►
Description
The Committee reviewed Local Law M of 2020 and Ordinance 21.92.20. Local Law M of 2020 strengthens the Historic Resources Commission’s oversight of emergency building demolitions and stabilizations in historic district neighborhoods. Ordinance 21.92.20 strengthens oversight of emergency demolition and stabilization actions in historic district neighborhoods.
A
Welcome
everyone:
okay,
welcome
everyone.
This
is
the
thursday
january
7
2021
meeting
of
the
common
council's
planning
economic
development
and
land
use
committee
committee
members
present
tom
hoey,
judy
doshay
joe
joyce
love
alfredo
ballerin
and
myself
kathy
fady.
Other
council
members,
richard
conte,
awusu
inani
and
I
see
corey-
is
that
corey
ellis.
A
Corey
and
core
m
council
president
cory
ellis
staff,
michelle
andre
john
rafael,
ricciardo,
and
we
also
have
from
the
administration.
We
have
rick
thanks
for
joining
us
from
buildings
and
codes,
and
we
have
brad
glass
from
the
planning
department,
and
then
we
have
aaron
glenning
glennon
from
the
planning
and
the
department,
john
myers,
from
historic
resource
commission.
Thank
you,
john.
For
coming
danielle.
I
see
I
missed
you,
our
city
clerk,
danielle
gillespie,
and
we
also
have
kara
macri
from
the
historic
albany
foundation
and
bill
brand
now
bill.
A
A
C
With
regard
to
emergency
emergency
actions,
emergency
actions
can
either
be
a
demolition
or
a
stabilization
under
the
building
code,
but
with
regard
to
emergency
actions
in
historic
districts
as
far
not
as
you
know,
as
far
as
oversight
review
and
ability
to
have
input
or
on
policy
or
make
recommendations.
So
that's
that's
the
overarching
goal
of
the
proposals
so
quickly.
The
let
me
just
hit
on
the
local
law.
First,
the
local
law.
It
does
make
some
provisions
regarding
the
filling
of
appointments
to
the
hrc.
C
This
is
a
different,
an
issue
that
we've
discussed
in
the
past
about
members
of
various
boards
serving
long
past,
their
expiration
of
their
terms,
and
I
think
that
all
the
members
of
the
hrc
right
now
are
actually,
except
for
maybe
one
are
serving
beyond
their
expi
beyond
their
terms
of
appointment.
So
this
is
just
to
try
to
get
to
that
issue.
We've
talked
about
not
just
on
hsc
but
other
boards
about
timely
appointments
or
reappointments
from
the
executive
that
are
subject
to
confirmation
by
the
council.
C
Section
two
of
the
local
law
amends
the
section
that
really
deals
with
the
the
powers
and
role
of
the
hrc
to
insert
in
their
review
of
emergency
actions
within
historic
districts
and
also
their
right
to
periodically.
You
know
make
be
able
to
make
recommendations
with
regard
to
policy
and
procedure
to
the
mayor
and
the
council,
and
also
provides
that
it'd
be
a
standing
agenda
item
at
hrc
meetings,
so
that
kind
of
establishes
the
role
part
of
the
role
in
the
authority
of
the
hrc.
C
C
C
The
other
one
provides
that
when
there's
a
demo,
this
is
a
row
of
crux
when
there
is
an
emergency
action
within
an
historic
district.
This
is
a
new
subsection
e.
That's
on
section
one
of
the
ordinance
that
when
there's
a
an
emergency
action
in
historic
district
that
the
hrc
should
be
notified
of
that
action
prior
to
the
action.
C
Basically,
it's
it's
a
notification
provision
so
that
members
are
aware
of
an
action
being
taken
place
and
that
this
provides
that
a
transmittal
of
any
structural
or
engineering
reports
and
any
findings
and
considerations
that
are
the
basis
of
the
action
also
be
transmitted
to
the
hrc.
At
the
same
time,.
C
The
section
two
of
the
ordinance
relates
to
quarterly
reports
on
the
vacant
building
registry
and
just
add
some
additional
provisions.
First
of
all
that
the
h
members,
the
hrc,
received
the
quarterly
reports
and
also
adds
some
additional
provisions
that
the
report
include
by
by
district,
and
there
are
a
number
of
different
historic
districts,
the
number
of
buildings
on
the
the
vacant
building
registry
and
the
categories
that
they
fit
into
with
regard
to,
what's
already
established
under
the
requirements
for
the
reporting
under
the
vacant
building
registry.
C
C
Which
is
very
lengthy
and
detailed,
a
number
of
like
about
164
pages
or
something
like
that,
but
I
think
that
elements
of
what
is
proposed
here
are
consistent
with
with
some
of
the
provisions
within
that
report
and
kind
of
provides
the
ability
actually
to
build
on
what
was
in
that
report.
