►
From YouTube: Beacon Workshop 9 18 23
Description
The City of Beacon Council Workshop from September 18, 2023
B
C
D
A
E
A
D
D
D
D
D
A
F
All
right
so
I
made
some
changes,
they'll
be
they
were
shown
posted
online
and
they'll
be
shown
in
this
short
presentation,
so
I'll
just
point
out
primarily
the
things
that
have
changed
since
the
last
time.
We
did
get
a
letter
from
the
CAC
and
I
Incorporated
what
they
asked
for
in
the
in
the
zoning
text.
F
F
F
I
wanted
to
point
out
that
the
frontages
are
relatively
shallow.
Here
you
know
sort
of
a
long
skinny
district
and
on
the
east
side
the
frontage
is
the
lot
depths
are
about
138
feet.
On
average,
that's
not
a
problem.
You
can
put
a
decent
building
with
a
rear
parking
lot
along
this
side
of
the
street
relatively
easily,
but
when
you
get
on
the
on
the
western
side
of
the
strip,
those
lock
depths
are
only
about
90
feet.
F
Deep,
so
I
did
some
sort
of
sketches
of
what
buildings
might
look
like
there
and
it's
very
difficult
to
put
a
building
with
a
any
degree
of
parking
on
some
of
these
Parcels.
So
as
it
stands,
most
of
the
development
that
would
happen
on
this
side
of
the
street
would
probably
have
side
yard
parking.
If
there's
a
parking
lot
involved,
which
brings
up
how
do
you
shield
and
does
it
create
a
walkable
environment
when
you're
walking
past
parking
lots
so.
F
F
The
shallow
Lots
is
to
not
have
setbacks,
as
we
talked
about
at
the
last
Workshop,
but
having
more
screening
and
buildings
up
front,
so
there's
room
in
the
back
for
parking
so
that
you
don't
you,
don't
only
get
side
yard
parking,
but
that's
just
something
to
consider.
The
other
things
that
I
wanted
to
point
it
out
is
that
there
are
five
Parcels
along
this
area
that
are
in
the
residential
district
that
are
being
currently
used
for
commercial
uses.
This
is
the
package
of
the
gas
station.
There's
a
car
lot
here.
F
Again,
I'll
point
out
that
almost
none
of
the
uses
have
changed.
So,
even
though
this
is
a
zoning,
District
change
in
name
all
of
the
uses
are
identical
to
the
GB
District,
except
for
one
right,
I
added
at
the
request
of
the
council
last
time.
Right
now,
industrial
manufacturing
uses
excluded
from
the
district
and
I
added
that
by
special
permit
here
so
other
than
that,
it's
not
changing
any
uses
in
the
district
foreign
and.
F
F
F
So
that's
the
other
change
that
was
made
in
this
table.
I
forgot
about
that.
Yes,
the
other
changes
that
are
noted
in
this
table
are
in
conflict
with
the
current
text,
so
they
were
in
the
last
go-round.
Somehow
the
the
table
doesn't
match
the
the
zoning
text.
So
it's
just
including
some
cleanup
check.
F
F
G
Okay-
and
you
know
it
Still
Remains,
but
it
occurred
to
me
that
we're
restricting
the
buildings
need
to
be
two
stories
with
the
Second
Story
being
you
know
not
just
for
show,
but
yes,
so
I
was
trying
to
picture
and
I
even
did
like
an
image
search
on
filling
stations
with
two
stories,
and
there
are
these
old-fashioned
ones,
but
I
couldn't
really
picture
what
a
filling
station
with.
What
would
you
do
on
the
second
story
of
a
gas
station.
F
Have
offices
up
there
for
the
whatever
the
convenience
store
or
whatever
you
want
to
call
it?
You
could
rent
out
offices.
All
you
did
is
the
next
year,
you're
stare
and
Franklin
Wright,
actually
designed
the
two-story
gas
station
back
in
the
day,
you're
right,
it's
it's
something
that
most
gas
stations
wouldn't
want
to
do,
and
it
would
be
a
disincentive
for
gas
stations
to
go
along
this
area,
but
it
would
be
possible
to
do
it.
F
It
also
requires
that
the
pumps
the
fueling
station
be
behind
the
front
plane
of
the
building,
so
the
building
the
convenience
store
or
whatever
you
call
it.
The
store
that
usually
goes
along
with
a
gas
station.
These
days
would
be
up
front
and
the
pumps
would
be
still
visible
from
the
street,
but
in
the
back.
F
D
D
G
A
A
D
A
D
A
C
A
D
C
The
only
argument
that
I
was
able
to
find
for
keeping
these
Automotive
uses
was
that
we
have
to
keep
our
usage
as
close
as
possible
to
the
GB
and
the
LI
to
be
in.
You
know,
to
kind
of
be
in
harmony
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
But
I,
don't
I
didn't
see
anything
in
the
comprehensive
plan
that
was
like
excited
about
gas
stations,
but
that's
the
only
reason
I
could
see
to
remove
it
or
to
leave
it
to.
F
F
It's
fun
I
think
you
probably
ought
to
reserve
judgment
until
you
see
it
when
it's
finished
with
landscaping
and
the
rest,
but
I
I
have
seen
gas
stations
there's
one
in
Rhinebeck
that
have
the
pumps
in
the
rear
and
it
functions
perfectly
well.
It
actually
works
better
because
people
who
are
coming
into
the
site
aren't
coming
into
the
to
the
fueling
area,
where
things
can
be
dangerous,
they
come
off
the
road
doing.
F
You
know
40
miles
an
hour
right
up
to
the
pumps,
whereas
this
shoe
circulated
to
the
back
of
the
building
and
you
have
time
to
slow
down
and
and
and
make
adjustments
so
you're
not
coming
into
the
pumps
too
fast.
So
I
think
it
can
work
the
second
floor.
It
should
be
noted.
The
way
it's
worded
is
that
the
second
floor
has
to
be
usable,
but
it
doesn't
have
to
be
occupied,
so
it
has
to.
