orderly
development.
I
have
questions
about
that.
I
have
concerns
about
that.
H
I
think
your
your
standard
says
it
needs
to
be
consistent
with
the
albany
2030
comprehensive
plan.
My
sense
is
that
that
doesn't
mean
that
we
have
to
match
each
and
every
of
the
300
page
document,
and
so
I
don't
know
that
that
the
city
has
ever
seen
a
project
that
has
hit
all
six
of
your
articulated
goals:
they're,
probably
page
324,
page
169-
that
maybe
we
don't
meet
and
satisfy
100,
but
we
literally
hit
every
single
of
the
six
highlighted
ident
goals.
I'm
not
sure
how
we
could
be
more
consistent.
I
Yes,
well,
I
agree
with
the
last
speaker:
I've
been
close
to
this
project
and
generally,
where
you
see
the
hiccups
come
in
is
from
the
plan
and
not
using
a
small
amount
of
people's
opposition.
We've
had
number
of
community
meetings
regarding
this,
and
you
know
the
the
meeting.
The
physical
meeting
that
I
was
at
at
the
opposition
to
the
project
was
very
minimum.
I
It
was
literally
a
handful
of
people,
and
my
concern
is
that
the
smaller
voice
seems
to
outweigh
the
larger
voice.
We
have
no
debate
that
development
is
needed
in
the
south
end,
I'm
gonna
back
up
on
what
councilman
robinson
said.
When
we
were
talking
about
new
scotland,
we
welcome.
We
welcome
development
and
neighborhoods.
I
We
if
you
walk
through
our
neighborhoods,
our
neighborhoods
need
new
life
and
as
a
resident
and
as
a
city
elected
official.
I
would
like
to
see
this
process
not
be
so
barren
on
people
that
come
in
from
coming
to
our
city
to
do
business,
and
we
should
be
celebrating
that,
as
as
people
from
our
community
that
is
presenting
this
and
I'm
trying
to
be
a
part
of
the
new
change.
I
That's
coming
to
the
south
end,
so
I
I
feel
like
we're,
putting
a
lot
of
emphasis
and
we're
talking
about
a
smaller
portion
of
the
conversation
and
not
focusing
on
the
excitement
that
this
project
is
bringing
to
our
community.
You
know
the
ideal
of
having
a
health
clinic
of
having
a
bank
of
having
a
barber
shop
in
that
area.
It
just
makes
people
smile
having
a
a
a
restaurant
and
walking
distance
is
making
people
smile.
I
B
H
H
Then
we
held
one
where,
where
we
sent
out
postcards
as
is
required
by
the
city
for
the
district
plan
which
we
later
withdrew,
so
we
mailed
notices
to
everyone
of
the
meeting
and
then
on
august
13th.
We
had
a
walk-through
of
the
site
where
the
public
was
also
put
on
notice
of
the
meeting.
So
there
have
been
four
separate
engagements
with
the
community.
H
H
I
I
No,
I'm
just
and
I
can
ask
this
question
and
I
don't
think
that
I
ask
any
question
inappropriate,
so
you
you're
free
to
ask
questions
and
I'm
just
asking
you
as
the
chair
and
you
know
as
a
person
that
is,
you
know,
displaying
you
know
some
type
of
problem
with
the
project.
So
I'm
just
asking:
when
did
we
start
asking
those
type
of
questions
kathy
and
it's
a
fair
question.
B
B
I
B
I
I
B
B
A
So
next
would
be
b
conflicts
with
any
other
provisions
of
the
usdo
and
the
code
of
the
city
of
albany.
Okay.
According
to
the
developer,
there
is
two
incompatibilities
with
the
dimensional
standards
of
the
muci
zoning
district,
which
would
arise
in
phase
two
of
the
of
the
of
the
planning
of
the
I'm.
A
Sorry
excuse
me
in
the
development,
which
is
the
maximum
impervious
lot
coverage,
which
is
required
of
60
percent,
but
the
project
is
allowing
62
is
doing
62
and
then
the
maximum
front
back
set
setback
is
required
to
be
20
feet,
whereas
the
proposed
is
25
feet.
This
allows
their
argument
is
that
the
variance
is
a
maximum
previous
lot
coverage
falls
below
the
20
10
allowable
administrative
adjustment.
A
The
project
is
otherwise
designed
compliant
with
the
usco
and
city
of
albany
code.
I
have
just
you
know,
in
collaboration
with
the
planning
department
staff,
there
came
to
me
from
there's
two
things:
one
that
this
would
be
subject
to
a
air
area,
variance
for
the
bza
to
determine
and
that
otherwise
it
is
compatible
and
that
other
parts
of
the
project
will
require
conditional
use.
Permit
approval,
which
is
separate
from
this
part
of
the
project,
part
of
the
portion
and
the
development
and
third,
that
I
believe
and
stephanie.
A
And
I
just
wanna
and
following
up
with
that,
the
one
of
the
recommendations,
the
advisory
notes
that
came
from
the
planning
board
recommendation
was
particularly
one
of
them
was
about
the
setback.
As
a
conversation
I
had
with
zach
powell
and
brad
with
regards
to
the
second
avenue
portion
in
regards
to
keeping
it
as
a
mixed.
A
So
then
automatically
this
project
would
then
become
incompatible
with
the
usdo.
If
we
were
to
rezone
it
on
that
portion.
So
the
only
way
that
they
could
is
that
mixed-use
neighborhood
campus
institutional
and
the
topography
that
resolves
the
conflict
and
that
an
area
variance
would
be
the
the
remedy
in
that
portion.
J
Yeah
and
just
to
expand
on
that
a
little
bit
further,
the
the
building,
a
that
we're
proposing
along
2nd
avenue.
We
are
specifically
targeting
to
get
an
area
variance
for
the
front
setback
in
order
to
set
it
back
from
that
front
property
line.
So
where
we've
placed
the
building,
it
will
actually
be
slightly
behind
the
adjacent,
rectory
and
church
buildings
and
behind
the
adjacent
residential
structures
in
order
to
limit
the
effect
of
the
height
on
those
adjacent
properties.
H
So
in
essence,
we've
designed
around
the
thing
that
the
planning
board
has
asked
us
to
do
and
when,
when
we
were
having
the
planning
board
meeting,
there
was
kind
of
an
interesting
discussion
where
I
said
to
zach
like
what
are
you
talking
about
like?
I
don't
even
understand
what
this
first
criteria
meant
and
there
was
a
an
interplay
between
the
two
of
us
and
basically
he
was
like
yeah
you're
right
and
but
they
carried
it
through
on
their
document
which
had
been
drafted
prior
to
the
meetings.
So
I
I
think
they
were
they.
H
A
G
A
G
Thank
you,
so
what
I
mean
it's
kind
of
interesting
that
we're
saying
this
is.