Maybe
you
know
at
some
point
later:
brad
or
aaron.
Can
you
know
quickly
touch
on
some
of
those
issues
so
and
that's
it.
A
Okay,
so
we
had
we've
received
letters
from,
in
addition
to
rick's
commentary,
we
received
letters
from
the
historic
albany
foundation
and
then
john
myers
from
the
historic
resource
commission
members
wrote
about
commented
on
the
legislation,
so
why
don't
we
turn
to
them
just
to
get
their
input
about
the
legislation?
John,
can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
historic
resources,
commission
and
their
opinions
about
this
legislation.
D
D
D
Specifically,
we
will
further
assess
the
term
emergency
action
and
work
to
understand
the
existing
city
policy
and
procedures
and
consider
what
reporting
on
demolition
and
stabilization
procedures
will
be
most
productive.
We
also
seek
clarity
on
the
bill
sponsors
intentions
with
the
term
review
when
that
review
would
occur
and
the
sponsor's
intention
for
that
review.
I
think
in
rich's
opening
comments
he's
clarified
where
he
was
intending
to
go
with
this
proposed
legislation,
and
in
closing,
thank
you
for
your
consideration
of
this
important
initiative.
D
D
So,
that's
you
know
the
substance
of
what
we
drafted
to
be
presented
here,
but
to
following
up.
I
think
that,
again
in
concert
with
the
preservation
plan,
this
aligns
precisely
with
many
of
the
concerns
that
we
have
expressed
about
emergencies
and
the
nature
of
them.
We
certainly
stand
ready
to
work
very
closely
with
the
building
department
and
would
offer
our
expertise
as
it
relates
to
buildings
and
hopefully,
in
the
this
review
environment
would
be
engaged
before
a
building
became
an
emergency.
A
Thank
you,
john.
So
when
I
was
reading
through
rick
lejoy's
comments
and
then
reading
you
know
the
text
of
the
legislation
there
were.
You
know
you
want
to
have
that
engineering
report.
You
want
to
have
the
notification
to
the
hrc
in
the
legislation,
but
there
are
some
obstacles
to
doing
that
and
I
guess
maybe
we
can
begin
to
talk
about
some
of
those
well.
It
would
be
helpful
to
get
the
planning
department's
input
on
the
on
some
of
the
legislation,
some
parts
of
it
brad.
B
Yeah,
I
mean
really,
you
know
john
covered
a
lot
of
what
I
would
have
said.
You
know,
I
think
that
you
know
I
I
I
was
at
the
meeting
hrc
meeting
last
night
and
you
know
they
really
want
to
take
a
cooperative
approach
to
solving
you
know.
What's
what's
what's
a
problem,
it
doesn't
have
an
easy
answer,
which
is
you
know
something
that
we
struggle
with
and
I'm
sure
you'll
hear
from
rick
a
little
bit
about
some
of
the
challenges
that
he
faces.
B
But
you
know,
I
think,
all
working
together
more
people
at
the
table.
We
can,
you
know
we
can
think
of
some
new
ideas
potentially-
and
you
know-
assist
where
necessary
and
get
out
ahead
of
these,
because
I
think
you
know.
Unfortunately,
a
lot
of
the
you
know.
Emotion
resides
in
that
initial
day
before
the
emergency
or
at
the
emergency,
and
at
that
point
it's
too
late.
B
So
you
know,
I
think
the
key
is
really
getting
out
ahead
of
the
head
of
the
problem
and
I've
seen
some
strides
so
far
from
the
city
in
doing
that,
it's
not
something
our
department
worked
directly
on.
I
know
sam
wells
and
obviously
rick
are
very
engaged
with
that,
and
you
know
I
think
what
the
preservation
plan
spoke.
To
really
was
the
notification
of
you
know.
B
The
hrc
sometimes
learns
about
these
things
second
hand,
and
they
are
some
of
the
you
know:
professionals
they
are
all
very
qualified
and
have
backgrounds
that
are
interested
in
the
subject,
and
they
don't
you
know.
Sometimes
hearing
it
second
hand
can
be
frustrating
for
them.
I
know
the
building
department
has
already
made
some
attempts
at
providing
those
reports
to
us.
So
you
know
hopefully
this
you
know,
legislation
underscores
that
need
and
again
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
good
potential
here.
A
E
E
E
C
So
that
was
that
was
I
I
guess
I
was
trying
to
make
a
point,
maybe
more
than
anything
else,
but
it's
it's
an
ongoing
concern
that
we
have
so
that
provision
doesn't
directly
relate
to
the
emergency
action
issue
that
we're
trying
to
get
at
but
kind
of
just
sort
of
like
as
we
were
as
I
was
in.