It
can't
be
like
a
phony
second
floor,
but
it
has
to
be.
C
F
Yeah
well,
I
think
that's
a
legitimate
concern,
but
during
site
plan
it's
entirely
possible
to
avoid
any
off-site
drainage.
That
would
go
that
direction.
All
the
drainage
would
be
focused
towards
the
front
and
the
and
the
grease
traps
or
whatever
environmental
functions
that
you
have
to
put
through
for
a
gas
station.
F
H
I
I
actually
am
thinking
about
the
sort
of
front
side
of
these
buildings
as
being
the
creek
side
and
as
we'll
have
I
thinking
the
most
pedestrian
and
bicycle
traffic
on
the
creek
side
and
the
most
car
traffic
on
the
street
side
wondering
if
there
is
something
to
keeping
the
cars
on
the
car
side
and
the
people
on
the
people
side.
Knowing
that
you
know,
people
will
go
everywhere.
H
I
guess
this
gets
at
one
of
the
questions.
I
think
Molly
raised
and
sorry
I'm
have
some
of
these
101
questions,
because
I
wasn't
able
to
join
two
weeks
ago,
but
wondering
to
what
extent
we're
envisioning
the
sort
of
traffic
between
the
street
side
and
the
The
Greenway
Trail
I
understand
that
was
part
of
the
intention
and
purpose
of
the
wide
setbacks
on
the
side
is
to
potentially
allow
access
between,
but
I'm.
Imagining
that
that
is
I'm
trying
to
imagine
from
the
People
level
how
this
neighborhood
is
going
to
be
experienced.
A
So
I
I
think
you
have
to
kind
of
choose
right
because
I
don't
think
you
could.
You
know,
move
the
buildings
to
the
street
without
allowing
for
parking
and
if
you
want
to
have
a
you
know,
face
sort
of
the
creep.
Then
again
you're
going
to
have
all
the
parking
on
52
you
kind
of
have
to
pick
one
or
the
other
and
I
I
thought.
The
concept
was
that
we
were
trying
to
improve
the
streetscape.
I
know:
we've
got
both.
You
know,
we've
got
the
tracks
right.
There
they're
a
good
bit
lower.
A
A
You
know,
as
it
faces
the
creek.
What's
the
necessary
screening
as
it
faces
Street
side
and
what's
the
screening
when
it,
you
know,
butts
against
houses,
I,
just
don't
think
we
have
to
you,
know
kind
of
figure
it
out
in
every
single
instance
as
much
as
set
up
the
rules
correctly
and
then
give
it
sort
on
site
plans.
H
I
guess-
and
that
is
exactly
what
I'm
getting
at,
though
we
and
maybe
I'm
not
articulating
myself
well,
is
that
I
am
asking
the
question.
What's
the
general
guideline
that
we're
trying
to
set
up
are
these
developments
intended
to
be
only
for
the
fish
called
Creekside
or
primarily
put
official
creek
side,
or
only
for
the
street
side,
or
primarily
for
the
street
side?
H
I
know
that
in
reading
the
you
know,
the
first
sentence
of
the
purpose,
as
it's
currently
stated,
is
that
the
purpose
of
this
article
is
to
increase
the
attraction,
attractiveness,
marketability
and
environmental
sustainability
of
this
part
of
the
city
of
Beacon
I'm,
not
sure
where
this
language
came
from
exactly,
but
in
our
conversations
previously
about
the
purpose
of
redeveloping
this
area.
My
understanding
in
recollection
is
that
this
came
out
of
our
conversation
about
affordable
housing
and
about
the
kind
of
development
that
we
are
trying
to
support
and
I.
H
C
All
the
way
to
the
Town,
Line
and
I
raised
the
point
at
that
moment
about
beautifying
Fishkill
Avenue,
because
I
thought
that
the
the
zoning
that
we
have
now
is
a
little
wide
open
and
it
doesn't
allow
for
a
the
way
that
the
zoning
is
now
doesn't
allow
for
kind
of
like
a
cohesive,
nice
neighborhood
and
actually
seems
to
encourage
the
opposite.
And
so
what
I
proposed
was
that
we
have
more
buildings,
kind
of
like
tracks
and
the
red
pepper,
Diner
kind
of
these
kind
of
smaller
buildings
up
to
the
street.
H
Pencil
sustainability,
I
think,
does
get
at
what
I
was
understanding.
Our
purpose
here,
I
I,
guess
I
have
issue
with
the
word
attractiveness,
because
I
think
that
word
is
very
subjective
and
it
does
get.
You
know
clarified
to
a
certain
extent
in
the
design
standards
further
down,
but
I
think
a
bit
Tilly's
point
about
being
overly
prescriptive.
I
just
want
to
be
clear
about
what
our
real
underlying
purpose
and
intention
is
here.
A
A
Plan
was
inserted,
be
looking
for
a
way
into
Camp,
Egan
I
think
we
would
want
to
include
that
here,
because
if
we
were
able
to
do
that,
I
think
it
would
create
a
catchment
area
of
potential
residential
and
affordable
housing.
That
would
make
this
more
attractive.
If
you
look
at
the
map
of
where
that
potential
Road
might
go,
it's
up
the
campfreen
driveway,
which
is
just
past
the
dummy
life
so
a
little
bit
or
the
flashing
light
so
just
past.
That
is
the
access
point
that
we've
been
looking
at.
D
A
A
And
I
I
think
on
the
where
Paloma
was
going
in
terms
of
both
the
front
and
the
back
I
think
the
back
side.
I
just
think
we
want
to
just
include
language
to
give
the
planning
board
the
the
direction
to
you
know
consider
in
their
site
plans
how
the
site
interacts
with
the
expected
Rail
Trail
and
the
creek
right.
F
Because
of
the
relative
shallowness
of
the
Lots
that
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
side
yard
parking,
so
you
could
have
buildings
that
extend
from
the
street
to
the
trail,
with
a
frontage
along
them
for
people
to
make
that
Crossing
from
the
street
to
the
trail
and
that
parking
would
be
off
to
the
side
behind
that,
so
that
it
could
be
screened
from
both
sides
more
effectively.