We
would
be
reaching
the
conclusion
that
this
does
not
conflict
with
other
provisions
of
the
usdo,
but
it
requires
a
variance,
but
the
other
thing
I'm
wondering
about
is
one
of
the
commenters
basically
said
that
this
rezoning
would
not
allow
for
a
single
or
two
family
detached
dwelling
that
will
continue
to
exist
in
this
location.
G
So
when
we
look
up
at
whether
this
conflicts
with
any
provisions
of
the
usdo,
you
know
when
we
wrote
the
usdo
part
of
the
goal
was
to
bring
more
properties
into
compliance
with
the
usdo,
and
so
it
seems
now
we
would
be
having
one
of
these
properties
be
out
of
compliance.
One
or
two
of
these
properties
be
out
of
compliance
after
we
do
the
rezoning,
so
that
does
adversely
impact
the
owners
of
the
other
properties
and
also
then
I
think
I
mean.
H
I'm
not
sure
where
you
get
that
it
adversely
impacts
them.
They're
allowed
to
keep
their
house
it's
a
pre-existing,
non-conforming
use,
it
doesn't
change
their
use
whatsoever,
it
actually
in
it
increases
the
value
of
those
houses,
because
commercial
properties
generally
sell
for
greater
price
than
a
residential.
So
if
somebody
were
to
acquire
their
property,
they
would
get
it
at
a
higher
rate
in
the
future,
but
they
can
absolutely
remain
in
their
premises.
A
And
furthermore,
the
process
of
the
bza,
the
point
of
the
bza,
is
to
take
into
consideration
of
these
topographical
issues
that
we
can't
predict
when
it
comes
to
creating
the
zoning
the
the
usdo
and
you
know,
other
zoning
districts.
So
this
is
where
it
would
perfectly
fit
under
for
bza
consideration.
M
M
So
it's
kind
of
disingenuous
to
think
we're
we're
going
to
be
creating
single-family
homes
on
a
on
these
small
lots
and
people
are
going
to
come
in
from
the
outside
and
do
this
to
help
a
neighborhood.
That's
not
happening.
It's
not
going
to
happen.
If
it
happened,
it
would
have
happened
already
by
now.
M
You
need
something
to
be.
You
need
something
to
be
the
generator
of
excitement.
The
generator
of
people
coming
in
to
look
at
the
south
end
re-examine
the
south
end.
Also,
you
need
something
to
generate
that.
The
city
understands
what
needs
to
happen
when
development
in
these
most
challenged
neighborhoods
and
how
we
do,
how
we
go
about
and
make
sure
it
happens.
M
So
when
we
looked
at
this-
and
that
was
when
we
went
there
as
a
group-
they
had
shown
us
what
it
would
look
like
how
the
building
would
be
set
back
away
from
the
walk,
the
walkway
and
how
it
would
come
into
view
with
the
other
houses.
So
that's
you
know,
that's
already
been
looked
at
also.
We
also
have
to
realize
that
our
planning
board
directed
these
developers
to
this
zoning
use
based
off
of
their
project.
So
this
is
not
something
they
came
in
and
did
on
their
own.
M
15.
they've
been
there
forever.
No
one's
coming
in
here
going
to
be
putting
up
one
in
single-family
homes
unless
there
is
a
major
project
with
a
major
investment
that
can
begin
to
galvanize
development
in
that
community.
So
we
need
to
continue
to
realize
that
a
project
like
this
is
going
to
send
a
message.
It's
going
to
send
a
message
that
the
south
end
the
city
of
albany,
the
city
council
members
in
this
city
understand
we
need
to
do
something
to.
M
G
So
I
just
want
to
say
you
know
in
terms
of
what
we're
doing,
in
terms
of
again
the
whole
idea
of
zoning
and
a
zoning
map
being
a
planning
document
and
saying
here's
what
our
intention
is.
It
seems
to
me
as
though
the
argument
should
then
be
made
that
we
shouldn't
only
zone
this
particular
lot,
but
maybe
all
the
lots
going
down
to
pearl
street
in
this
part
of
the
south
end
and
and
and
approve
it
as
a
commercial
or
mixed-use
commercial
district.
G
A
Yes,
so
the
next
criteria
c
is
required
by
change
conditions.
The
developer
has
made
several
arguments
as
to
that.
The
zoning
that
any
the
current
zoning
is
insufficient
to
spur
development,
as
it's
already
been
discussed
already.
My
recommendation
was
that
it
is
needed
by
the
chain
for
the
change
conditions,
as
stated
by
the
developer,
the
mixed
use,
campus
institutional
allows
for
the
construction
of
buildings,
as
proposed
by
the
developer.
It
also
brings
more
besides,
in
addition
to
residential,
it
brings
more
community
commercial,
professional
and
cultural
facilities.
G
What
specifically
has
changed
with
regard
to
these
particular
parcels
in
the
last
three
years,
since
we
did
the
rezone,
and
I
I
want
to
note
that
if
the
answer
is
oh
well,
we
have
a
developer.
Then
this
criteria
would
apply
to
anybody
who
proposes
any
development
any
place
that
we
well.
We
now
have
somebody
who
wants
to
you
know
develop.
You
know
these
particular
parcels.
That
seems
to
me
to
be
the
only
real
change
from
the
facts
and
circumstances
that
existed
three
years
ago.
So
jr
correct
me.
A
I
The
thought
and
the
planning
that
was
put
into
this
process
to
have
as
many
more
of
the
effect
as
they
can,
because
they're
building
in
they
they've
taken
every
step
that
they
could
to
not
be
intrusive
on
on
the
the
current
neighborhood.
So
once
again,
I
just
would
like
it
to
be
known
that
in
the
future
you
know
it's
it's
funny
that
the
usdo
came
out
right
when
they
knew
that
that
that
we
were
going
to
do
redevelopment
in
the
south
end.
So
it
was
almost
like.
G
I
I
think
people
have
said
that
I
think
that
was
said
many
many
many
times
and
you
know
like
we're.
Seeing
people
use
the
usda
for
their
argument
against
something
and
then
go
against
it
and
when,
when
they
want
to
so
it's
a
lot
of
problems,
it
sounds
like
with
the
usdo
and
hopefully
we'll
work
together
to
get
those
addressed.
N
Yeah,
if
I
could,
you
know
on
behalf
of
us
he'd
respond
to
you
know,
I
think
twice
now
a
statement's
been
made
to
the
effect
that
what
is
you
know?
Why
is
this
site
different?
Why?
Why
would
it
rezone
here
not
set
the
precedent
to
re-zone
any
other?
You
know
parcel,
and-
and
I
would
argue
that,
if
you,
if
you
go
through
our
development
with
with
a
with
detail,
this
is
a
very
unique
site.
This
site
is
a
long
second
ave
with
tremendous
public
transportation,
some
of
the
best
most
innovative
public
transportation.
N
One
cdta
finishes
their
work
in
the
capital
district,
which
is
a
criteria
for
our
project.