That
section,
maybe
throw
it
in,
and
I
know
also
that
there's
been
some
discussion.
I
believe
the
hrc
is
right.
C
C
It
was
had
been
seven
members,
but
you
know
I
don't
know
if
that's
an
issue
that
should
be
discussed
while
we're
in
that
section
of
the
code
or
not,
but
they
say
the
major
thrust
is
the
emergency
action
issue
and
you
know
the
the
appointment
part
was
just
as
I
was
in
that
area.
I
kind
of
trying
to
make
that
point.
A
F
So
I
I
I
share
richard's
frustration
that
sometimes
people
are
continued
in
perpetuity
without
the
administration,
taking
the
action
to
submit
the
reappointment
and
there's
been
improvements.
Certainly
this
year
I
think
I've
seen
a
lot
of
improvements
with
us
seeing
more
of
these
appointments
or
reappointments
on
a
timely
manner.
But
so
I
just
want
to
comment
on
that,
and
I
and
I
agree
that
that
it's
it's
a
less
important
provision,
but
I
just
didn't
want
to
kind
of
let
that
go
with
regard
to
rick
lejoy's
comments.
F
G
G
It's
never
changed
the
outcome
just
for
the
record
and
all
these
engineers
they
make
more
money
on
stabilizations
than
they
would
ever
make
on
declaring
something
a
demolition
there's.
No,
nothing
is
gained
by
that.
Those
are
just
statements
that
are
made
without
any
basis.
It's
just
a
personality
issue.
F
So
I
think
that
something
the
hrc
could
look
at
is
when
you
say
it
makes
no
difference
for
there
actually
to
be
a
retrospective
review
of
the
the
reports,
for
you
know,
maybe
over
the
last
three
years
and
who
has
been
retained
and
and
how
much
et
cetera.
So
I
think
that
that
would
be
with
regard
to
this
report.
That
is
due
in
180
days.
G
F
G
F
I
E
E
I
D
D
You
know
we
also
want
to
balance
the
board
and
have
a
a
fairly
wide
perspective
of
you
know,
representatives
of
the
population
that
possess
the
the
various
skills
and
a
broader
range
of
skills.
We're
not
all
architects,
we're
not
all
you
know,
structural
engineers,
so
there
there
needs
to
be
some
some
balance,
and
maybe
we
need
to
look
at
our
own
composition
to
see
if
there
is
kind
of
an
ideal
composition
for
the
board,
so
that
there
is
a
you.
J
Thank
you.
I'd
like
to
hear
a
little
more
from
rick.
To
be
honest,
I'm
not
trying
to
put
you
on
spot
work,
but
I
really
want
to
make
sure
that
what
we're
doing
here
is
something
that's
going
to
benefit
our
city.
I
unfortunately
have
had
the
experience
of
several
fires
in
in
my
world
over
the
last
few
years,
and
I've
seen
the
pain
residents
go
through
when
they
lose
everything
and
they
lose
their
home.
J
But
I've
also
seen
the
pain
of
what
residents
have
to
deal
with
when
we
have
an
abandoned
building,
that's
been
a
flames
that
you
know
is
a
constant
scar
and
I
think
of
20
benson
street,
and
you
can
google
it.
If
you
want-
and
you
can,
you
can
see
what
I'm
talking
about
as
a
constant
scar
in
our
in
our
neighborhood.
J
A
G
As
far
as
the
legislation
goes,
I'm
a
proponent-
I
I
think
it's
good,
I
you
know
I
embrace
working,
you
know
together.
I
just
think
we
got
to
work
out.
Some
of
I
think,
there's
some
of
the
changes
I
would
think
would
have
to
happen
is
the
timing
of
it,
for
instance,
when
I'm
standing
at
the
building
at
three
in
the
morning
because
the
wall
blew
out
or
in
real,
you
know
just
two
nights
ago:
it
happened.
That's
not
the
time
to
bring
in
someone
to.
G
Let's
see
what
we
can
talk
about
and
see
what
we
can
do.
It
has
to
happen
long
before
these
buildings
are
not
secrets.
They're,
not
you
know.
Oh
also,
we
realize
there's
one
that's
coming
down
they're,
you
know
been
cited
forever.
The
neighbors
know
about
it.
You
all
know
about
it.
We
all
know
about
it,
so
that's
the
reality
of
it.
I
really
think
this
would
be
even
more
beneficial
and
I'll
just
play
out
a
scenario.
G
If
we
sign
a
building,
you
know
for
the
vacant
building,
and
you
know
during
our
inspection,
we
have
real
concern
and
this
happens
often
we'll
cite
the
owner
and
tell
them
you
need.
We
need
an
engineer's
report.