Imagine
it,
and
you
know
whether
that
happens
as
part
of
the
development
process
we'll
have
to
guide
the
developers
in
that
direction.
F
H
H
F
That's
consistent
across
every
District
in
this,
in
that
has
any
design
standards.
They
all
talk
about
screening
parking
and
trying
to
get
more
likely
towards
the
rear,
or
at
least
have
a
building
element
in
front
of
it.
Even
if
it's
just
the
wall
or
you
know
a
fence
or
a
landscaping
screen
so
you're,
not
looking
at
cars,
you're
looking
at
buildings
and
and
Landscaping
rather
than
parking
lots.
F
Well,
and
if
you
think
that
attractiveness
is
subjective,
then
it's
hard
to
make
that
case,
but
I
think
that
architecture
is
a
better
front
yard
than
than
parking
lots.
Parking
lots
are
possible
and
a
variety
of
you
know
Vehicles,
which
individually
vehicles
are
very
interesting,
but
you
put
100
of
them
together
or
20
of
them
together.
It's
just
a
you
know
massive
mental
that
isn't
really
it's
more
asphalt
than
parking,
I.
G
The
local
parking
lot
I
think
the
chair
of
the
greenway
committee
had
some
interesting
language
here.
It
came
in
later
tonight,
but
just
I
think
that
kind
of
pulls
together,
possibly
what
Paloma
is
getting
at
philosophically
and
some
of
what
we're
getting
at
with
the
word
attractiveness.
There's
some
language
there
about
the
greenway
Trail
and
the
potential
rail
trail.
H
Yeah
I
think
that
that's
a
I
think
you
are
getting
more
articulously
around
what
I'm
getting
at,
which
is
that
I,
if
I'm,
not
particularly
interested
in
hiding
our
Reliance
on
fossil
fuel
infrastructure.
If
it's
our
reality,
then
we
should
have
to
face
it,
but
that's
much
less
interesting
than
the
sort
of
glass
half
full
of
what
you're
saying,
which
is
let's
design
for
the
types
of
transportation
and
connectivity
that
we
do
want
in
the
long
term.
C
C
Right
like
it
would
be
a
very
different
landscape
and
it
wouldn't
be
as
pleasing
and
I
think
that's.
The
proposal
is
trying
to
mirror
mirror
that
I
think
to
the
point
about
you
know
parking
in
the
back
and
how
it
faces
the
trail.
The
CAC
gave
us
some
good
recommendations.
I
haven't
checked
to
see
if
they're,
all
in
John's
latest
draft,
but
one
of
them.
C
What
I
thought
that
was
quite
smart
was
that
the
buildings
on
the
back
should
be
aesthetically
and
architecturally,
pleasing
as
the
fronts
and
the
sides
of
the
buildings,
because
there's
people
on
the
other
side
of
the
creek
and
there's
people
who
could
be
coming
up
steps
or
coming
along
the
trail.
Who
would
see
those
faces
of
the
buildings
and
to
to
crib
one
of
Chris's
notes.
It
wouldn't
look
nice
going
on
a
hike
with
the
back
of
a
cow
door
at
the
top
of
the
hill,
so.
A
A
A
If
there
is
one
there,
so
I
I
like
that
concept,
the
other
one
that
struck
me
what
I
heard
you
know
talking
with
a
resident
when
I
was
walking
there
is
that
once
it
gets
to
Lydia
Drive
and
it's
very
close
that
that
might
be
the
right
spot
to
have.
You
know
an
open
kind
of
entry
point
to
the
rail
trail,
maybe
some
green
space,
maybe
some
parking,
an
easy
access
right
there
right.
A
A
F
A
For
tonight
yeah,
but
when
I
was
look
when
I
was
walking
the
site,
the
image
that
I
had
is
our
our
main
entry
point
kind
of
the
centerpiece
entry
point
could
be
right
at
that
flashing.
Light
yeah
right
on
either
side
of
it
right
because
it's
the
section
between
Lydia
and
Route
52
is
probably
too
narrow
to
build
anything.
D
C
A
C
Little
you
know
when
the
rail
trail
in
Ulster
County
I'm,
pretty
sure
it
was
the
Ulster
county.
Rail
trail.
Has
these
kind
of
stations
like
these
key
stopping
points
where
you
can.
You
know
like
lock
up
your
bike
and
go,
do
you
know,
and
this
would
be
a
perfect
place
for
a
station
like
that,
you
know,
stop
if
you're
coming
from
the
north
to
the
South.
This
is
probably
the
first
commercial
thing
you
would
see
in
a
while
would
be
that
tracks.
Coffee
roasters,
so
you
like
pull
your
bike
off.
G
C
G
G
D
F
The
other
interesting
thing
is
between
Mill
Street
here
and
State
Street,
a
little
Beyond
Straight
Street
is
the
only
area
where
tracks
come
up
and
there's
a
beautiful
view
of
the
mountain
ranges
to
the
east.
It's
wide
open,
there's
no
Landscaping
along
this
section,
so
it
opens
up
at
that
location
where
you
really
get
the
broadest
landscape
view
of
the
of
the
whole
properties
to
the
east.
Up
on
the
ridge.
J
That
actually
dovetails
nicely
and
I
was
going
to
say
talking
about
view
sheds,
so
that
particular
one
at
the
bottom
of
State
Street
is
a
great
example
of
a
view
shed.
We
might
as
a
council
want
to
consider
if
we
want
to
directly
protect
and
then,
if
we
think
about
a
further
south,
if
we're
considering
design
standards
in
which
the
building
goes
more
or
less
front
to
back
in
the
lot
and
the
parking
is
the
side.
J
H
Yeah
I
agree
with
the
theme
of
mixed
use.
