►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
C
Are
we
all
set
yep
so
welcome
to
the
April
2020
meeting
of
the
Planning
and
Economic
Development
Committee?
This
is
our
first
PDC
meeting
ever
on
zoom'
we're
joined
by
Hey
yeah,
the
committee
members,
Cynthia
Brock,
Laura,
Lewis,
Donna,
Fleming
I,
believe
Steve
Smith
will
be
joining
us
soon.
We
also
have
council
members
George
McGonagall
ducks
and
when
and
I
believe,
that's
it
and
also,
of
course,
our
staff.
We
have
our
planning
director
joining
Cornish
and
our
planner
Jennifer
Pozner
and
Megan
Wilson
who's
going
to
be
administering
the
public
comment
tonight.
C
Seeing
none
we'll
move
to
our
regularly
scheduled
public
comment
and
I
believe
there
are
some
folks
who
are
here
to
speak
for
public
comment.
That's
correct,
Megan!
Yes,
that
is
current!
So,
if
and
and
I
believe,
the
way
that
this
works
is
that
you
can
send
your
name
Megan
in
the
form
of
a
chat
and
then
she
will
call
your
name,
and
you
can
speak
to
the
committee
and
of
course,
if
you
could
state
your
your
name
and
address
for
the
record,
that
would
be
helpful
and
then
the
normal
rules
apply.
C
Public
comment:
okay,
should
we
move
to
the
public
hearing,
then?
So
we
we
do
have
a
public
hearing
tonight.
It's
on
special
permits
for
multiple
primary
structures
for
a
motion
to
open
the
public
hearing
move
by
Laura.
Is
there
a
second
second
by
Cynthia,
all
in
favor
of
opening
the
public
hearing
and
I?
Don't
see
Donna
but
I'm
guessing
she
voted.
Yes,
yes,.
C
C
So
I
can
go
ahead
and
just
read
the
email
that
I
got
give
me
one
second,
so
this
is
from
Joe
McMahon
and
he
says
he
I
would
like
to
offer
support
of
the
proposed
amendment
for
the
multiple
primary
structures
to
be
passed
on
to
Common
Council.
Many
of
us
in
South
hell
see.
This
is
a
way
to
address
problems
with
the
original
proposal
and
thank
you
for
working
hard
to
make
this
legislation
better.
He
also
has
a
comment
in
regards
to
the
route
13
fifth
Street
intersection.
C
He
says
that
he
supports
design
one
with
the
three-way
intersection.
I
have
worked
with
and
spent
much
time
socializing
with
residents
in
the
apartments
on
Hancock
and
4th
streets
and
think
adding
more
vehicle
traffic
to
this
neighborhood
would
be
imprudent
and
potentially
tragic.
You
can't
think
of
another
area
of
the
city
where
children
are
playing
and
moving
about
a
safer
way
for
all
pedestrians
and
bicyclists
to
cross
route.
13
is
essential
design.
One
fits
both
of
these
issues
and
then
on
the
special
permits
for
multiple
primary
structures.
D
C
C
G
Okay,
well
thanks
for
having
me
and
for
asking
about
this,
so
their
number
of
efforts,
obviously
underway.
Tell
you
a
little
bit
about
some
of
those
efforts
and
answer
your
questions.
The
mayor
is
convened.
An
economic
recovery
cabinet
they've
met
a
couple
of
times
now
they're
meeting
every
two
weeks.
G
This
is
a
group
of
high-level
business
and
community
and
government
leaders,
basically
sharing
information
and
coordinating
responses
related
to
economic
development,
and
another
group
has
kind
of
grown
out
of
that
effort,
which
is
a
an
economic
development
service
providers
group
we're
meeting
every
week
and
really
rolling
up
our
sleeves
and
collaborating
and
working
together
and
I
want
to
just
tell
you
about
some
of
those
initiatives:
the
members
of
that
group
or
our
office
TCA
d,
dia
chamber
I.
You
are
a
workforce
development
board
and
our
Alliance
for
manufacturing
and
technology.
G
G
G
Among
the
122
survey,
respondents
to
the
last
survey
57
response,
seven
season,
a
57%
responded
that
they're
temporarily
closed
three
say
that
they've
permanently
closed
62%
of
seeing
a
decrease
in
consumer
demand.
Nearly
half
have
furloughed
employees.
Forty
percent
say
that
they
have
no
reserves
or
emergency
financing
in
place
and
of
these
a
number
say
that
you
know
a
fairly
sizable
amount
between
10,000
and
50,000
over
the
next
three
to
six
months
would
be
required
to
resume
operations
in
terms
of
additional
financing.
G
So
surprisingly,
because
we
had
heard
about
banks
and
landlords
offering
forbearance
on
payments,
but
surprisingly-
and
this
the
results
are
a
week
old.
So
maybe
we'll
see
this
change,
but
about
three
quarters
of
those
surveys
have
not
received
flexibility
and
payments
from
their
landlord
or
their
lender.