We
need
somebody
to
assess
this
building
within
seven
to
14
days,
because
we
believe
it's
it's
heading
in
the
wrong
direction
and
it
could
become
a
public
hazard
when
there's
no
compliance.
G
I
think
that's,
I
think,
that's
when
it
would
be
most
beneficial
to
then
reach
out
to
everybody
and
say
here's
a
building.
It's
on
its
way.
We
know
it's
coming.
We
need
to
act
on
it.
This
is
the
time
to
act
on
it.
So
this
is
where
we've
you
know
it's
not
an
emergency.
It
hasn't
been
what
to
me
once
it's
been
deemed
an
imminent
threat.
We
can't
take
the
foot
off
the
gas
because
one
of
us
might
think.
G
Well,
it's
been
that
way
for
a
year,
what's
another
six
hours,
because
then
I'm
on
the
hook.
So
if
the,
if
it's
called,
we
got
to
move,
but
if
I
know
it's
coming
in
that
direction-
and
you
know
I
can
give
you
the
list-
we
got
plenty
of
them.
That's
when
I
say
hey,
here's
a
building.
What
can
we
do?
You
know
not,
as
I'm
standing
there
with
the
contractors
we
need.
This
is
when
we
need
to
get
in
there.
G
This
is
where
we
have
enough
worry
about
the
building
that
I
have
the
legal
standing
to
gain
access.
If,
if
need
be,
if
we
see
something
beginning
to
give
or
give
way,
that's
the
time
and
I'll
give
you
an
example.
If
I
can
167
third
avenue,
we
cited
it
in
october,
my
inspector
was
there
said
we
need
to
have.
We
need
an
engineer's
report,
please,
within
14
days
now
we're
into
january.
We
never
got
a
response.
We
never
got
the
report.
G
Our
picture
show
a
corner
on
the
foundation
beginning
to
erode
in
some
missing
brick
fast
forward
to
three
nights
ago.
We
get
a
call
at
six
or
seven
o'clock
at
night
water's
coming
out
of
the
second
floor
upon
arrival,
the
entire
side
of
the
foundation
and
it's
above
ground
brick
about
six
feet
has
has
collapsed.
The
entire
back
wall
has
disengaged
and
is
you
know
floating
essentially
the
the
sills
go
everything's
gone,
there's
nothing
there
and
we
can't.
G
Now
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
say
well
if
we
get
in
there
and
stabilize
and
fix
it
up,
you
know
someone
could
make
something
out
of
it
if,
as
a
city,
if
I
put
somebody
in
there
and
god
forbid
that
thing-
let's
go
we're
on
the
hook,
so
the
imminent
threat
is
there.
We
had
to
take
it
down
october
when
we
had
that
notice
and
we
saw
the
beginnings
of
it
and
that's
just
how
fast
and
how
rapid
this
can
happen.
G
That's
when
we
should
have
come
in
there
and
you
know,
brought
you
know,
whoever
whatever
that
might
be,
whoever
you
all
want
to
be
part
of
that
conversation.
Those
are
the
things
that
we
you
know
that's
when
we
should
be
doing
it.
So
that's,
quite
honestly,
that's
the
only
issue.
I
have
in
the
in
the
entire
thing
is
the
timing
of
when
we
think
we
want
to
have
these
conversations
and
reviews.
G
A
A
G
E
C
C
You
know
ahead
of
time,
potential
detention
or
something
or
lining
up
potential
making
it
aware
so
people
who
are
potentially
interested
in
development
or
rehab
or
saving
a
building
can
can
be
out
there.
I
had
a
building.
I
had
my
up
earlier
the
background
141
dove
street,
which
rick
is
familiar
with
a
building
in
my
ward,
which
was
demoed
last
year,
and
it
it
was
really.
C
C
G
G
That
would
be
the
opportune
time,
for
you
know
those
of
us
to
get
in
there
and
and
have
these
conversations
and
look,
you
know,
particularly
when
we
know
it's
a
building
that
no
one's
answering
because
nobody's
taking
ownership
etc.
You
know,
I
think
that
would
be
huge,
hugely
beneficial
to
the
to
the
city.
G
Nobody
I
mean
nobody
wants
them
to
come
down
and
clearly
it's
wasted
money.
I
mean
it's
money
that
you're
never
getting
back
structure,
you're,
never
getting
back!
You
know.
I
think
that
would
be
a
great,
a
great
system
for
us
to
put
in
internally
where
we're
notifying
the
hrc.
At
that
point
of
the
non-compliance.
D
Yeah
you
know
we.
We
certainly
would
welcome
that
to
that
whole
engagement.
You
know
throughout
this
process,
because
buildings
don't
just
suddenly
become
a
problem
you're
right.