That's
written
throughout
this
section
in
our
conversation,
but
I
do
want
to,
as
as
I
have
been
thinking
about
this
area
and
imagining
what
size
buildings
we
might
get
out
of
this
and
John
I
absolutely
would
love
your
perspective
on
this
that
they
would
probably
be
smaller
buildings
or
fewer
units
per
building,
but
that
just
brings
back
up
to
me
our
conversation
about
inclusionary.
H
So
again,
I
will
keep
saying
what
I've
been
saying,
which
is
that
I
would
like
to
see
our
percentage
of
Workforce
housing
increase
and
I,
don't
mind
pairing
that
with
tax
incentives,
but
I
want
to
know
what
our
options
are,
because
right
now
10,
you
know,
I,
don't
know
how
many
10
unit
buildings
we
get,
but
five
unit
buildings
or
more.
We
might
get
a
unit
out
of
that.
G
A
Because
I
think
that's
how
we
get
it,
I
mean
just
the
existing
developments
there
that
the
access
road
to
connect
to
are
several
hundred
units
of
affordable,
which
we
know
we
can
do
out
there
because
the
land
you
know,
sometimes
we
get
it
and
then
we
can
give
it
to
a
desirable
development.
The
other
thing
I
was
looking
at
was
where's
the
other
entry
point
and
the
other
one
of
interest
and
I.
Don't
know
the
I
know.
There's
some
topography.
Issues
is
from
about
Hedgewood
to
just
where
the
first
car
dealer
starts
at
Conklin.
D
A
A
G
J
I
J
F
But
at
the
very
minimum
you
have
direct
access
up
near
State,
Street
and
in
this
area
near
Hedgewood,
so
you
might
want
to
try
to
do
one
at,
but
a
Townsend
or
something
like
that
sort
of
in
the
middle.
So
you
have
you
know
regular
entry
points
to
the
rail
trail
in
this
District
I,
don't
know
what
the
steepness
is
in
here
and
whether
you
can
do
it.
But
certainly
here
you
could
do
a
tapered
down
ramp
system
to
get
down
to
the
rail
trail
and
up
here
is
relatively
level.
A
I
F
I
A
C
C
Yeah
I,
so
there's
there's
two
things
on
my
mind
with
regards
to
Dimensions.
The
first
is
having
walked
that
stretch
with
Molly
and
a
local
resident
and
being
concerned
about
blocking
view
sheds.
One
thing
that
I
was
interested
to
find
was
that,
as
we
were
walking
along
Route
52
on
the
west
side
of
it
of
the
street,
the
the
Healey
Brothers
that
is,
there
I
think
it's
the
Hyundai
Healy
Brothers
has
like
a
small
two-story
building.
C
Maybe
it's
the
Ford
I
forget,
but
there
was
just
this
two-story
Healey
Brothers
park,
building
there
and
The
View,
shed
as
it
is
now
is
blocked
by
trees.
Right,
like
the
biggest
obstacle
to
the
view
of
the
mountain,
is,
is
the
trees
down
along
the
creek
and
the
and
I.
My
feeling
was
that
if
we
were
to
go
any
higher
than
that
tree
line
is
when
we
would
begin
blocking
views
and
and
while
I
don't
know
what
a
39-foot
building
is.
C
I
do
know
that
the
Healey
Brothers
building
is
exactly
the
tree
line,
and
so
my
feeling
was
that
that
two-story
building
should
be
our
height
so
that
we're
not
take.
You
know
we're
trying
to
give
something
back
to
the
neighbors,
but
if
we're
giving
them
three
and
four
story
buildings-
or
it
was
a
38
foot
tall
buildings,
we're
definitely
taking
something
away
from
the
neighborhood,
and
so
my
feeling
is
that
the
tree
line
along
the
creek
it's
hard
to
explain
it
without
actually
being
down
there
and
visualizing
it.
C
But
the
tree
lines
seem
to
come.
The
tree
line
seems
to
come
up
high
enough
as
it
as
it
would
a
two-story
building
at
street
level,
and
so
my
personal
opinion
is
that
the
whatever
the
height
of
that
Healey
Brothers
building
is
is
probably
exactly
what
our
maximum
height
should
be
I'm,
just
very
caught.
I,
don't
think
if
we
are,
if
our
goal
is
to
beautify
a
neighborhood
blocking
the
views
of
the
most
beautiful
part
of
that
neighborhood
would
be
counterproductive.
C
C
That
said,
although
the
planning
board
may
make
an
exception
for
large
footprint,
retail
uses
such
as
a
grocery
store,
and
so
what
I
wanted
to
suggest
was
that
we
take
that
new
buildings
shall
not
be
more
than
a
number
much
less
than
150,
but
that
the
planning
board
would
still
be
able
to
make
those
exceptions
for
grocery
stores.
I
just
150
feet
is
a
really
really
big
building
and
if
it's
all
150
foot
buildings
with
a
10-foot
setback,
it's
basically
a
brick
wall,
especially
if
it's
38
feet
high.
C
C
You
are
definitely
taking
away
the
views
of
that
neighborhood
and
so
I
just
want
to
put
out
there
that
I
think
we
might
be
a
little
big
and
what
we
should
probably
be
doing
is
actually
encouraging
smaller
lot
sizes,
except
in
cases
maybe
where
a
grocery
store
is
the
right
fit
and
and
the
planning
board
makes
an
exception
for
that.
What
are
your
thoughts
on
all
that.
G
H
C
Well,
the
so
the
The
Zone
would
apply
to
the
west
side
of
the
street,
but
I
think
what
you
know.
It
also
and
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
people
with
residential
buildings
on
Mead
Avenue.
That
would
agree
with
me
that
they
don't
that
going
much
higher
than
two
stories.
There
would
not
be
nice,
but
I
think
it's
most
urgent
on
the
east
side
of
the
of
Route
52,
because
everybody's
looking
East.
A
You
know
there's
nothing
wrong
with
a
building
going
up
to
three
stories
for
40
feet
and
then
coming
down
and
having
an
open
space.