That's
something
we
want
to
try
to
encourage
I,
think
survey.
Third
survey
is
going
to
go
out
soon
and
we'll
continue
to
do
this
every
couple
of
weeks.
G
So
you
know,
let
me
give
you
just
a
brief
description
of
some
of
our
local
recovery
activities.
First,
a
basic
inventory
assessment
and
technical
assistance.
All
of
the
service
providers
are
responding
to
businesses
that
are
in
our
networks
that
are
reaching
out
for
help
with
everything
from
how
to
access
the
new
SBA
loan
programs
to
workforce
information
etc,
and
a
number
of
really
helpful
websites
have
been
generated,
including
the
Chamber
of
Commerce's
website.
G
Tca
D
has
a
nice
website
and
we
have
a
resource
on
our
web
page
as
well,
and
we're
also
following
up
directly
from
the
surveys
reaching
out
to
businesses,
and
we
need
to
do
more
of
that.
We
know
that
it's
hard
to
access
some
of
these
new
resources
that
were
in
the
stimulus,
and
so
we
want
to
help
businesses
and
help
walk
them
through
that,
and
so
we're
developing
proposals
for
how
to
increase
our
capacity
to
do
that.
G
We
have
worked
over
the
last
ten
days
fairly
rapidly
to
develop
a
new
small
business
resiliency
fund.
Today's
TC
DC
board
meeting
happy
to
report
that
they,
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
of
funding
towards
this.
Last
week.
The
I,
you
are
a
approved,
a
hundred
and
forty
thousand
dollars
in
funding,
and
basically
what
this
will
be.
We
hope
to
push
it
out.
The
application
form
out
very
soon
will
be
a
micro
loan
of
five
thousand
dollars
or
less.
G
That
will
be
forgivable
if
you
reopen
there's
a
lot
of
businesses
in
our
community
that
don't
have
the
cash
on
hand
and
the
reserves
and
the
credit
to
be
able
to
fund
basic
expenses
to
keep
the
business
afloat.
So
we
hope
that
this
will
help
some
of
those
businesses
with
those
types
of
working
expenses
and
complement
some
of
the
other
funds
that
are
out
there.
So
you
look
for
that.
G
We
we
took
the
lead
here
in
on
behalf
of
the
whole
partnership
of
economic
development
service
providers,
along
with
Nels
bone
and
and
Gary
Ferguson,
in
pulling
together
the
details
and
we'll
be
partnering
with
a
FCU
on
delivering
the
base.
The
combined
fund
we're
also
starting
to
think
about
planning
for
Rio,
pre-opening
and
recovery.
G
We
believe
there'll
be
the
need
for
additional
local
resources
to
capitalize
a
revolving
loan
fund.
That
would
be
a
recovery
fund
and
we're
starting
to
think
about
how
to
best
assemble
that
funding
and
put
together
a
program
like
that,
a
lot
of
other
activities
as
well,
a
lot
of
communications
and
information
coordination
working
to
promote
opportunities
to
support
our
local
businesses.
G
Through
this
crisis,
a
number
of
businesses
are
getting
innovative
about
how
to
keep
some
revenues
flowing
in
through
things
like
gift
cards
and
takeout
and
delivery
and
online
sales,
and
we're
working
to
support
that
we're
in
early
conversation
with
our
workforce
partners
of
the
county,
about
the
possibility
of
a
major
long-term
jobs
and
workforce
initiative.
Last
week,
1300
people
applied
for
unemployment
in
Tompkins
County
the
week
before
that
it
was
500.
G
This
is
significant
and
so
we're
starting
to
think
about
how
to
redeploy
some
of
our
workforce,
potentially,
as
we
start
to
recover
and
as
as
Mel's
bonus
shared
with
with
some
of
us,
the
HUD
has
allocated
an
additional
amount
to
the
entitled
communities
of
CDBG
funding,
and
so
the
IRA
will
be
considering
I
think
over
the
next
period,
how
to
employ
those
funds,
including,
hopefully,
to
support
an
economic
recovery
effort.
I.
Think
there's
about
four
hundred
thousand
dollars
in
additional
funding
there.
So
let
me
stop
there
and
answer
any
questions
you
have
about
our
efforts.
H
G
H
G
H
There
a
some
sort
of
central
location
or
website
or
resource
or
newsletter
that
we
can
put
out
over
email
to
the
businesses
that
we
have
in
our
listservs
so
that
they
can
be
connected
to
these
resources.
Be
aware
of
the
efforts
that
are
being
put
in
place
to
provide
financial
services
and
assistance.
Yes,.
G
We
actually
have
been
working
to
develop
a
newsletter
list
here
that
includes
the
number
of
city-owned
businesses.
We
are
city
businesses,
we
were
not
the
first
two
surveys
were
distributed
to
TC
ad
dia
and
chamber
constituencies
and
business
owners
and
their
networks
directly
we're
now
part
of
that
effort
and
so
we'll
be
utilizing
our
e-newsletter
list
to
get
those
resources
out.