It's
an
ongoing
thing
and
the
building
department
and
you
rick,
are
in
these
buildings
far
earlier
and
often
and
recognize
that
there
are
imminent
issues
or
issues
that
are
pending.
D
I
think
it's
you
know,
time
for
all
of
us
to
kind
of
you
know,
link
arms
and
see
how
we
can
solve
this
problem
and
save
as
much
of
the
built
environment
as
we
can
amen
because
it
clearly
it
it's
a
lost
resource,
we're
seeing
neighborhoods
chunks
of
neighborhoods
disappear,
and
you
know
it's
and
missing
teeth
in
continuous
rows,
and
that
is
part
of
the
character
of
the
city
that
we
all
want
to
see.
Preserved.
D
A
K
G
K
D
Well,
if
it's
not
a
declared
an
emergency
or
an
imminent
threat,
then
you
know
there
certainly
have
been
opportunities
that
go
way
back.
Where
we've
you
know,
we've
gone
in
and
taken
a
look
at
it.
We've
done
a
tour
through
the
building
and
you
know
can
certainly
offer
guidance
as
to
what
appropriate
actions
could
be
to
stabilize
it.
L
Thank
you
kathy.
Well,
I
see
one
of
the
things
that
richard
had
brought
up
was
the
early
warning
system
within
the
preservation
plan,
and
part
of
the
goal
of
that
is
also
that
we
can
identify
potential
properties
that
may
be
headed
towards
vacancy
and
if
we
can
work
with
the
preservation,
community
or
organizations
like
historic
albany
and
identify
potential
contractors
or
parties
that
would
be
interested
in
taking
on
those
properties
for
stabilization
and
rehab.
That
is
part
of
what
we're
hoping
to
do
with
the
early
warning
system.
K
Gotcha,
thank
you
and
then
to
re.
So
my
concern
is
more
so
when
I
first
read
the
legislation
that
was
put
forward,
it
seemed
like
when
the
emergency
demolition
had
been
declared
that
the
planned
department
of
building
the
codes
have
to
notify
hrc
first
before
the
demolition
takes
place.
Am
I
reading
that
wrong
or
is
there
any.
C
But
the
intention
was
that
when
there's
an
emergency
demolition,
a
decision
to
do
an
emergency
act,
emergency
action
that
the
members
of
the
hrc
be
notified
and
the
intent
was
that
they
received
the
engineering
report
and
findings
at
that
point
and
understand.
Rick
said
those
those
are
not
necessarily
available.
C
K
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Richard
again,
I
just
want
to
close
out
and
say
that
you
know
building
you
know.
Urban
blight
in
the
city
of
albany
is
a
disease
that
all
of
us
are
passionate
about,
want
to
get
rid
of,
and
I
know
that
richard
said
this
earlier.
The
notification
as
it
relates
to
council
members
or
hrc.
I
remember
there
was
a
scenario
where,
in
the
10th
ward,
where
a
mother
passed
away
and
the
the
property
was
owned
by
two
sisters,
one
wanted
to
keep
it
one
wanted
to
sell
it.
K
As
a
common
council
member,
when
I
first
got
into
office,
I
was
able
to
reach
out
to
rick,
with
joy's
off
rick
lejoy's
office,
able
to
get
some
contacts
reach
out
to
the
two
sisters.
After
months
and
months
of
going
back
and
forth,
we
were
able
to
finally
reach
out
and
connect
them
to
someone
who
was
interested
in
purchasing
that
property,
and
I
believe
that
was
that
was
a
success
story
and
I
think
about
this
legislation.
K
F
Yeah
so
yeah,
I
think,
following
up
a
little
bit
on
what
a
wuzu's
just
said,
I
just
you
know
it's
always.
You
know
I
think
government
in
decision
making.
It's
always
a
balance
of
you
know,
figuring
out
when
something's
you
know
an
emergency
and
you
need
to
take
it
down
how
to
best
deal
with
the
potential.
You
know
impacts
on
a
particular
neighborhood
on
a
community
and-
and
so
I
think
you
know
finding
that
right
balance
when
we're
dealing
with
legislation
is
important.
F
May
not
be
that
imminent.
One
of
the
things
that
richard
attempts
to
do
in
this
legislation
is
to
provide
some
definition
with
regard
to
the
level
of
urgency,
but
I'm
glad
to
hear
the
city
is
concerned
about
liability,
because
I
would
love
for
it
to
address
some
issues
with
regard
to
properties
that
it
owns.
F
That
might
be
a
good
time
to
let
hrc
and
other
people
who
are
interested
in
this
issue
know
that
a
report
has
been
requested
that
some
an
engineering
report
has
been
requested,
because
that
is
some
indication
that
it's
not
you
know.
Oh
well,
there's
there's
no
fire
extinguisher
kind
of
thing
or
you
know
you
need
to
fix
the
lock
on
the
door
or
something
like
that
or
something
more
minor.