The
park
to
the
south
that
we're
going
to
invest
in
as
part
of
this
project
is
a
critical,
green
space.
That's
part
of
this.
This
is
going
to
be
the
most
sustainable
development
ever
built
in
new
york
state.
If
you
get
an
aerial
map,
there's
great
green
space
on
the
former
landfill
and
behind
the
school
that
is
integral
to
what
this
project
wants
to
be.
The
school
itself
is
important
to
this
project.
N
We
are
going
to
partner
with
the
charter
school
on
the
stem
education,
allowing
the
kids
to
walk
up
the
hill
and
see
some
innovative
agriculture
and
aquaponics
concepts
that
you
don't
see
anywhere
else
in
the
city.
So
I
would
argue
that
the
the
it's
the
opposite
of
a
situation
where
this
could
take
place
anywhere.
This
site
is
two
local
developers
who
grew
up
here.
They
know
the
site,
which
is
how
they
ended
up
with
this
land,
and
it
is
the
perfect
storm
to
create
a
really
groundbreaking
breaking
development
for
the
city
of
albany.
N
B
A
A
But
in
addition
to
that,
the
demonstrated
community
need
is
immediate
employment
opportunities,
two
increases
in
in
property
value,
three
retaining
residents
who
otherwise
choose
not
to
remain
in
the
south
end
for
quality,
affordable
housing
and
find
reducing
vacant
aging,
residential
building
and
a
cycle
of
decay
and
abandonment.
My
recommendation
is
that
the
rationale
the
developers
sound
unacceptable.
K
K
A
K
A
So
e
the
next
criteria's
e
would
improve
compatibility
among
uses
and
would
ensure
efficient
development
within
the
city.
So
just
you
know
to
summarize
what
the
developer
has
argued
in
their
application.
This
would
allow
for
development
of
an
entirely
new
community
within
the
south
end.
The
design
of
the
structures
and
integration
of
mixed
uses
to
support
residential
component
were
purposeful.
A
The
provide
safe
access
through
south
end
to
crank
park
and
the
charter
school
and
the
inch
the
compatibility
going
into
the
modular
component,
which
would
allow
for
efficient
and
quick
development,
significantly
reducing
the
amount
of
time
that
the
project
impacts
adjoining
neighbors
and
that's
basically
to
sum
it
up
again.
They
re-emphasize
the
2007
insight
plan.
M
Yes,
I'd
just
like
to
comment
on
the
modular
part
of
that
modular
is
going
to
be,
I
believe,
a
new
wave
of
how
we're
going
to
be
developing
and
building
structures,
and
you
know
I
look
at
this
as
an
opportunity
why
we
build
the
building
like
this.
That's
never
been
built
in
the
united
states
before
in
the
south
end
and
it's
modular
now.
M
What
we're
looking
at
is
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
other
other
developers
who
do
modular
they're
going
to
be
looking
at
how
we
did
it
here,
but
also
it's
going
to
create,
possibly
can
create
an
opportunity,
and
this
is
with
opportunity.
What
if
albany,
is
the
place
where
we
build
a
modular
factory
where
we're
building
it
here
and
this
this
type
of
development
starts
that
conversation
and
starts
that
vision,
modular,
is,
I
think,
is
going
to
be
it's
already
being
looked
at
and
used
in
other
places.
M
So
and
when
we
look
at
this
project
from
an
environmental
standpoint,
the
reuses
of
the
water
and
things
of
that
nature.
Now
we
got
a
modular
building
in
our
in
our
city
and
now
we
can
start
looking
at
well.
Why
wouldn't
we
want
the
modulars
built
here
in
our
city,
and
I
think
that
is
a
vision
that
we
should
all
be
that
I
know
I'm
going
to
be
looking
at
as
far
as
how
to
create
more
jobs,
because
if
buildings
they
can
be
built
more
efficiently
and
quicker
with
modular.
M
B
L
A
Okay,
f
is,
would
result
in
logical
and
orderly
development
patterns
so
going
through
I'm
going
to
bypass
on
what
the
developer
argued
in
their
plan
as
it's
been
written
there,
but
my
recommendation
was
sound
and
acceptable
and,
as
on
the
site
visit
on
august
13
2020,
it
was
explained
that
the
height
of
the
building
would
not
be
taller
than
surrounding
buildings.
In
fact,
the
church
at
the
northeast
corner
would
remain
the
tallest
structure
in
the
area,
therefore,
maintaining
a
logical
and
orderly
development
in
the
area.
A
Furthermore,
and
pulling
up
the
zoning
map
now
from
on
our
city
website,
map
geo,
as
you
will
see,
this
is
the
this.
Is
the
zoning
map
right
here
as
it
currently
stands?
At
this
point
I
have
to
zoom
out,
so
I
can
show
you
what
I
was
saying
with
sound
and
acceptable
on
this.
The
rest
of
the
areas
is
mostly
mixed:
use,
neighborhood,
edge,
residential
town,
home
residential
town
home,
one
and
land
concert
conservation,
more
mixed
use,
neighborhood
edge.
If
you
zoom
out
just
a
little
bit
more
mixed
use.
Campus
institutional
is
right
here.
A
The
next
click
stance
on
it.
This
right
here
is
actually
empire
state
plaza,
that's
the
closest
mixed
use,
campus
institutional
nixie
area,
the
other
one
in
mixed
use,
campus
institutionals
over
here.
It's
actually
empty
here,
it's
kenwood
commons
llc,
and
it's
mainly
small
areas
here.
So
this
would
keep
and
top
of
that
would
keep
in
the
scheme
of
the
zoning
map
as
well
as
while
this
would
be
a
little
spot
of
mixed
use.
Campus
institutional,
most
of
the
campus
institutional
has
either
been
government
or
smaller
development,
and
this
would
result
in
a
larger
development.
G
G
G
It
was
the
concept
of
there
being
stepped
up
kinds
of
development,
so
we're
going
from
mixed-use
neighborhood
edge.
Usually
the
next
step
would
be
mixed-use
neighborhood
center,
where,
where
you
might,
with
a
variance
and
using
the
affordable
housing
incentive,
go
from
three
and
the
allowed
three
and
a
half
stories
to
five
and
a
half
stories
which
gets
you
close
to
what
they're
looking
for
here.
But
that
also,
then,
has,
I
think,
some
more
appropriate
limitations
with
regard
to.
G
If
this
does
not
go
forward,
what
would
be
an
allowable
development
in
in
this
particular
location?
So
you
know
what
are
the
potentialities
you
know,
I
would
be
very
comfortable
with
this
being
an
mu
and
c
change,
and
that
would
accomplish
a
lot
of
what
they
are
accomplishing
there.
One
of
the
things
that
happens.
G
B
B
H
Shadow
study
was
done
and
submitted
in
july,
why
the
planning
department
did
not
put
that
in
their
uploaded
documents.
I
have
no
idea.