G
H
If
that
would
be
helpful,
I
just
think
of
businesses
on
the
route
13
corridor,
we
have
some
very
small,
family-owned
businesses,
minority-owned
businesses
that
may
not
be
generally
part
of
the
TC
ad
or
chamber
network,
and
so
efforts
that
we
can
undertake
to
include
them.
I'm
happy
to
reach
out
to
you
and
if
there
is
a
central
information
location,
whether
or
not
it's
the
city
website
or
others.
That
would
be
a
good
reference
to
be
able
to
bring
forward
at
every
meeting
to
reaffirm
that
connection.
F
Yeah,
thank
you.
We
discussed
this
as
Tom
knows
at
this
afternoon's
IBA
meeting
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
the
observation
that
it
is
just
remarkable.
The
partners
who
have
pulled
together
in
the
midst
of
this
just
unthinkable
crisis
tom
has
done
a
great
job
and
working
with
Heather
at
TC
nad,
a
working
with
the
DIA
I,
the
number
of
people
who
have
stepped
up
to
help
support
in
terms
of
emergency
funding
those
businesses
in
our
community
to
provide
some
bridge
to
hopefully
keep
businesses
from
closing.
F
Once
we
get
beyond
this
crisis,
the
question
that
Cynthia
was
asking
about
how
to
communicate
these
programs.
These
loan
programs
to
the
public,
both
potential
city
applicants,
as
well
as
countywide
applicants,
is
something
that
came
up
earlier
today
in
the
ID.
A
meeting
and
Tom
responded
to
that.
It's
also
remarkable
not
only
that
these
programs
have
been
pulled
together.
I
F
F
F
G
Thank
you
Laura.
If
I
could
add
to
that,
you
know
this
as
I
think
you've
alluded
to,
while
we're
doing
everything
we
can
to
deploy
the
resources
that
we
can
identify
the
demand.
We
anticipate
that
the
demand
for
this
program
and
others
will
be
much
higher,
then
we're
able
to
meet
through
this
initial
fund.
We
do
want
to
seek
additional
funders
both
locally
and
beyond.
G
So
if
you
have
ideas
in
that
regard,
please
let
us
know
as
well
we'll
be
reaching
out
to
some
other
potential
local
funders
very
soon,
and
we
hope
that
the
state
and
federal
partners
will
realize
the
benefit
of
working
through
these
kinds
of
local
partnerships.
Often
we
can
deploy
the
funds
more
quickly
and
in
a
more
targeted
strategic
way.
C
D
Okay
yeah:
this
is
Joann
and
I'll.
Do
that
I'm
going
to
start
with
this
sustainability,
director
search
and
I'm,
not
sure
if
the
mayor
may
want
to
join
in
at
some
point,
but
we
we
had
a
transition
team
and
we
interviewed
four
candidates
out
of
about
22
that
were
qualified,
and
that
happened
the
week
of
March
16th,
which
seems
like
a
century
ago,
given
where
we
are
right.
D
Now
we
needed
to
sort
of
seesaw
operations
because
of
Kovac
19,
of
course,
and
that
happened
right
after
these
interviews
and
actually
during
the
interviews
we
Skype,
because
we
were
starting
to
understand
the
gravity
of
the
situation.
We
came
very
close
to
making
decision,
and
then
yesterday,
the
mayor
and
chief
of
staff
and
I
consulted
on
moving
forward
with
this
hire
and
I
think
the
collective
wisdom
was.
F
I
F
D
Did
reach
out
today
and
I:
ask
them
to
stay
tuned,
I
think
everyone's
in
the
same
situation,
so
it
can't
have
come
as
a
surprise
to
them
that
this
is
unpause,
so
I
did
reach
out.
I
said
we
will
be
in
touch
when
we
know
what
the
situation
is
and
when
we
plan
to
move
forward
with
with
a
higher
and
I
I,
just
asked
them
all
to
please
keep
their
interest
intact
and
we'll
be
in
touch.
D
I,
don't
have
much
of
an
update
because
I,
of
course
everything
sort
of
got
put
to
the
bottom
while
we
dealt
with
with
what's
going
on
today,
but
we
are,
you
know
we
have
been
meeting,
but
we
haven't
done
it
for
a
few
weeks.
So
we're
going
to
start
that
again
and
we
have
we
have
a
plan
of
action
that
we
were
putting
into
place
in
anticipation
of
the
new
directors,
so
I
think
we'll
come
back
together.
D
The
interim
advisory
group
will
come
back
together
and
we'll
sort
of
assess
where
we
are
and
how
to
best
move
forward.
Given
our
current
situation.
But
as
we
all
know,
you
know
climate
change,
although
it
seems
a
lot
clearer
out
there,
climate
change
is
still
happening,
so
we
have
to
start
focusing
on
this
again
and
I.
Think
I
think
I'm
ready
to
do
that
now
that
things
have
stabilized
a
little
bit
for
us
all.