F
So
and
what
so?
So
that's
one
thought,
and
I
and
as
I
was
looking
at
the
legislation
and
the
month
and
the
in
the
quarterly
reports,
I
was
actually
wondering
if
every
month
the
hrc
should
be
getting
some
sort
of
list
of
buildings
that
exist
in
in
historic
districts
only
because
that's
essentially
their
purview.
Maybe
we
want
to
expand
that
a
little
bit,
but
to
have
that
have
them
be
notified
monthly
of
any
request
for
engineering
reports
so
rick.
I
see
that
you
were
having
a
reaction.
I'd
love
to
hear
your
input.
G
Sure,
well,
that's
what
I
was
alluding
to
before
is
I
thought
not
when
we
issued
the
violation
to
get
the
engineers
report,
because
I
have
to
give
the
owner
the
opportunity
to
comply
if
they
don't
comply.
We
we
are
that
we
then
have
the
legal
authority
to
move
on
their
non-compliance,
which
is
why
I
thought
if
I
issue
the
violation,
we
need
an
engineer's
report
and
it's
usually
just
a
fort.
It's
either
a
7
to
14,
day
window
of
opportunity.
G
G
You
know
I
just
don't
know
that
I
have
the
right
to
invite
folks
onto
someone's
property
before
I
have
an
absolute,
no
compliance
and
now
we're
being
forced
to
act
upon
that
non-compliance
that
that's
all
I
was
going
to
say
is
so
instead
of
at
the
time
that
I
issue
it,
I
guess
we
could
to
give
you
a
heads
up,
but
I
just
thought
it
might
be.
You
know,
let's
see
because
believe
it
or
not
people
do
comply.
One
of
the
things
I
was
going
to
send
over.
G
G
I
had
cited
171
properties
that
very
violation
that
I
needed
them
to
get
us
the
engineers
report
and
added
that
171
properties,
79
of
them
complied
so
that
left
92
that
we
then
sent
to
court
for
non-compliance
that
if
I
looked
them
up,
I'm
sure
they
still
have
not
complied
and
may
have
already
been
demolished.
You
know,
they're,
you
know
from
their
negligence
kind
of
thing.
So
our
you
know
our
citations
do.
Do
reap
some,
you
know
recourse
and
and
compliance.
G
We
could
have
this
conversation
and
you
know,
I
think
I
think
bill
brando
and
I
actually
right
before
covet
had
a
a
a
similar
conversation
of
kind
of
uniting
forces
and
being
able
to
do
this
when
we
know
that
there's
been
no
compliance,
you
know,
and
I
know
I
mean
I'm
not
a
dummy.
I
understand
these
buildings
pretty
well.
G
G
A
there
is
a
percentage
that
I
give
that
violation
to,
because
it's
just
unknown.
You
know
the
outside
looks
okay,
but
we
have
no.
You
know
the
windows
are
boarded
up.
I
can't
see
if
there's
daylight
through
the
route.
You
know
there's
indicators
that
aren't
allowing
me
to
know
all
right.
You
know
I
can
see
the
floor
where
the
plaster
you
know
collapsing
so
we'll
issue
that
which
will
usually
get
a
response
of
hey.
G
You
know
my
building's
fine
come
take
a
look,
you
know,
so
some
of
those
violations
do,
you
know,
aren't
maybe
necessarily
warranted,
but
I
go
after
it
in
the
hopes
that
it's
preventing
you
know
from
getting
to
that
point.
But
a
high
majority
of
those
violations
are
it's
very
evident.
You
know
we
can
see
the
erosion
in
the
foundation.
I
can
see
the
daylight
through
the
roof.
You
know
standing
at
the
sidewalk.
You
know
there
are
some
real
indicators
that
that
moisture
penetration
is,
you
know,
pretty
relevant.
A
H
I
mean
I
I
guess
I
can
you
hear
me
yep,
I
believe
I'm
unmuted,
okay,
I
I
couldn't
be
more
happy
that
this
is
finally
moving
moving
along.
I
I
looked
up
today.
It
was
april.
1998
was
the
when
I
became
involved
in
issues
like
this,
and
I've
been
pushing
for
something
like
this
since
shortly
thereafter
for
three
years,
I
worked
for
historic
preservation,
historic
albany
foundation.
I
was
cara
macri's
predecessor
by
a
couple
people
from
2001
and
2001
to
2004,
and
it
always
troubled
me.
H
H
You
know
that
was
reported
in
the
times
union
that
the
city
had
been
looking
at
that
building
for
a
month
a
couple
weeks.
There
was
a
length
of
time
and
they'd
gone
back
and
forth
and
made
the
determination
that
it
couldn't
be
saved
and
that's
the
sort
of
thing
where.