So
I
I
thought
what
we
were
doing
was
we
were
going
to
identify
few
sheds
that
we
want
to
protect
and
then,
while
I
don't
support,
you
know
150
feet.
Three
stories
and
10
feet
from
the
sidewalk.
I
would
rather
have
some
sort
of
stand,
some
guidance
to
the
planning
board
to
say,
while.
A
Should
be,
you
know,
you're
going
to
have
to
decide
in
a
site
plan,
what's
the
appropriate
with?
What's
you
know
where
you
can
go
to
that
height
and
where
you
shouldn't
right,
because
I
I
do
think
that
you
make
it
very
difficult
to
actually
transform
a
neighborhood.
If
you
say
well,
you
know
one
story
or
two-story.
It's
going
to
take
something
to
make
a
change.
D
B
B
K
D
A
So
what
I
was
I,
don't
know
if
last
comment
got
through,
but
I
would
ask
John
I
think
you
heard
the
discussion
so
John.
How
would
we
craft
you
know
kind
of
form-based
description?
That
says
you
know
we
don't
want
to
have
a
long
building.
That's
too
tall,
but
there
might
be
some.
You
know
some
areas
where
you
could,
but
it
would
be
for
the
planning
board
to
kind
of
make
the
Judgment
calls
of
when
it
works
and
when
it
doesn't.
F
It's
difficult,
you
certainly
say
on
one
side
of
the
street
is
different
than
the
other
side
it's
hard
to,
and
you
can
certainly
put
a
shorter
maximum
size
on
a
building
than
150
feet.
Those
things
are
all,
but
it's
you
know
dimensions
are
supposed
to
be
sort
of
district-wide
unless
there's
a
good
reason.
F
F
Very
well
might
be
35
feet.
High
I
I
don't
have
a
I'm,
not
sure
that
I
have
an
exact
way
to
measure
them,
but
35
feet
is
what's
allowed
in
the
district
now,
and
so
you
could
assume
that
some
of
those
buildings
are
35
feet.
High,
even
for
a
medium-sized
tree
is,
is
pretty
typical.
The
trees
down
by
the
creek
are
probably
60
70
feet
high
because
those
are
native
plantings.
They
go
quite
high,
so
20
feet.
F
Trees
are
really
dwarfs
and
don't
make
a
good
streetscape,
so
I
I
would
see,
and
the
other
thing
I
would
point
out
that
two-story
buildings
are
very
inefficient
to
build
because
you
still
have
to
put
in
an
elevator
and
two
staircases.
So
you
don't
get
the
benefit
of
the
extra
space
for
the
amount
of
building
envelope
that
you
have
to
develop
for
vertical
access.
F
Well,
that's
because
one
story,
buildings
are
are
the
bill
because
you
don't
have
to
put
in
the
vertical
access
elevator
and
the
space
required
for
the
two
staircases
makes
two-story
buildings
the
hardest
thing
to
finance.
If
you
go
three
four
and
five,
then
each
layer
you
put
on
it
makes
the
elevator
and
the
staircases
less
than
a
cost
Factor,
so
I'm,
just
suggesting
that
number
one
I
think
those
Healy
buildings
are
taller
than
you
think
it's
not
by
story
it's
by
height
in
this
District.
F
So
what
we
should
probably
try
to
figure
out
how
high
those
are
and
like
I
said
typical
Street
trees
are
at
least
35
feet
high
only
if
they're
under
wires.
Do
you
put
a
tree,
that's
20
feet
and
they
always
did
not
act
well
as
Three
Trees,
which
you
want
to
sort
of
spread
out
over
the
sidewalk
and
create
shade
and
onto
the
street,
into
the
sidewalk
in
20-foot
Street
trees.
Don't
necessarily.
C
I
could
recommend
some
species
if
you'd
like
there's,
dwarf
trees
that
could
accomplish
all
of
the
goals
of
a
street
tree,
which
is
shade
coolness
cover,
there's,
definitely
options.
I
definitely
would
love
to
you
know.
Unless
John,
you
and
I
want
to
go
over
to
the
Healey
Brothers
with
a
tape
measure,
and
you
can
go
up
on
the
roof
and
we
can
figure
it
out.
I,
don't
know,
I'd
love
to
know
how
tall
that
building
is
because
I
think
it
hits
the
nail
on
the
head.
We.
F
C
And
I
think
I
think
the
latitude
we
can
give
the
planning
board
with
regards
to
width
is,
you
know
we
can
say
like
this?
Is
the
maximum
width?
That's
just
not
150
guaranteed
for
every
single
lot,
but
we
can
say
that
you
know
here's
a
width,
you
know
if
say
50
feet
and
if
there's
a
business
case
to
be
made
for
a
wider
width,
the
planning
board
will
will
entertain
that.
But
at
least
you
know
what
we
would
make
clear
as
a
council
is
we
don't
want
just
big?
C
H
F
H
I
guess
what
I'm
getting
at.
Also,
though,
is
that
I
think
at
least
that
this
that
it
one
or
two
three-story
buildings
that
are
relatively
narrow,
might
not
negatively
affect
the
fuchsia
significantly.
But
what
we
don't
want
is
all
three-story
buildings
or
for
them
to
be
completely
bulky
and
I'm,
not
saying
you
know,
start
spot
zoning
about
how
high
each
lot
building
can
be,
but
I'm
wondering
if
we
could
get
a
variety
through
looking
at
overall
bulk,
we're
not
making
sense.
A
I
want
to
I
want
to
point
out
is
the
one
residential
structure.
That's
in
the
middle
of
this
is
a
second
Empire
on
Fishkill,
app
and
I.
Think
it's
a
two
and
a
half
story.
It
has
three
floors
of
units
and
I
I
think
it's
actually
one
of
the
loveliest
structures
there,
because
it
is
a
historic
structure.
B
Also
just
want
to
say
that
I'm
hesitant
to
limit
the
height
or
limit
it
to
two
stories.
I
should
say:
I'm
not
looking
for
any
skyscrapers
on
fiscal
app,
but
I.