D
Steve,
to
be
honest,
most
things
have
been
put
on:
hold
our
contracts,
we're
sort
of
holding
and
I
think
what
we
need
to
do
is
sort
of
take
a
step
back
and
figure
out
what
is
the
most
important
thing
to
move
forward
with
and
also
what,
since
our
funds
may
be
very
limited,
we
need
to
prioritize
and
I'll
speak
with
with
the
mayor
about
that.
All.
C
K
If
anything,
I
hope
we
take
those
lessons
forward
and
that
fight
against
climate
change.
So
I
just
want
folks
in
the
public
to
know
that,
because
we
are
pausing
on
hiring
the
sustainability
coordinator
and
because
the
last
month
has
really
shaken
us,
as
we've
tried
to
figure
out
how
to
run
the
city.
C
K
C
C
So
next
up
is
the
environmental
significance.
So
this
is
resolved
that
this
Common
Council
is
lead
agency
in
this
matter
adopts
as
its
own
findings
and
conclusions.
The
short
environmental
assessment
form
dated
March
12
2020
resolved
at
this
common
counsel's.
Lead
agency
in
this
matter
hereby
determines
that
the
proposed
action
at
issue
will
not
have
a
negative,
significant
effect
on
the
environment
and
that
further
environmental
review
is
unnecessary.
Their
motion
moved
by
Cynthia
secular
by
Steve.
Is
there
any
discussion
on
this?
The
environmental
review,
seeing
none
all
in
favor
and
that
carries
unanimously?
C
So
then
we
come
to
the
ordinance
itself.
Is
there
a
motion
on
the
ordinance
itself
moves
by
Donna
seconded
by
Steve?
So
basically
this
would
create
a
special
permit
for
multiple
primary
structures
in
the
city
of
Ithaca
and
there's
some
language
and
criteria
in
there.
I'll
just
go
ahead
and
read
the
language.
B
To
what
zones
to
these
changes
apply?
That's
one
question,
and
then
my
other
question
is
how
how
what's
the
big
picture
of
how
this
will
all
fit
together
in
the
code,
when
we
also
have
conversations
about
more
conversations
about
ad
use
and
the
best
short-term
rentals
on
what
I
imagine
this
of
these
will
be.
What
we're
doing
now
is
changing
or
amending
some
of
the
uses
in
some
of
the
zones
and
then
defining
what
kind
of
special
permits
will
be
required
in
some
of
those
zones.
B
I
E
E
B
E
We
can
I
respond.
Okay,
so
we've
taken
the
accessory
apartments
out
of
there,
so
this
replaces
the
entire
accessory
apartment
section
we've
taken
that
out
and
we've
created
the
criteria
that
we
want.
The
multiple
primers
to
be
allowed
to
have
special
permits
and
you
accessory
apartments
are
no
longer
listed
as
requiring
a
special
permit.
It's
just
the
multiple
primary
solicitous
requiring
a
special
permit.
C
H
Yes,
actually
well
Jennifer
answered
my
question
or
said
what
I
was
going
to
say,
but
Donna.
This
conversation
then
highlighted
that
right
now,
accessory
apartments
are
required,
do
require
a
special
permit
and
now
by
this
action,
we're
eliminating
that.
Is
that
what
that's?
What
you're
saying
is
that
correct.
E
Yeah
if
this
passes
yeah
that
takes
accessory
apartments
out-
and
so
this
was
going
forward
at
the
same
time
before
that
we
were
doing
the
Adu
discussion,
and
that
was
what
was
recommended
that
we
put
the
multiple
primaries
there.
But
since
we
stopped
that
one
this
would
this
would
remove
excess
requirements
from
the
special
permits.
E
C
So
if
I
can
ask
a
question,
I
guess
what's
what's
unclear
to
me
is
what
the
impact
your
accessory
apartments
in
the
city
will
be.
If
we
were
to
pass
this
right,
because
it
sounds
like
what
you're
saying
is
that
we're
basically
replacing
all
the
whole
accessory
apartment
law
with
this
new,
multiple
primary
special
permit?
What
does
that
mean
for
somebody
who
wants
to
build
an
accessory
apartment?
Are
they
not
going
to
be
able
to
do
it
or
is
it
making
easier?
Is
it
make
it
as
it
right,
because
it
I
mean
yeah?
C
E
D
So
that
means
they
would
could
be
built
as
of
right.
They
get
a
building
permit.
They
can
build
the
accessory
partner
in
the
r-1.
They
are
to
cr1
in
Sierra
yeah,
but
multiple
primaries
would
require
a
special
permit.
So
and
this
was
it
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
done,
but
this
was
agreed
by
Planning
Committee
for
circulation.
Yes,
and
it
was,
this
would
be
yep
yeah.
It
hasn't
changed.
Okay,
I
just
wanted
to
be
be
clear
about
that.
Yeah.
C
I
guess,
to
be
frank:
I
guess,
I
wasn't
clear
in
the
back.