Why
wasn't
the
hrc
at
least
made
aware
of
that
and
there's
other
types
of
frustrations
where
there
was
a
building
on
theater
road
that
was
stabilized
and
then
determined
to
be
an
emergency
demolition?
H
Why
couldn't
that
have
gone
to
a
an
actual
hrc
agenda
to
be
discussed,
whether
that
needed
to
come
down
anyway?
I
think
there's
a
lot
that
can
be
be
discussed,
but
I
think
this
is
a
first
step.
You
know
this
is
the
sort
of
openness
and
transparency
that
I
was
hoping
for
quite
a
while
ago.
To
me
this
has
been
not
just
a
preservation
issue.
This
is
a
government,
transparency
and
openness,
but
not
just
for
the
sake
of
openness
and
transparency.
I
truly
believe
that
better
end
results
can
come
of
it.
H
A
couple
other
things
that
aren't
specifically
in
here
but
but
have
been
touched
on
by
by
people
talking
before
the
engineers
report
for
a
very
long
time,
I've
pushed
they
should
be
a
a
design
professional
report.
It
is
so
much
easier
and
in
most
cases,
less
expensive
to
find
an
architect
a
licensed
architect.
I
mean.
I
know
the
city
needs
licensure
for
reliability
issues,
but
I
think
that's
something
that
should
be
considered
and
that's
something
it
could
be
added
to
to
this
or
a
different
legislation.
H
But
the
other
thing
somebody
mentioned
the
number
of
hrc
people
on
the
hrc.
The
hrc's
ordinance
mentions
a
city
archaeologist
about
16
times,
I'm
making
up
a
number,
but
it's
a
number
of
times.
Two
two
two
archaeologists
were
added
the
entire
time.
I
was
on
the
hrc
and
since
then,
there's
only
been
one
on
on
the
commission.
H
I
think
the
report,
the
the
proposals
and-
and
I
I
think
it
also
could
potentially
and
should
allow
the
city
to
become
more
proactive.
You
know,
I
think,
there's
there's
a
a
theory
that
preservationists
all
preservationists
only
want
to
save
everything.
I
think
you
know
when
I
was
working
for
hf.
I
had
to
go
out
and
decide
whether
hf
was
going
to
fight
something
or
or
not,
and
often
we
just
you
know,
if
a
building
shot
a
building
shot.
H
I
do
think
and
and
rick's
going
to
disagree
with
me,
but
that's
fine.
We've
disagreed
before
I
do
think
during
the
she
and
administration
that
drive
to
be
more
proactive,
which
is
absolutely
admirable,
has
also
led
on
some
occasions
to
a
widening
of
the
definition
of
what
constitutes
an
emergency,
and
I
think
that's
why
there
just
need
to
be
more
people
in
on
that
discussion.
H
It's
not
saying
that
none
of
those
should
be
declared
emergencies,
but
looking
at
how
buildings
are
addressed,
if,
if
the
hrc
and
the
knowledgeable
people
on
the
hrc
were
involved
earlier,
you
know
one
of
the
ones
I
think
of
174
176
pearl
street.
I
think
it
was
174
was
occupied
three
years
before
it
was
torn
down
and
sold
for
225
000,
and
until
a
couple
years
ago
you
could
see
on
zillow
the
the
pictures
of
the
inside.
H
H
Because
again
you
know
the
public
documents,
that's
part
of
the
transparency
and
and
rich-
and
I
talked
about
this-
I
don't
remember
why
he
decided
not
to
put
this
in,
but
I
think
the
demolition
reports,
if
it's
outside
of
a
historic
district
should
go
to
the
planning
board.
You
know
if
if
they
would
have
to
review
a
demolition,
I
think
I
think
every
demolition
report
that's
issued
should
go
to
the
appropriate
oversight
body
within
the
city.
Anyway,
that's
that's
my
soapbox.
I
M
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
comment.
Historic
albany
is
as
excited
as
bill
is
about
this,
and
I
won't
go
into
all
the
reasons
because
you
pretty
much
covered
them,
but
this
is
definitely
something
that
we've
been
very
happy
and
looking
forward
to
for
a
long
time.
I
think
the
early
morning,
systems
things
that
we've
been
talking
about
are
really
important
and
I'm
really
glad
these
conversations
are
happening.
M
I
know
that
sam
and
rick
have
been
working
on
an
amazing
number
of
really
proactive
things
that
I
think
are
already
starting
to
show
in
fewer
emergency
demolitions
and
more
stabilization,
so
that
that's
really
great
what
I
like
about
this
amendment,
particularly
and
what
historic
albany
is
very
excited
about
as
well,
is
really
the
review
component
of
it
and
the
only
question
feedback.