It
was
part
of
a
public
meeting
that
we
had
with
the
planning
board
where
we
went
through
slide
by
slide,
how
the
shadow
impacted.
So
it's
been
done.
I
I
think
it's
just
a
planning
department,
snafu
and
to
judy's
comment
about
you
know
we
like
this
project,
we're
not
sure
if
this
is
the
right
zoning.
It's
actually
your
planning
department
that
pushed
us
in
the
direction
of
this
particular
zone.
H
So
it
wasn't
something
where
we
came
in.
We
were
like
hey.
This
is
what
we
want
to.
This
is
the
zone
we
want
to
create.
We
actually
came
in
with
the
project
and
said:
can
this
fit
does
this
fit?
This
is
what
we
want
to
do
and
they
worked
with
us
to
hone
this
project
and
to
find
the
the
specific
zone
that
we
later
proposed.
H
So
a
parking
structure
couldn't
go
on
the
site,
because
the
parking
structure
has
to
be
a
supportive
structure
to
something
else,
and
there
just
isn't
enough
land
to
do
that.
Would
a
drive-through
work
on
this
site.
It
probably
wouldn't
because
of
the
topography.
Your
planning
department
would
reject
it
when
it
went
through
the
development
plan
process.
So
we
went
through
that
in
painstaking
detail
in
order
to
provide
you
with
the
contrast
so
that
if
the
76
didn't
actually
occur,
you
would
know
what
uses
could
be
put
there.
H
Is
anybody
going
to
put
a
stadium
on
this
particular
site
no
way,
there's
no
way,
you'd
have
to
excavate
so
much
land
just
to
make
it
even
it
just
wouldn't
happen,
and
we
took
you
through
all
of
those.
In
a
probably
an
hour
and
a
half
presentation,
we
can
pull
those
slides
back
up
if
you'd
like
us
to,
but
but
we've
been
through
this.
B
A
A
J
J
So
are
you
guys
seeing
it
yet
nope?
So
now?
Yes,
okay,
so
similar
to
what
a
typical
shadow
study
would
include.
We
evaluated
the
four
typical
seasons,
and
so
this
first
one
is
the
spring
equinox
and
I
can
zoom
in
a
little
bit,
but
basically
this.
This
shows
obviously
the
the
full
development
in
the
event
that
building
egg
could
be
the
the
full
length
of
the
frontage
of
2nd
avenue,
but
that
area
would
be
reduced
to
half
if
84
and
86
second
half
are
not
acquired.
J
So
looking
at
this
in
the
atm,
the
shadow
is
reflecting
into
the
vegetated
buffer
along
leonard.
This
is
actually
jack,
keane's
mother's
home,
where
he
grew
up,
and
then
these
are
commercial
uses
in
the
mixed
use,
neighborhood
edge
zone
in
this
area
at
the
12
p.m.
Time
frame
the
shadow
actually
reflects
completely
within
the
second
avenue
right
of
way
and
then
would
for
building
b.
You
can't
tell
very
much,
but
it
would
reflect
into
the
yard
of
the
84
and
86
second
half
properties
as
they
currently
exist
and
then
by
6
pm.
J
It's
already
the
sun
is
already
setting.
This
is
the
summer
solstice.
The
shadows
don't
extend
as
far
during
this,
but
again
a
little
bit
into
the
adjacent
properties
on
leonard,
not
too
far
at
all
during
the
noon
time,
and
then
the
6
pm
is
where
you
do
get
some
shadow,
but
it's
a
very
short
duration
in
that
time
frame,
and
then
the
next
one
is
the
autumn
equinox.
J
So,
while
this
does
look
somewhat
exaggerated,
it
will
be
for
short
durations
and
it
will
continue
to
to
rotate
through
and
then
just
something
that
the
shadow
study
doesn't
actually
consider
the
way
that
they
are
designing
the
canopies
for
the
solar
on
the
rooftops
of
each
of
these
buildings.
They
are
actually
going
to
have
what
they
call
diffusers,
which
will
project
the
natural
light
down
into
the
adjacent
areas
surrounding
the
buildings
and
into
the
plazas.
B
E
All
right,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
I
really
appreciate
it
and
thank
you
for
putting
that.
It
hasn't
been
there
and
obviously
just
a
quick
review.
I
don't
know
how
you
can
make
a
statement
that
the
areas
that
are
going
to
be
impacted
by
the
shadows
are
only
going
to
be
a
short
period
of
time
to
the
periods
that
are
being
shown
on
the
solstices.
E
This
is
the
kind
of
information
I'm
not
trying
to
denigrate
the
project
or
go
into
a
question
of
where
it
satisfies
the
need,
but
those
are
the
details
of
showing
the
alternatives
and
how
you
have
an
impact
that
the
environmental
impact
statement
should
do,
and
I
am
struck
by
something
that
I
do.
I'm
afraid
I
hear
is
disconnect
on
is
the
mixed-use
institutional,
zoning
and
and
the
legislation
that's
being
provided,
has
no
assurances
of
the
mixed
uses,
amenities
that
are
actually
being
proposed
by
this
project,
or
is
there
any
assurance
or
requirement?
What's
the
for?
E
What's
that
whatsoever
for
affordable
housing?
So
unless
the
law
has
changed
to
specifically
mandate
that
and
if,
for
some
reason,
this
project
does
not
come
to
fruition
because
of
whatever
its
financial
issues
are,
where
the
phases
don't
really
get
developed,
things
will
change
and
there's
no
guarantee.
That
will
happen
unless
you
put
that
in
this
this
requirement,
because
otherwise
these
are
just
empty
promises
unless
it's
embodied
into
the
law,
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
for
comments.
I
Currently,
if
you
drive
up
second
half
on
a
sunny
day
is
almost
impossible
to
see.
You
know
we
have
been
lucky
that
we
haven't
had
car
accidents
there
because
of
the
sun.
If
you
go
up
there
at,
I
drive
up
that
street
all
the
time
for
for
leisure
and
work
when
you're
driving
up
by
the
church
right
there,
the
red
light
that
the
the
the
the
blur
from
the
sun
is
is
dangerous
in
itself
in
its
natural
state
right
now.
So
I
just
want
to
point
that
out.
A
Yeah
I
just
want
to
follow
up
on
something
that
was
just
stated
just
over.
You
know,
as
council.
One
thing
is,
I'm
not
I'm
not
sure
we
can
put
in
our
zoning
contingency
in
the
zoning
map.
That
would
be
almost
considered
spot
zoning.
I
don't
I've,
never
seen
something
like
that.
I
believe
that
is
something
that
is
done
at
the
phase
two
level
when
the
conditional
use
permits
are
actually
applied
for
when
the
building
permits
are
applied,
for
I
don't
think
it's
at
this
level.
A
The
second
thing
is
too,
with
the
shadow
study,
I
believe,
from
the
planning
board
meeting
and
stephanie
jump
in
at
this.