This
would
replace
the
accessory
apartments
that
wasn't
clear.
I
thought
was
just
a
special
permit
requirement
for
multiple
primary
structures
I'm
a
little
concerned
just
given
all
of
the
other
conversations
that
we
had
about
the
green
space
and
all
the
rules
in
the
zoning.
Just
without
those
rules
in
place,
I'm
not
sure
what
the
impact
of
this
would
be.
I
guess,
I'm,
just
so
I'm
clear
on
that
I
saw
a
George
had
his
hand
up.
L
C
H
H
If
we're
removing
special,
if
we're
removing
a
permit
requirement
for
a
special
part
accessory
apartment,
but
we
don't
have
in
place
any
size
restriction
on
accessory
apartments
at
this
point.
So
at
this
point,
if
this
passes
prior
to
any
other
restrictions,
then
accessory
apartments
of
any
size
could
be
built
in
any
design.
Correct,
yeah,.
E
C
C
I
would
say
and
I
know,
Donna
and
said:
do
you
want
to
speak,
but
a
my
concern
about
this
is
that
I'm
I
can
I'm
pretty
stuck.
The
public
doesn't
fully
understand
the
implications
of
this.
You
know.
I
certainly
I
certainly
know
that
John
graves
and
the
people
that
are
emailing
us
tonight
don't
understand
the
implications
of
this
and
I
would
be
concerned
with
moving
something
forward.
That
has
some
pretty
drastic
impacts
in
terms
of
I
mean
this
is
something
I
actually
support.
C
As
you
all
know,
we've
had
this
debate
for
a
long
time,
but
I'm
really
concerned
about
moving
forward
with
something
that
could
potentially
be
very
controversial,
especially
when
we
don't.
We
don't
have
in-person
meetings.
You
know
we
really
haven't
gotten
a
lot
of
feedback
on
this.
So
that's
that's
my
concern
with
this.
At
the
moment
I
sat
down
and
then
Cynthia
when.
B
I
read
this
I
had
no
idea
that
it
would
be
placed
the
accessory
the
accessory
apartment
rules
on
the
books
now,
but
and
that's
true.
So
if
we,
if
we,
if
this
replaces
all
of
the
current
accessory
apartment
rules,
then
right
it's
not
all
there
is
there.
Not
only
does
the
owner
occupancy
requirement
go
away,
which
I
know
many
of
you
are
happy
about,
but
also
the
whatever
size
restrictions
we
do
have
go
away
and
whatever
whatever
else
is
in
there,
so
yeah
I
agree
with
Seth.
This
was
certainly
I.
B
Don't
think
this
was
the
general
understanding
of
what
this
proposals
about.
I
mean
I
I
liked
it
when
I
read
it
but
I.
Guess
that's
because
I
didn't
know
the
that
it
was
entirely
replacing
well
I
guess
I
would
have
seen
that
if
I
had
said
it
does
say
hereby
amended
in
order
to
replace
accessory
apartments.
That's
true,
I
had
read
more
deeply.
I
would
have
seen
that,
but
I
certainly
didn't
catch.
That
implication.
H
I'm
very
cautious
to
move
this
forward
with,
while
also
relieving
the
accessory
apartment
requirement.
The
rest
of
it
I
like
very,
very
much
I
appreciate
the
attention
that
staff
has
put
into
it,
but
in
terms
of
the
accessory
apartment,
elimination,
I'm,
very
hesitant,
to
do
that
without
the
other
pieces
in
place.
F
Yeah
I
I
share
some
of
the
concerns
that
have
been
expressed.
My
question
to
Joanne
and
Jennifer
is:
what
are
the
implications
if
we
pause
on
this,
there
are
many
things
being
paused
right
now
in
this
current
environment,
rather
than
voting
to
send
this
on
to
council
right
now.
If
we
pause
this
and
came
back
to
it
next
month,
what
are
the
implications
if
any
I.
D
C
I'll
just
follow
I
mean
this
has
been
a
really
complex
discussion
and
I
think
it's
sometimes
been
challenging
for
the
public
to
understand
all
the
ins
and
outs
and
the
complexities
of
this,
and
that's
really
my
concern
right
now,
especially
I
mean
all
of
our
priorities
of
abotu
shifted
in
the
last
month.
We've
all
had
many
other
things
on
our
minds.
I've
been
distracted,
and
you
know
like
Donna
I
apologize
that
I
did
not
read
this
with
the
level
of
scrutiny.
H
C
C
D
B
I
am
curious,
are
we
disagree?
I
think
we're
agreeing
on
process
right
now,
but
but
I'm
hoping
that
we
don't
disagree
on
substance,
in
other
words,
I
I
hope
that
everyone
thinks
that
whatever
accessory
apartment
legislation
we
have
it
includes
some
size
or
green
space
or
whatever
restrictions.
Even
though
we
disagreed
about
what
they
are,
am
I
mistaken
about
that
and
yes,
I
know,
we've
disagreed
about
owner
occupancy.