I
think
that
we
had
about
that
was.
M
M
M
A
C
Yeah-
and
I
just
want
to
know
because
bill
had
referenced,
the
the
other
there-
I
mean
they're
kind
of
two
different
demo
procedures
in
the
city.
One
relates
to
historic
districts,
which
is
older,
and
that's
the
one
that
I'm
dealing
with
there
are
a
few
years
ago
we
put
in
provisions
related
to
demos
outside
of
historic
districts,
where
it
would
be
a
review
process
through
the
planning,
department
and
brad.
C
I
think
those
provisions
were
incorporated
into
the
usdo,
but
I
think
they're
they're,
basically
the
same
where
there
is
a
demo
review
process
through
the
planning
department
in
non-historic
districts,
which
is
a
little
bit
different
than,
and
it
just
was
a
whole
other
area.
So
I
was
just
historic
district.
C
Obviously,
my
time
on
the
council
is
limited
and
I'm
not
planning
on
coming
back
next
year.
So
I'd
like
to
wrap
this
up,
so
I
yeah
I
I
if,
if
we
can,
I
mean
I'm
okay
holding
for
tonight
and
let's
do
some
of
the
refinements
and
if
there
are
comments
from
the
departments
that
we
need
to
incorporate,
if
we
can
get
that
information
or
the
law
department
and
just
try
to
refine
this
in
a
way,
maybe
maybe
incorporate
some
of
the
other
provisions
from
the
preservation
plan.
C
Like
the
you
know,
some
type
of
reference
to
an
early
warning
system,
if
that's
something
that
enough
just
to
put
a
reference
in
there,
we're
not
designing
the
whole
thing
at
this
point,
but
you
know
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
move
on
it
and
get
something
through.
But
I
you
know,
and
I
know
we
need
to
make
some
refinements
before
it's
ready
to
come
before
the
council.
C
D
L
C
I
Rick
well
number
one.
Thank
you.
We've
had
only
one
demolition
up
by
me
and
you
guys
are
really
good
and
I
appreciate
it.
So
you
know
keep
up
the
good
work.
My
question
is:
I'm
an
I.t
guy
and
you
know,
there's
different
databases
in
the
city
and
I'm
just
trying
to
think
you
know.
I
know
the
assessor's
office
goes
around
takes
pictures
of
property
throughout
the
city,
so
they
can
do
the
assessment.
Is
that
something?
I
G
For
you
yeah,
well,
I'm
not
sure
about
the
assessor
and
you
know
what
they
can
do
or
not
do.
But
sam
wells
who
works
for
me.
That's
you
know
one
of
his
role.
His
main
role
is
the
vacant
buildings
and
that's
something
that
he
does
do
throughout
the
year.
So
he's
constantly
out
re,
you
know
evaluating
re-evaluating.
G
L
I
G
Yeah,
we
are
actually
scheduled
to
start
our
training
next
week,
so
we
have
not
started
using
them
as
of
yet
we
still
have
access,
you
know
as
needed,
but
that's
finally,
you
know:
we've
selected
the
vendor
we're
scheduled,
for.
I
saw
an
email
this
afternoon.
I
think
we
start
some
training
next
week
we
can
have
up
to
10
of
my
staff.
I
think
I
have
it
limited
to
about
five
right
now,
so
I
just
don't
want
everybody.
You.
E
G
I
mean
I
know
which
ones
are
you
know
kind
of
lagging
you
know
through
our
building
blocks
program,
we
can
kind
of
see
ones
that
are
potentially
going
to
be
vacant.
You
know,
there's
criteria
that
we
can
punch
in
that
tell
us,
based
on
you,
know,
amount
of
code
violations,
water
usage,
etc
that
these
buildings
may
potentially
become
vacant.
G
So
I
mean
we're
we're
actively
on
this
currently,
so
I
don't
really
foresee
a
whole
lot
of
things
kind
of
slipping
through
the
cracks,
although
there's
always
always
something,
but
we
are
more
proactive
as
a
department
than
I
think
the
city's
ever
been
quite
honestly,
so
there's
so
many
and
a
lot
of
this
is
you
know
all
hand
in
hand,
and
I
still
I
told
bill
you
know
ever
several
months
ago.
I
still
believe
in
three
years
we're
not
doing
emergency
demolitions.
That's
I
believe
that
wholeheartedly.
G
A
Okay,
well,
I
I
think
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
good
discussion
tonight
on
these
issues
and
work,
that's
going
to
be
done,
conversations
that
are
going
to
be
had
about
how
we
can
how
you
can
move
forward
and
find
a
piece
of
legislation
that
works
for
everyone
here.
So
I
guess
we'll
plan
to
reconvene
sometime
in
late
february,
rich.