Personally,
I'm
invested
in
just
seeing
more
mixed
income,
housing
and
low-income
housing
in
general
and
I.
Think
if
there
are
ways
that
we
can
just
encourage
mixed-use
buildings
and
and
I
think
doing
so
would
be
to
encourage
maybe
a
three-story
building
here
and
there
we
can
come.
We
could
potentially
see
that
on
fiscal,
Ave
and
I.
C
C
F
K
F
There
is
a
provision
in
the
code,
the
draft
one
that
says
after
soliciting
comments
from
the
greenway
Trail
committee.
The
plan
of
War
may
require
the
establishment.
A
few
of
you
are
access
corridor
from
the
public
side,
Works
through
the
development
to
the
real
Trail
right
of
way.
So
it
gave
us
the
plan
aboard
the
right
in
certain
locations
where
it
makes
sense
to
make
that
either
visual
or
actually
Public,
Access
connection.
F
C
F
You
know
taxes
and
and
availability
in
that
area,
so
I
I
didn't
include
that
in
the
latest
draft
I
still
have
it
in
there.
I
think
the
only
change
that
I
made
was
instead
of
the
first
75
feet
had
to
be
commercial.
I
said
the
first
50
feet
had
to
be
commercial,
so
there
might
be
more
room
for
residential
in
the
rear,
but
I
still
in
the
at
least
in
the
draft
code,
as
it's
currently
written
that
there
would
be
ground
floor,
commercial
required.
H
C
D
B
F
C
D
C
F
A
I
lean
in
the
direction
of
being
more
flexible
and
because
I
don't
think
we
know
how
this
is
going
to
turn
out
and
you
know,
there's
lots
of
ideas.
I
mean
the
one
that
that's
tangible
is
the
one
on
the
corner
right
right.
So
that's
a
three-story
residential
and
apparently
that
works
and
our
only
reaction
to
it.
Seeing
it
was
oh,
we
should
have
removed
the
parking
requirements
and
should
have
some
more
Landscaping,
so
we
should
definitely
get
those
in.
C
A
Yeah
I
think
this
I
think
this
is
a
the
flexibility
we
wanted
with
respect
to
uses
right
so
I
think
well.
At
least
I
am
very
open
to
uses
where
I
think
we
want
to
kind
of
focus
is
what
we
want
it
to
look
like,
regardless
what
the
uses
might
be
and
I
I
think
that
would
work
so
again
in
my
head.
My
flexibility
is
toward
use
as
opposed
to
design
standards
right.
H
A
C
C
H
C
What
do
these
buildings
look
like
versus
what
what
we
can
get
with
our
current
zoning
and
what
we
can
get
with
our
current
zoning
is
really
just
about
anything,
and
we
really.
We
really
have
no
expectation
of
what
we
can
get
in
our
current
zoning
until
we
get
applicants
and
I
the
suggestion
that
we
do
different
dimensions
and
that
we
have
different
setbacks
and
such
and
is
is
the
Crux
of
the
rezoning
I
think.
D
A
H
C
A
B
A
J
J
The
residents
might
prefer
parking
lots
if
they're
that's
what
they
are
primarily
now
as
opposed
to
new
three-story
buildings
with
businesses
in
them.
So
that's
so
to
answer
your
question.
John
I'm,
intrigued
by
the
idea,
but
I
kind
of
want
to
tease
out
so
that
tease
out
what
that
might
mean
in
practice,
as
others
have
said,
as
well.
A
Yeah,
the
other
thing
question
I
had
in
this
area.
John,
is
that
this
is
the
one
block
or
two
blocks
where
there
are
houses
directly
adjacent
right,
I,
don't
think
it.
If
that's
the
case
anywhere
else
along
this
area,
and
it's
like,
would
we
want?
You
know
some
kind
of
higher
standards
because
of
that
like
in
terms
of
screening,
in
terms
of
whatever,
in
terms
of
direction,
that
we
give
the
planning
board
on
on
how
it
becomes
compatible
by
what
they
do
with
the
site
plans.
F
A
F
C
I
think,
what's
key
is
having
just
making
sure
that
dumpsters
and
and
parking
spots
right
aren't
right
on
the
property
line
where
people
live
on
the
other
side
and
cars
aren't
backing
into
people's
fences.
All
the
time,
I
think
I
think
fencing
is
a
good
idea.
I
think
Landscaping
is
always
nicer,
so
I
would
I
hope
that
they
would.
We
could
write
in
maybe
that
it's
done
with
Landscaping,
in
addition
to
a
fence,
yeah.
F
I
have
both
right
now,
yeah,
okay,
great
because
no
matter
how
good
a
landscaping
is,
you
know
you
still
get
headlights
and
there
is
a
height
difference
between
Mead
and
and
Fishkill
Avenue.
So
there
is
sort
of
a
natural
way
that
you
could
bring
the
cards
down.
So
they're,
not
like
fronting
right
on
the
meats
need
Avenue
right
now.
That's
the
way
it
is
it
sort
of
slopes
down
there
and
there's
a
wooded
buffer,
or
at
least
a
tree
line
buffer,
an
offense
on
on
those
areas.
C
F
F
This
area
is
going
to
be
part
of
a
reconstruction
project,
so
it
is
open
to
change
in
terms
of
sidewalks
on
both
sides.
Straight
trees.
Parking
on
street
parking
like
Main
Street,
would
be
helpful
as
a
buffer
from
the
sidewalks
and
a
way
of
slowing
down
traffic
and
and
avoiding
the
need
for
large
parking
lots
bike
Lanes,
my
suggestion
would
be
the
bike.
F
So,
if
you
want
I
could
I
could
start
a
a
section
of
the
corridor
as
a
model
for
what
the
other
rest
of
it
could
look
like.
I
already
did
a
a
rough
build
out
based
on
the
Conklin
project
and
I
estimated
that
if
all
the
or
all
of
most
of
all,
the
properties
were
built
out
at
a
three-story
level,
you
could
get
around
200
additional
housing
units
in
here,
which
is
actually
consistent
with
what
you
could
have
under
current
zoning
too.