D
C
E
J
I
guess
I
I
think
we're
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
chance
that
wrapping
this
into
the
ATU
discussion
is
going
to
make
this
any
more
any
more
of
a
simple
conversation.
I
think
I
think
it's
fun
to
discuss
this
in
isolation.
I'm
also
fine
hitting
pause.
If
the
general
feeling
is
that
people
needle
more
time
to
digest
this
and
read
it
with.
C
Okay,
so
it
sounds
like
I
mean
it
sounds
like
we
want
to
push
pause
on
this
and
revisit
it
when
I
mean,
maybe
when
there's
an
opportunity
for
more
public
input,
you
know
I,
think
the
challenge
of
the
format
we're
using
right
now
is
that
we,
it
is
actually
kind
of
hard
to
hear
from
the
public.
We
haven't
really
tonight.
I.
Think
we've
had
three
big,
weighty
topics
on
the
agenda
and
we
haven't
really
heard
much.
D
Just
going
to
say,
I
think
that
makes
sense,
I
think
this
is
it's
a
it's
very
complicated.
We
thought
this
would
be
sort
of
a
simple
step
to
take
to
get
to
alleviate
some
of
the
concern
over
the
multiple
primaries,
but
we
certainly
can
take
a
step
back
and
work
on
this
and
then,
when
we
resume
a
normal
on
a
meeting
platform,
introduce
it
again.
D
J
My
comment
I'm
sorry
frustrations
with
mute
button.
My
comment
is
more
just
along
the
lines
of
I.
Think
if
we're
looking
for
public
feedback
that
we're
not
quite
getting
in
a
physical
setting,
I
think
we
need
to
be
pretty
clear
about
what
that
is.
So,
if
we're
looking
for
more
public
input
like
finding
a
way
to
pull
that
in
because
we're
not
gonna,
if
this
is
the
new
normal
for
the
next
month,
two
months
three
months,
we
do
need
to
find
a
way
to
be
able
to
get
public
feedback
in
a
way.
J
That's
going
to
help
us
feel
informed
and
I'll
just
say
that
as
amazing
as
it
is
that
you
know,
constituents
of
ours
come
out
to
public
meetings,
and
you
know,
comma
dress,
address
us
and
address
the
public
and
voice
their
concerns
or
their
support
for
any
legislation
that
we
are
considering.
I
I
personally,
don't
find
that
that
the
public
comment
section
always
embodies
necessarily
how
the
community
at
large
is
feeling
or
how.
How
we
should
necessarily
be
be
proceeding.
C
Mean
I
always
found
that
I
mean
with
every
topic
tonight.
I've
been
a
little
bit
concerned
with
we.
You
know,
we've
gotten
some
comment,
especially
about
the
intersection,
but
this
is
the
intersection
is
a
huge
deal
for
the
North
Side,
neighborhood
and
I
feel
like
if,
if
these
were
normal
times,
we'd
be
hearing
from
a
lot
more
people
and
I
also
think
it's
true
of
the
Adu
legislation.
I
mean
we've
gotten
a
couple
comments
from
South
Hill.
C
You
know
what,
during
that
whole
discussion,
I
was
I
was
really
pleased
that
we
were
hearing
voices
that
we
don't
normally
hear.
We
were
hearing
from
students.
We
were
hearing
from
people
that
were
speaking
out
in
favor
of
this.
You
know
those
voices
are
kind
of
silent
right
right
now
and
I.
Think
part
of
that
is,
people's
minds
are
just
elsewhere.
They're
focused
on
other
things,
and
it's
it's
something
I've
been
really
concerned
about
in
general,
with
everything
we're
focusing
on.
How
do
we
move
things
forward
in
a
transparent
way?
C
H
H
Don't
think
that
we're
gonna
see
a
return
to
normal
by
June
I
think
it
may
go
a
lot
longer
than
that.
That
being
said,
we
are
all
getting
used
to
this
technology.
Our
community
is,
is
learning
how
to
adjust
to
this
new
reality
and
I
do
hope
that
in
the
coming
month,
or
so,
we
can
be
more
familiar,
our
public
can
be
more
familiar.
H
We
can
create
easier
access
for
them
to
reach
out
to
us,
either
through
email
or
a
comment
form
or
zoom,
or
some
other
method
to
reach
out
to
us,
so
that
we
don't
find
ourselves
in
a
situation
where
we
are
putting
everything
on
hold
for
for
the
next
six
months
or
so,
and
giving
ourself
this
time
to
figure
out
this
technology,
I
mean
even
we
ourselves
are
trying
to
figure
this
out.
So
I
can
only
imagine
what
everybody
else
is
dealing
with.
Yeah.
C
F
Yeah
I
think
there
are
plenty
of
people
who
appreciate
being
able
to
see
meetings
on
on
YouTube
I
two
things:
I
do
think
that
there
is
an
adjustment
period.
You
know,
Cuomo
was
saying
the
other
day.
This
has
only
been
37
days,
and
it's
not
that.