I
believe
they've
reduced
the
height
of
the
buildings,
and
I
think
the
shadow
study
took
into
consideration
the
tallest
build
out,
and
then
it
was
reduced
to
minimize
the
shadowing.
A
Okay,
the
next
standard-
this
is
the
last
standard
that
is
usually
for
the
zoning
text,
but
we
have
two
three
two
more
standards
after
this
would
avoid
significant
adverse
impacts
on
the
natural
environment,
including,
but
not
limited
to
water,
air,
noise,
storm
water
management,
wildlife,
vegetation,
wetlands
and
the
natural
functioning
of
the
environment.
I've.
This
is
kind
of
a
little
bit
with
seeker,
but
just
to
really
hit
the
points
and,
as
the
planning
board
has
directed
again
the
emphasis
on
the
triple
net
zero.
A
A
A
For
example,
the
the
supermarket
would
absolutely
have
to
go
for
a
case
by
case
for
a
conditional
use
permit
and
its
own
secret
determination
as
well
by
the
planning
board.
The
project
will
have
the
most
direct
impact
on
the
elijah
missionary
baptist
church
during
phase
two
of
the
construction.
There
are
only
three
properties
within
the
within
the
two
block
area
that
are
not
under
direct
ownership
of
the
south
end
development.
A
A
Experience
and
that
there
will
not
be
direct
impacts
by
the
construction
process
as
there
have
been
mitigation
and
development
plans,
as
in
the
fifa
full
environmental
assessment
plan
that
have
taken
to
consideration
to
reduce
as
much
impact
into
the
livelihood
by
using
the
modular
construction
style
and
given
the
proximity
to
the
highway
to
reduce
traffic
during
the
the
development
portion
as
well.
So
my
recommendation
was
sound
unacceptable.
A
I
further
went
into
the
issue
of
spot
zoning
and
that
spot
zoning
is
defined
as
a
impersonal
process
of
singling
out
one
parcel
of
land
for
use
classification
totally
different
from
that
of
the
surrounding
area
for
the
benefit
of
the
owner
of
such
property
and
that
the
detriment
of
the
other
owners
spot
zoning
is
the
antithesis
of
plan
zoning.
Fundamentally,
if
a
zoning
amendment
is
consistent
with
the
municipality's
comprehensive
end,
it
is
considered
by
the
courts
not
spot
zoning.
A
A
zoning
amendment
will
be
upheld
if
it
is
established
that
it
is
abducted
for
a
legitimate
government
purpose
and
that
there
is
a
reasonable
relation
between
the
nsoc
to
be
achieved
by
the
amendment
and
the
means
used
to
achieve
that
end.
In
order
for
it
to
be
valid,
an
amendment
to
a
zoning
ordinance
must
be
calculated
to
the
benefit
of
the
community
as
a
whole,
as
opposed
to
individual
owners.
A
They
have
made
several
arguments
and
I
said
the
recommendation
was
acceptable.
The
rezone
is
uniquely
located
in
close
proximity
to
essential
public
and
community
facilities,
including
the
south
police
station,
which
is
about
a
half
mile
away
about
.6
of
a
mile
from
this
from
the
south
end.
Fire
department,
1.5
miles
from
albany
medical
center,
directly
adjacent
to
albany,
community
charter
center,
directly
adjacent
to
crank
park
and
american
little
league,
and
they
will
also
enhance
the
existing
facilities,
including
a
partnership
with
the
neighborhood
stakeholders
for
improvement
and
management
of
crank
park.
A
K
I
just
got
a
fast
question
tom
yeah,
with
the
project,
because
you
know
when
I
heard
about
public
and
stuff,
as
we
all
know,
with
the
kovid.
A
lot
of
our
kids
now
have
to
do
classes
online.
I'm
just
wondering
you
know.
I
should
have
brought
this
question
up
sooner,
but
will
there
be
provisions
for
internet
to
to
these.
H
O
B
B
G
G
To
kathy,
probably
you
to
address
what
the
planning
board
meant
by
having
there
be
a
clear
articulation,
should
be
made
of
the
unique
circumstances
that
make
this
site
location
and
rezoning
appropriate
as
distinguished
from
other
sites.
That
may
exhibit
features
and
conditions.
So
I
think
we
do
need
to
accompany
our
decision.
G
I
think
we
need
to
do
something
along
those
lines.
Okay,
so
I
think
that
that
kind
of
you
know
you
could
do
it
continued
upon
something
you
know
you
could
approve.
It
continue
to
find
somebody,
but
since
you're
saying
you
know
you'd
like
some
more
time
well,
maybe
somebody
ought
to
be
drafting
that
and
that
further
helps
solidify
people's
thinking
on
how
this
complies.
B
K
Tom,
hello,
yeah,
you
know
I'm
looking
on
my
iphone
now
I
don't
have
the
chat
box,
but
when
I
was
at
home
there
was
a
lot
of
people
asking
questions
on
chat.
Well,
we
you
know
and
again
you
know
I'm
in
favor
of
this
project,
but
I
am
concerned.
I
don't
want
people
thinking
that
we
ignored
them
when
they
wrote
stuff
on
chat-
and
I
don't
know
whether
you
know
will
we
be
dealing
with
that
chat
box
at
all.
B
H
M
E
M
E
B
P
B
A
P
O
Yeah,
so
the
time
constraint
is
having
the
legal
authority
to
build
the
kind
of
a
project
that
we're
submitting
before
the
end
of
the
year
and
realistically,
the
sooner
we
have
the
legal
authority
to
build
said
project
that
we're
presenting
to
the
planning
board
the
better
it
is
for
us
and
in
the
community.
That's
about
it.
B
P
L
So,
from
my
perspective,
I
feel,
like
we've,
had
a
number
of
meetings
on
this
project
for
the
common
council
and
if
we
were
to
pull
it
out
of
committee
and
bring
it
to
the
common
council
for
a
vote,
that's
not
saying
yes
or
no
to
the
project.
It's
purely
moving
along
the
process-
and
we
would
have
time
in
between
pulling
out
a
committee
now
to
when
the
council
needs
to
review,
said
materials
that
are
in
question.
A
Well,
the
next
week,
the
most
the
most
we
could
schedule
is
for
september
21st,
because
there's
a
delay,
there's
a
10-day
notice
that
we
have
to
do
for
a
public
hearing.
We
couldn't
do
this
for
september
10th
and
we
would
have
to
submit
it
to
the
we
have
to
submit
it
because
of
the
zoning
map.
We
have
to
do
it
within
250
feet
of
the
entire
area.
So
there's
time
to
process
it,
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
make
it
for
the
september
10th
meeting,
but
the
21st
is
the
one
we
could
do
next.
A
I
K
Do
this
and
put
in
the
contingencies
that
we
just
need
to
verify,
you
know
I
don't
know
if
we're
allowed
to
do
that
or
not,
but
I'd
like
to
move
it
forward,
because
you
know
we're
talking
now,
you
know
the
end
of
september
and
if
they
need
to
get
this
stuff
in
by
the
end
of
the
year,
I
mean,
I
think,
there's
some
minor
stuff
that
we
need
to
to
look
at.