F
F
Units
200
bedrooms
because
I
just
averaged
it
out
and
some
would
be
Studios
and
some
would
be
two
bedrooms.
Perhaps,
but
that's
the
way
I
looked
at,
because
the
Calkins
street
is
all
one
bedroom.
So
I
just
took
the
percentage
of
the
lot
covered
by
that
and
extrapolated
out
over
the
the
other
parcels
and
came
up
with
a
number.
C
Yeah
I
just
want
to
go
back
to
what
you
said
about
cycling
and
I.
I,
don't
want
to
I
think
we
just
need
to
talk
about
cycling
with
all
roads
and
not
say
like
that's
the
road
with
bicycles
and
that
that
one
I
think
we
should
be
talking
about
bicycles
with
every
Road
and
the
the
while.
The
rail
trail
and
Route
52
are
parallel
to
each
other
for
a
short
period.
Where
we're
talking
about.
They
do
go
their
separate
ways.
I
The
corridor
you
don't
have
with
us
I
think
you
think
there
is
we
had
to
head
by
right
away
in
order
to
do
five
foot
sidewalks.
You
have
two
lanes
of
traffic
a
little
bit
of
a
shoulder
and
then
sidewalks
again
I,
don't
I,
don't
I!
Think
you
you
shouldn't
go
too
far
beyond
with
bike
Lanes
before
you
look
at
the
width
of
that
road.
Most
of
that
road
does
not
have
that
width.
C
H
A
Anyway,
yeah
one
of
the
suggestions
that
I
I
got
over
the
weekend
was
kind
of
consistent
with
one
of
my
thoughts,
and
that
is
we.
We
don't
have
to
solve
it
all
at
once.
I
think
what
we're
working
on
now
is
the
zoning
aspect
that
we're
we're,
not
focusing
so
much
on
uses
as
much
as
kind
of
what's
the
design
pattern
that
we're
looking
for.
You
know
we're
going
to
have
a
comprehensive
Plan
update
in
2027..
A
It's
probably
going
to
start
a
year
or
two
sooner
than
that,
and
that
might
be
the
point
that
we
try
to
ask
someone:
let's
look
into
tail
and
get
all
the
pieces
because
we'll
know
what's
going
on
with
the
rail
trail
by
then
right
now,
we're
hoping,
but
we
don't
have
a
guarantee.
Yet
we're
going
to
have
that
County
study
done
by
then
and
so
I
I
think,
if
we
just
cover
kind
of
the
zoning
pieces
and
kind
of
get
some
basics
in
place,
I
think
we
can
get
there
over
time.
C
I
think
I
just
want
to
I
I
I'm,
supportive
of
the
viewshed
law,
obviously
but
I.
If
we're,
if
we're
talking
about
having
a
row
of
buildings
and
then
just
like
a
30-foot
gap
between
a
building
and
calling
that
a
view
shed
like
that,
was
that
I
forget
what
it's
called
over
here:
the
parcel
l
where
River
Ridge
and
when
they
were
doing
the
proposal.
They
said
this
is
a
view
shed,
which
is
the
entrance,
the
the
driveway
going
into
the
to
the
property
and
and
they
they
widened
it.
C
They
were
graceful
enough
to
widen
it
another
10
feet
or
20
feet
and
said
this
is
a
view
shed
I,
don't
know
anybody
that
walks
past
that
building
and
says,
like
oh
wow
I'm,
going
to
stop
here
and
look
at
the
view.
You
know
it's
not
it's
not
it's
a
view
shed.
Yes,
you
can
see
the
river,
but
it's
not
a
a
place
where
you
stop
and
take
it
in
and
enjoy
the
river.
A
D
B
B
D
A
Really
depends
on
on
where
we
are
in
the
city.
I
mean
we
are
a
city
and
we
do
have
development,
and
so
we
just
have
to
be
thoughtful
about
how
we
make
it
fit
right.
I,
don't
think
we
can.
You
know,
have
everything
be
a
perfect
view
shed,
but
I
think
we
should
be
thoughtful
about
it
and
that
particular
stretch
there's
some
really
open
ones,
and
we
should
figure
out
how
to
maintain
you
know
sort
of
those
open
ones.
A
G
F
F
So
that's
sort
of
a
no-brainer
right
to
me
anyway,
and
then
the
other
one
would
be
down
here
along
the
creek,
where
there's
no
separation
between
the
street
and
the
rail
trail
and
the
creek.
So
you
can
certainly
have
access
and
View
Corridor
out
towards
the
creek
here
and
another
location
might
either
be,
and
I
I
have
never
actually
looked
at
this
area
at
the
end
of
Townsend
or
the
end
of
Conklin.
B
F
A
A
F
Some
of
it
just
didn't,
make
it.
It
was
approved
in
the
local
law,
but
it
Eco
didn't,
didn't,
put
in
misunderstood
what
happened,
and
so
the
official
zoning
code
that's
online
for
everybody.
Looked
like
this
job.
Has
some
references
and
they're
minor
things
mostly
either
references
to
districts
there's
one
case
in
which
the
text
didn't
get
changed,
but
the
table
got
changed,
so
they
don't
match
and,
and
then
the
other
one
was.
F
It
came
up
during
one
of
the
site
plans
along
Main
Street
that
required
a
minimum
two-story
building
on
Main
Street.
So
you
don't
have
those
one-story
buildings,
but
in
the
rear
or
towards
the
rear.
You
couldn't
put
a
one-story
addition,
for
instance,
or
an
accessory
building
in
the
back
for
storage,
or
you
know,
maintenance
or
anything,
because
it
only
allowed
two-story
buildings
throughout
the
district.
So
I
added
one-story
accessory
buildings
to
the
rear
of
the
principle.
The
building
are
permitted
in
one
story.