Let
me
38
days
now,
but
it's
not
been
that
long,
that
we
have
had
to
shift
our
means
of
communication
and
think
about
our
priorities
and
it
takes
a
little
bit
of
time.
I.
F
You
know
I
agree
with
Cynthia
that
this
could
be
going
on
for
more
than
one
month
two
months,
however,
with
each
day
I
believe
people
are
adjusting
to
the
changes
in
how
we
communicate
and
I
think
there
is
some
value
in
looking
at
all
right.
What
are
our
immediate
priorities?
What
are
some
of
the
things
that
the
impact
will
not
be
so
great
or
so
severe
that
we
can't
push
the
pause
button
and
turn
to
business?
F
I
C
C
You
know,
especially
these
three
very
big
topics,
and
particularly
the
intersection,
and
we
have
heard-
and
you
know
the
city
was
very
proactive
reached
out
to
the
neighborhood
and
the
listserv
and
did
that
and
we
got
some
good
feedback,
but
I
just
I
really
feel
that
people,
it's
there's
an
adjustment
here,
and
you
know
it's
taking
time
for
people
to
figure
out
how
how
do
they
reach
their
elected
officials
in
this
new
environment
and
I.
Think
for
all
those
reasons,
I
think
it
doesn't
make
sense
to
push
pause,
but.
I
C
F
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
add
quickly
that
not
everyone
does
have
access
to
email
and
some
people
make
use
of
the
public
library,
the
library
downtown,
the
libraries
at
Cornell
libraries,
its
College,
all
of
which
are
closed
right
now.
So,
while
we
are
hearing
from
some
people
we're
able
to
communicate,
there
are
others
who
don't
have
that
access
right
now
to
I.
Just
want
to
point
that
out.
C
Thanks
any
other
comments.
Okay,
so
we
our
next.
The
next
agenda
item
is
the
resolution
to
authorize
staff
to
pursue
a
break
in
access
and
route
13
at
fifth
Street.
This
is
kind
of
a
lengthy
resolution,
so
I
won't
read
the
entire
thing,
but
basically,
what's
prompting
this
is
the
carpenter
Business
Park
project.
C
So
this
is
the
first
step
in
that
process
and
the
city
has
presented
two
different
options:
one
for
a
three-way
intersection
that
would
have
a
bike
and
pedestrian
crossing
across
route
13,
but
wouldn't
allow
traffic
in
the
fifth
Street
and
a
four-way
intersection
which
would
open
up
5th
Street
to
traffic,
so
we'll
have
to
decide
which
of
those
two
options
we
want
to
move
forward
with
tonight.
So
is
there?
Is
there
a
motion
on
the
resolution.
A
I
think
that
that
that's
correct
the
last
month
we
presented
the
two
options.
You
know
you
asked
us
to
do
some
public
outreach.
This
was
before
we
couldn't
have
public
meetings
anymore
and
you've
seen
I've
submitted.
What
what
we've
done
in
the
comments
that
we've
gotten
and
you
know,
you've
gotten
a
recommendation
from
engineering
and
you
have
the
part
three
environmental,
which
is
basically
I,
would
say
the
planning
recommendation
that
lays
out
the
argument
for
the
intersection.
H
So
I
think
I
have
a
question
for
Tim
in
your
memo.
One
of
the
arguments
that
was
put
forward
in
terms
of
supporting
the
four-way
intersection
is
that
it
would
allow
the
commercial
institutions
in
that
area
to
have
quick
access
to
route
13
and
basically
relieve
stress
on
the
residential
area.
In
that
case,
you're
talking
about
the
ICSD
DPW
facility,
you're
talking
about
the
I,
think
stone
and
tile
and
other
I
think
there's
a
towing
company
there.
M
Think
it'd
be
fair
to
say
that
we
actually
don't
have
specific
counts
about
traffic
generated
by
some
of
those
businesses
and
that
existing
block
of
5th
Street.
So
it's
a
little
hard
to
say
that
one
would
outweigh
the
other.
You
know
the
real
estate
agency
probably
has
a
fair
amount
of
traffic
coming
and
going
feel
its
independence
that
are
some
all
stone
tile.
Certainly,
some
the
school
district
probably
is
a
fair
amount
of
daily
traffic
trucks
that
are
in
and
out
their
facilities
and
operations.
Folks,
but
but
I
don't
have
an
accurate
count
on
that.
B
Similarly
on
other
streets,
I
used
to
I
used
third
Street
to
get
to
the
farmers
market.
So
that's
just
another
similar
example.
Maybe
it
would
just
even
out
the
traffic
and
I've
come
to
trust.
The
judgment
of
the
traffic
engineers
and
engineering
department
I
think
some
of
the
change,
many
of
the
major
changes
and
intersections
that
we
see
the
last
few
years
have
worked
wonderfully
on
I
think
but
I
think
it's
especially
important,
as
Tim
noted
in
his
memo
that
we
have
a
demand
management
program
from
the
project
as
well.