So
is
there
a
way
we
can
do
that
jrd,
like
just
move
it
out.
You
know
with
a
positive
recommendation:
okay,.
A
B
A
I
Sorry,
I
just
want
to
say
once
again,
because
I'm
sitting
here
and
I'm
just
watching
and
I'm
listening
right
and
when
you
go
home
and
you
look
at
it
you'll
understand
why
I
keep
interjecting,
because
it's
from
I'm
hearing
you
and
judy's
her.
You
know
personal
opinion
about
it
and
you're.
What
you're
saying
that
you
want
to
hold
it
up
again.
You
know
I've
been
watching
you,
you
know,
and
I
would
have
to
say
that
this
is
probably
the
most
unprepared
that
I've
seen
you
deal
with
something
you
know.
I
And
you
know
it's
hard
for
me
not
to
interrupt
and
not
to
get
loud,
because
it's
like
it's
it's
getting
slowed
up
for
no
apparent
reason,
and
you
know,
and
it's
for
you
know
personal
opinions
and-
and
you
know
when
you
have
it
bordering
on
the
first
and
the
second
ward,
and
you
have
both
council
people
supporting
this
project.
You
know,
I
don't
understand
why
we
are
not
moving
this
forward
tonight.
G
So
what
I
was
going
to
say
before
derek
spoke
is,
I
would
be
okay
moving
this
forward
without
recommendation
of
the
committee
at
this
point
and
directing
staff
and
ms
fredericks
to
draft
the
required
statements
that
address
the
planning
board's
recommendations,
as
well
as
the
findings
that
the
usdo
requires
us
to
make
before
it
be
brought
to
a
vote
in
the
in
the
common
council.
So
that
would
be
my
recommendation
at
this
point.
G
I
am
derek
I
you
know
you
say
personal
opinion,
but
I
you
know
I
I
I
am
bothered.
I
am
bothered
by
how
much
things
things
have
changed
in
my
world
as
a
lawyer
in
terms
of
people
having
problems
with
people
who
are
looking
to
the
law
and
the
standards
that
are
adopted
in
the
law,
and
you
know
I
feel
like
as
a
public
official,
I
have
an
obligation
to
obey
the
law
and
make
reasonable
decisions.
G
With
regard
to
the
standards
that
I'm
directed
to,
I
have
a
problem
with
the
fact
that
in
our
city
there
are
decisions
that
have
been
made
that
are
inconsistent
with
the
law
with
people
you
know
simply
wanting
to
get
to.
Yes,
because
of
a
particular
development-
and
I
think
some
of
this
points
to
you
know
the
need
to
have
further
dialogue
and
have
actually
discussions
about
changes
to
the
usda
overall
that
we
should
be
having,
and
that
doesn't
mean
I'm
gonna
vote
no
on
this
particular
project.
G
But
I
do
have
reasonable,
reasonable
and
legitimate
concerns
about
it
actually
meeting
the
standards
that
are
put
forth
in
the
code
in
order
to
approve
this
zoning
change
and
those
standards
are
there
to
protect
everyone-
and
you
know-
sometimes
it
may
be
to
you-
know-
protect
you
or
me
for
from
a
development
that
we
would
not
necessarily
want
to
see
as
well
as
allow
developments
that
we
do
want
to
see.
And
if
and
if
it's
not
providing
the
foundation
for
us
to
approve
things
that
we
do
want
to
see.
G
K
B
B
Again,
excuse
me
joyce
hold
on.
Let
me
speak,
I
I
wanted
to
meet
again.
No
one
else
seems
to
feel
like
there's
a
need
to
do
that,
as
a
committee
on
this
judy
has
proposed
moving
it
out
with
no
recommendation,
I'm
a
little
more
comfortable
with
that
than
a
positive
recommendation,
because,
like
I
said
I'd
like
to,
I
just
would
like.
I
personally
would
like
to
review
all
this
information,
and
so
that's
my
thoughts
on
it.
F
You're
muted,
oh
I'm
sorry.
I
just
wanted
to
say
for
the
record
that
this
meeting
was
made
available
to
the
public.
It
is
live
stream,
like
all
of
our
meetings.
It's
been
noticed
the
same
way
on
the
website.
Try
lift,
served
and
also
provide
an
opportunity
to
provide
public
comment,
while
the
public
comments
was
sent
to
the
members
also.
I
just
wanted
to
ask
which
legislation
would
be
this
motion
because
there's
an
ordinance
and
also
a
resolution.
So
I'm
just
trying
to
be
clear.
A
Yeah,
I
just
want
to
be
clear
as
how
we're
going,
because
I
know
councilwoman
dusha
had
said
something
about
the
standards
of
review.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
how
are
we
going
to
proceed
in
terms
of
how
those
standards
are
because,
in
the
last
ordinance,
when
she
moved
it
out,
all
she
did
is
went
down
the
line
saying
this
this
this
this,
and
I
mean
I
provided
a
memo.
I
don't
know
if
you
guys
want
something
more
in
writing.
Just
want
to
understand
how
removing
procedure
to
address
the
standards
that
are
required.
B
B
G
G
M
Our
attorney
presented
a
memo
of
the
project,
I'm
confused
on.
What
more
do
you
need?
I
I
don't
understand.
He
went
point
by
point:
how
this
project
lines
up
with
what
is
called
to
be
on
this
project.
I
don't
understand
so
what
you're
saying
is
the
information
you
got
from
jr
is
not
sufficient
or
it
doesn't
address
point
by
point.
What
what
is
the
standard
that
needs
to
be
covered
for
this
to
be
rezoned
at
that
at
what
it's
being
rezoned,
because
he
went
point
by
point.
B
You
know
I
just
want
to
point
out
to
everybody
that
this
really
is.
You
know:
we've
had
a
couple
just
a
couple
of
the
other
zone
changes
and
we're
trying
to
work
through
this
process,
because
it
is,
you
know,
we've
only
done
it
a
couple
of
times
since
we
passed
the
usdo.
So
if
I
apologize
and
if
people
could
be
patient
with
us
as
we
figure
out
what
the
best
procedure
is
here,
judy.
G
B
A
G
Okay,
so
wait
just
a
moment.
I
did
spell
out
the
factors
considered
in
making
its
decision
when
I
amended
that
resolution
or
that
ordinance
passing
that
out
of
committee,
I
stated
the
factors
and
the
basis
or
rationale
for
the
decision.
That
was
a
kind
of
easy
thing,
because
we
had
just
discussed
it.
It
was
very
straightforward.