F
C
F
C
F
F
F
The
other
qualitative
thing
that
I
I
put
in
here
is
that
on
our
zoning
map,
there's
a
parking
overlay
District
and
in
this
six
years
I
have
been
here,
I've,
never
seen
it
used
or
referenced
in
any
way
and
I
did
a
code
search
and
there's
no
reference
to
the
parking
overlay
District
that
any
provision
of
the
code,
so
I'm,
not
I,
just
questioned.
Why
it's
there
you
know
it
was
put
in
in
2000,
1998
or
some
something
way
back
so
I,
it's
before
my
time
and
I.
F
A
F
People
look
at
it
and
what
do
I
have
to
do
for
the
parking
overlay
District
I'm
in
it
and
we
have
to
say
just
put
on
every
every
site
plan
says:
are
you
in
the
parking
overlay
District?
They
say
yes,
but
there's
nothing
that
impacts
the
the
site
plan,
because
there's
no
nothing
in
the
code
refers
to
it
as
a
requirement.
F
F
J
Yeah
I
think
if
these
are
Corrections
or
things
you're
discovering,
it
might
actually
be
good
to
separate
them
out,
like
Dan
just
went
through
like
what
are
we
passing
that's
new
versus
what
are
we
doing?
That's
actually
getting
rid
of
things
that
might
not
really
exist
in
practice
or
things
that
are
just
updates
to
our
table.
So
I
appreciate
you
bringing
this
up
now.
John,
okay
and.
H
K
D
F
A
I
I
The
first
amendment
is
to
transfer
thirty
five
thousand
dollars
from
the
contingency
Fund
in
the
sewer
budget
to
overtime
and
that's
to
cover
the
cost
of
some
of
the
overnight
Staffing
that
we've
done
in
light
of
the
torrential
rains
that
we've
had
whenever
we've
had
forecasts
for
heavy
rains,
we've
staffed
the
plant
overnight
so
that
we
didn't
have
any
backups
or
Jam
UPS.
We
also
were
down
one
or
two
staff
at
various
times
this
year,
so
to
cover
that
we
would
transfer
thirty,
five
thousand
and
I
know
you
like
to
know.
I
What's
left
in
the
contingency
that
contingency
was
fifty
thousand.
This
leaves
us
fifteen
thousand
in
the
general
fund.
We
have
a
highway
budget
amendment
for
repair
of
equipment
for
the
leaf
vacuum
truck
and
our
backhoe.
So
we
would
be
transferring
20
000
from
contingency
to
repair
of
equipment
and
I'll.
Give
you
an
update
on
that
contingency
after
the
next
one.
The
third
amendment
is
to
deal
with
the
very
high
cost
of
getting
rid
of
recycling
materials.
I
I
We
are
now
paying
an
average
this
year
of
a
hundred
and
six
dollars
a
ton
to
get
rid
of
recycling
at
Republic,
which
is
out
on
Route
52,
so
we're
amending
the
budget
to
move
61
000
from
contingency
to
recycling,
charges
that
that
nearly
depletes
our
contingency
in
the
general
fund.
It
brings
us
down
to
eight
thousand
eight
hundred
and
twenty
one
dollars.
I
I
I
I
don't
know
that
that
helps
because
we're
we
would
still
then
go
to
the
commodity
market
for
paper
and
and
again
like
we're
getting
a
higher
price
to
dispose
of
our
recycling,
because
people
are
less
inclined
to
want
to
buy
it.
So
we
would
have
that
issue
whether
you
know
the
pickup
and
the
processing
was
public
or
private.
I
also
think
if
we
were
to
take
that
on
you'd
add
a
lot
of
labor
costs
that
we
don't
have
right
now,
so
I
I
think
you'd
end
up.
J
Chris,
do
you
think,
when
the
idea
of
changing
our
approach
to
recycling
like
the
idea
of
dual
stream,
rather
than
single
stream,
is
that
something
that
the
CAC
or
we
should
put
some
resources
into
looking
into
in
more
detail
and
whether
or
not
in
the
future,
we
should
pursue
it.
Even
if
we're
not
doing
it
immediately.
I
I
I
wouldn't
recommend
that
when
the
city
did
that
the
city
of
Kingston
had
to
buy
a
whole
new
round
of
toters,
so
those
big
plastic
containers
that
we've
given
out
to
every
household
you'd
have
to
you'd
have
to
put
in
impute
the
cost
of
four
to
five
thousand
more
of
those
again
and
then,
where
do?
Where
do
we
take
it?
Because
the
the
Republic
Service
is
out
on
Route
52
is
a
single
stream
operation,
so
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
we
would
get
back
what
we
had
to
put
into
it.
I
I
I
would
say
if
you
want
to
save
money.
Stop
using
glass
is
the
most
expensive
component.
It
has
the
highest
carbon
footprint
because
it
has
to
be
transferred
to
a
facility
where
the
labels
are
taken
off.
Then
it's
ground
down
and
it's
sent
elsewhere.
So
if,
if
people
that
are
tuned
in
want
to
save
the
city,
money,
take
your
glass
bottles
back
to
the
store
if
they
have
a
deposit
and
and
if
you
can
find
them
in
aluminum,
which
is
much
easier
to
recycle.
That
would
be
great
too.
I
Yeah,
the
aluminum
still
has
a
market,
and,
and
actually
the
one
in
two
Plastics
has
a
pretty
decent
Market
I'm
told
the
number
fives
and
sevens
and
all
the
bags
and
the
contamination
you
know
they.
They
also
take
value
out
of
it,
because
we
we
essentially
are
also
paying
for
some
part
of
this
stream
to
be
contaminated.
J
Going
back
to
the
to
the
budget
amendment
curious,
you
know,
you
know
at
least
some
of
that
was
because
of
the
heavy
rains
and
I
know
that
we're
not
yet
at
budget
season,
but
I'm,
just
wondering
if
you
know
already,
if
that
kind
of,
assuming
that
we
expect
more
heavy
rain
events
in
our
future.
If
that
kind
of
changes,
how
we
think
about
over
time
and
Staffing
for
our
facilities
for
upcoming
budgets,
yeah.