G
B
L
B
B
A
A
Eleven
changes
in
two
or
more
elements
of
the
environment,
no
one
of
which
has
a
significant
impact
in
the
environment,
but
when
considered
together,
result
in
a
substantial,
diverse
impact
on
the
environment
and
twelve,
two
or
more
related
actions
undertaken,
funded
or
approved
by
an
agency,
none
of
which
has
or
would
have
a
significant
impact
on
the
environment.
But
when
considered
cumulatively
would
meet
one
or
more
of
the
criteria
in
this
subdivision,
I
would
advise
all
the
members
to
pull
to
look
at
the
part,
part
three
and
part
four
part.
Two.
A
So
when
you
look
at
one
impact
on
land,
the
question
asked
is
propose:
any
action
may
involve
construction
on,
or
physical
alteration
of
the
land
surface
of
the
proposed
site.
They
reference
in
the
part
one
portion
of
it.
I
said
yes,
it
does
and
then,
after
that,
going
through
when
you
look
at
the
criteria
and
there's
the
relevant
questions
in
the
part,
one
that
it
refers
to
in.
In
the
analysis
I
made
that
it
makes
no
or
small
impact
and
or
small
impact
may
occur.
So
this
is
a.
C
C
A
So
when
it
comes
to
part
one
part,
one
is
the
application
submitted
by
the
applicant
part.
Two
and
three
are
what
are
done
by
the
reviewer
as
required
as
seeker,
and
it
says
they're
on
part
three,
as
it
says
right
there.
If
the
lead
agency,
I'm
sorry
part
two
is
to
be
completed
by
the
lead
agency.
Part
two
is
designed
to
help
the
lead
agency
inventory
all
potential
resources
that
could
be
affected
by
a
proposed
project
or
action.
A
We
recognize
that
the
lead
agency's
reviewers
will
not
necessarily
be
environmental
professionals,
so
the
questions
are
designed
to
walk
a
reviewer
through
the
assessment
process
by
providing
a
series
of
question
that
can
be
answered
using
the
information
found
in
part,
one
which
is
submitted
by
the
applicant.
So
and
as
we
are
the
lead
agent,
we
are
the
reviewers.
A
Just
so
I
can
get
back
onto
that
so
part,
one
on
the
air
quality
ground
like
in
totality,
I
said
finding
of
none.
So
let
me
go
to
part
two
so
part,
two
impact
on
geological
features
and
reviewing
part
one
and
comparing
it
to
what
the
question
is.
The
proposed
action
may
result
in
a
modification
or
destruction
or
inhibit
access
to
any
unique
or
unusual
land
forms
on
the
site.
Cliffs
dunes,
mineral
fossils
caves.
My
response
was
a
no.
A
B
A
Number
four
impacts
on
groundwater:
the
proposed
action
may
result
in
new
or
additional
use
of
groundwater
or
may
have
the
potential
to
introduce
contaminants
to
groundwater
or
an
aquifer.
My
answer
was
yes
in
reviewing
the
the
questions
a
b,
a
through
g.
My
answer
is
where
no
or
small
impact
may
occur
when
it
came
to
question
b
water
supply
demand
from
the
proposed
action
may
exceed
safer,
sustainable
withdrawal
capacity
of
the
local
supply.
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
Yes,
under
secret,
that's
a
very
specific
determination
when
you're
making
from
the
different
shark
contrasts
to
use
current
land
use
patterns
between
the
proposed
there's,
a
very
specific
action
with
it.
So
that's
why
questions
a
through
f
are
very
sp.
You
have
to
go
through
each
one.
So
when
you
go
through
a
9a
proposed,
action
may
be
visible
from
any
officially
designated
federal
state
or
local
scenic
or
aesthetic
resources.
My
answer
through
that
and
it's
in
part
e,
I'm
sorry
an
e3h
of
part
one
and
when
you
look
at
it
the
answer
is
no
b.
A
A
Under
c,
the
proposed
action
may
be
visible
from
publicly
accessible
vantage
points,
seasonally
year-round
again.
The
dac
website
refers
to
state
like,
for
example,
state
parks,
particularly
state
parks
or
federal
parks
or
and
there's
a
whole
analysis
questionnaire,
and
when
I
did
that
my
response
was
no
or
small
impact.
A
A
And
then
the
proposed
action
may
cause
a
disminishment
of
the
public
enjoyment
and
appreciation
of
the
designated
aesthetic
resources
again
you're.
Looking
at
you
know,
parks
mountains
like,
for
example,
on
the
adirondacks.
If
we
were
close
like
right
there,
that's
one
way,
that's
how
the
dec
website
refers
to
it
and
that's
where
I
came
with
now
and
then
the
so.
There
are
similar
projects
visible
from
the
following
distance
of
the
proposed
project,
and
when
you
go
through
it,
when
you
go
through
the
analysis,
the
answer
is
no
or
small.
A
A
A
C
A
A
My
answer
to
that
one
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur
b.
The
proposed
action
may
result
in
the
construction
of
paid
parking
area
for
500
or
more
vehicles.
My
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
see
the
proposed
action
will
degrade
existing
transit
access
and
my
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur
d.
The
proposed
action
will
degrade
existing
pedestrian
or
bicycle
accommodations.
A
A
So
impacts
on
energy,
the
proposed
action
may
cause
an
increase
in
the
use
of
any
form
of
energy.
My
answer
was
yes,
a
the
proposed
action
will
require
new
or
upgraded
to
an
existing
substation
upon
review
of
the
application
and
reports.
The
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur
b.
The
proposed
action
will
require
the
creation
or
extension
of
an
energy
trans
transmission
or
supply
system
to
serve
more
than
50
single
or
two
family
residents,
or
to
serve
a
commercial
industry
use.
A
The
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur,
see
the
proposed
action
may
use
more
than
2
500
megawatt
hours
per
year
of
electricity.
My
answer
was
moderate
to
a
large
impact
may
occur,
and
then
you
will
see
in
my
memo.
I
address
this
a
little
bit
and
I
say
that
there
is
and
as
we're
supposed
to
do
in
part,
three
there's
mitigating
factors
for
that
d.
The
proposed
action
may
revolve
heat
may
involve
heating
or
cooling
of
more
than
100
square
feet
of
building
area.
When
completed.
A
15.
impacts
on
noise,
odor
and
light
the
proposed
action
may
result
in
increase
in
noise
orders
or
outdoor
light.
My
answer
was
yes,
and
in
continuation
a
the
proposed
action
may
produce
sound
above
noise
levels
established
by
local
regulation.
My
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur
b.
The
proposed
action
may
result
in
blasting
within
1500
feet
of
any
residence
hospital
school
licensed
day
care,
center
or
nursing
home,
and
so
there's
no
small
impact
may
occur,
see
the
proposed
action
may
result
in
routine
orders
for
more
than
one
hour
per
day.
A
The
d
the
proposed
action
may
result
in
light
shining
onto
adjoining
properties.
Interestingly,
the
dec
website.
I
was
a
little
confused
by
this.
I
thought
I
was
understanding
that
this
was
going
to
be
about
shadowing,
but
it
kind
of
was
about
light
sources,
and
so
therefore,
I
said
no
or
small
impact
may
occur
e.
The
proposed
action
may
result
in
lighting
create
sky
glow
brighter
than
existing
area
conditions.
A
Impacts
on
human
health,
the
proposed
action
may
have
an
impact
on
human
health,
from
exposure
to
new
or
existing
sources
of
contaminants.
My
answer
was
yes,
and
I
have
to
preface
what
contaminants
mean
they're
very
low
standard.
The
reason
why
I
said
yes
is
in
one
of
the
questions:
there's
a
commerce
there's
a
mention
of
pesticides
for
shrubbery
to
in
general
maintenance,
but
under
the
dec
that
has
to
be
considered,
and
so
I
had
to
put
yes,
but
then
you
go
down
the
list.
A
A
the
proposed
action
is
located
within
1500
feet:
hospitals
of
a
school
hospital
licensed
daycare,
center
group,
home,
nursing,
home
or
retirement
community.
Will
this
have
an
impact
in
human
health?
I
said
no
or
small
impact
may
occur,
be
the
site
of
the
proposed
actions
current
undergoing
remediation.
A
My
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur,
see
there
is
completed
and
there
is
a
completed
emergency
spill
remediation
or
completed
environmental
site
remediation
or
adjacent
to
the
site
of
the
proposed
action.
My
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur
d.
The
site
of
the
action
is
subject
to
an
institutional
control,
limiting
the
use
of
the
property,
e.g,
easement
or
deed
restriction.
I
said
no
or
small
impact
may
occur.
A
The
proposed
action
may
affect
I'm
sorry,
I'm
going
back
to
that.
Oh,
no,
I'm
sorry
e.
The
propose
actually
affect
institutional
control.
Measures
that
were
put
in
place
to
ensure
the
site
remains
protective
of
the
environment
and
human
health.
My
answer
was
no,
where
small
impact
may
occur
f.
The
proposed
action
has
adequate
control
measures
in
place
to
ensure
that
future
generation,
treatment
and
disposal
of
hazardous
waste
would
be
protective
of
the
environment
and
human
health.
The
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur.
A
A
The
proposed
action
may
result
in
excavation
of
a
disturbance
within
200
feet
of
a
site
under
the
disposal
of
solid
or
hazardous
waste.
My
answer
was
no
or
any
impacts
or
small
impacts
may
occur.
I
think
I
skipped
one
and
I
think
I
did
yes,
I
the
proposed
action
may
result
in
an
increase
in
the
rate
of
disposal
or
processing
of
solid
waste.
My
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur.
A
The
proposed
action
may
result
in
excavation
I'm
sorry.
I
know
that
was
when
I
went.
I
skipped
ahead.
The
proposed
action
may
result
in
the
mitigation
of
explosive
gases
from
a
landfill
site
to
adjacent
offside
structures.
My
answer
was
no
or
small
impact
may
occur
and
then
I,
the
proposed
action,
may
result
in
the
release
of
contaminated
leak.
I
can't
pronounce
that
my
english
is
not.
A
B
G
G
H
G
A
So
17
is
a
little
interesting,
so
it's
consistency
with
community
plans,
but
the
question
is
the
proposed
action
is
not
consistent
with
adopted
land
use
plans,
it's
a
double
kind
of
negative
kind
of
a
thing,
because
when
you
go
into
each
one
it's
a
negative
inference.
So
you
say
no,
that's
what
I
put
down.
B
A
B
A
A
A
G
So
I
mean
this
is
a
substantial
change
in
what
is
there
now?
It's
an
improvement,
but
it's
a
substantial
change.
One
of
the
reason
why
I
asked
about
the
square
footage
is
we've
had
things
like
saint
peter's,
doing
a
simple
hospital
expansion
of
275
000
square
feet.
We
required
the
applicant
to
do
a
full
eis.
G
H
There's
no
requirement
within
seeker
that
ties
anything
to
square
footage,
except
for
determination
of
whether
it's
a
type
1
action,
a
type
2
or
an
unlisted
action.
That's
the
only
place
in
the
seeker
statute,
where
there's
any
significance
placed
on
the
square
footage.
What
we're?
What
what
we're
really
talking
about
here
when
you
say
eis
versus
a
negative
declaration?
H
What
does
the
es
require
you
to
do?
It
requires
you
to
scope
and
the
purpose
of
something
is
to
determine
what
the
impacts
are
and
then
it
asks
you
to
study,
impacts.
We've
already
done
that,
and
we
actually
did
that
with
your
planning
staff.
They
were
the
ones
who
identified
each
and
every
impact
that
they
found
within
this,
and
they
told
us
to
study
that,
and
so
that's
when
we
came
up
with
the
list
of
studies
that
they
required
and
then
we
provided
them
to
you
so
we've.
H
Given
you
a
geotechnical
report,
we've
done
both
phase
one
and
phase
two
of
that
we've
done
a
traffic
study
and
not
just
a
normal
traffic
study.
We've
done,
one
that
includes
parking
demand
and
transportation
demand
management
plan
far
in
excess
of
anything.
I've
seen
in
the
past
done
a
shadow
study.
We've
done
archaeological
phase,
1
1b
and
we've
done
a
swift.
So
we've
worked
with
your
planning
department
months
ago
to
identify
what
are
the
impacts
of
this
project
and
then
study
them
and
that's
exactly
what
is
required
in
an
eis.
A
A
A
That's
the
that's
the
that's
the
final
portion
of
of
the
part
two.
So
then
you
step
over
to
part
three
and
you
make
the
determin
and
you
put
in
the
determinations
I
put
in
there.
The
addendum,
which
is
my
memo
and
would
also
be
the
proposed
amended
resolution
that
I
have
produced
where,
according
to
all
my
findings
and
with
the
mitigating
factors
by
the
bella,
has
produced
for
all
this,
including
the
triple
net
zero.
M
K
Well,
I
didn't
know:
do
you
want
me
to
make
a
motion
kathy
to
we
passed
this
at
the
resolution
out
with
a
positive,
I
mean
I'll,
be
glad
to
do
it,
but
obviously
we
won't
have
three
with
joyce.
I
think
joyce
is
gone
unless
you
and
judy
are
gonna,
do
it
I
mean
it'd,
be
kind
of
that's
why
I
was
quiet
for
a
minute
or
two.
B
G
G
You
know
10
15
years
we
just
haven't
had
that
many
projects
of
this
size
and
when
we
have
we,
you
know
that
we,
the
city,
has
required
the
full
environmental
impact
statement,
and
I
know
that
this
is
like
a
really
sensitive
area
that
you
know.
I'm
I
mean
I,
I
guess
what
I'd
like
is
actually
to
have
somebody
from
the
planning
department
come
and
what
you
know
concur
with
jr's
assessment.