B
A
Well,
as
we
talked
about
a
little
in
the
part
three,
they
have
proposed
lots
of
different
things
for
the
transportation
demand
management.
Some
of
them
are,
you
know,
physical
infrastructures,
that
they're
actually
proposing
like
the
crossing
and
other
things
are,
you
know
other
ways
to
reduce
vehicle
traffic
and
I
think
for
those
or
trip
generation.
So
for
those
I
think
we
just
need
a
more
detailed
program
that
we
can
monitor
and
we
can
make
that
a
condition
of
their
CEO.
A
C
H
H
However,
when
I,
when
I
look
at
the
larger
map
and
I
think
of
that
neighborhood,
it's
it's
not
really
a
break
in
access
that
will
cause
a
quick
trajectory
anywhere
into
downtown
because
it
5th
Street
is
such
a
narrow
street
or
such
a
short
street
lasting,
basically
two
blocks
and
then
into
a
t-junction
and
into
Keskin
illustrate.
So
it
doesn't
really
provide
much
benefit
above
taking
third
Street.
H
That
said,
I
I
definitely
hear
the
concerns
of
the
residents
and
if
this
were
turned
into
a
three-way
intersection
rather
than
a
four-way
intersection-
and
it
was
found
at
some
point
in
the
future
that
it
would
be
really
beneficial
to
open
up
open
it
up
to
four-way
traffic.
Is
that
something
that
could
be
done
easily
based
on
this
design?
Or
would
it
not
allow
that
sort
of
change?
If
we
chose
to
do
that
in
the
future,
I.
A
A
M
C
H
M
Be
honest:
we
have
never
done
this
before
we're,
not
really
familiar
with
this
administrative
procedure.
So
I
don't
know
for
sure.
If
the
team
would
say
well,
you
asked
for
a
public
benefit.
You
know
arguments
based
on
it.
You
can't
go
back
and
say
well,
I'll
just
build
the
legged
intersection
that
looks
too
much
like
a
driveway.
M
J
M
C
M
Mean
I'm,
probably
the
biggest
one
is
just:
it
limits
some
other
regular
movements
for
either
Tcat.
If
they
found
that
coming
across
5th
Street
would
make
sense
or
for
emergency
services
or
for
fire
truck
access.
It
made
sense
to
just
cut
across
13
at
5th,
as
opposed
to
try
to
beyond
13
and
then
turn
into
the
new
development.
Those
are
probably
the
biggest
ones,
and
otherwise
it's
kind
of
just
good
policy.
It
helped
spread
the
grid
a
little
bit.
M
C
C
And
I
appreciate
your
memo,
I
think
they're,
interesting
arguments.
You
know
you
know
I
know,
I
did
notice
that
you
mentioned
it
would
be
no
different
than
1st
Street
in
2nd
Street
and
other
Northside
streets.
I
mean
I
can
tell
you
that
there's
a
huge
complaint
that
we
get
from
all
our
constituents
has
to
do
with
traffic
and
cars
driving
too
fast,
and
it's
like
the
number
one
thing
you
hear
about
it's.
So
it
is
it's
a
pretty
big
impact
of
the
neighborhood
and
I.
Don't
think
it
should
be.
C
You
know
under
valued
in
terms
of
what
this
means.
For
you
know,
a
neighborhood
has
a
lot
of
kids
and
potentially
has
you
know
as
families
and
their
cars
that
are
driving
and
driving
too
quickly.
So
it's
something
that
I
take
really
seriously
I
mean
I've,
always
been
a
big
supporter
of
trying
to
traffic
home
city,
streets
and
I
know
that
from
the
outreach
that
the
city
did
there's
the
overwhelming
consensus
that
we've
heard
from
the
neighborhood
is
for
the
three
way-
and
you
know
maybe
it's
somewhat
parochial
or
protectionist,
but
I
think.
C
I
I'm
definitely
sympathetic
to
you
know
you
and
I
assess
have
been
to
many
meetings
where
that
opinion
has
been
expressed
pretty
strongly.
But
you
know
thinking
citywide
like
what's
best
for
the
city,
especially
the
most
urban
parts
of
the
city,
is
to
create
a
grid,
and
you
know
dead-end
streets
or
Cossacks
are
our
suburban
or
they
have
a
lot
of
suburban
character.
I
So
yeah,
it's
hard
I,
do
want
to
express
the
concerns
of
my
neighbors
and
there
are
my
neighbors
there.
Just
a
few
blocks
away,
so
I
get
it
and
it's
the
same
with
like
thinking
about
Cleveland
Avenue
too,
and
they
love
I'm,
not
sure
how
that
happened
back.
Was
it
the
nighties
or
something?
It
seems
absurd
to
me
now,
I
mean
I,
understand
why
they
love
it.
But
it's
seems
like
a
privilege
that.
I
I
Eric
is
already
doing,
which
is
pursuing
a
lower
speed
limit
or
the
ability
to
create
a
lower
speed,
limit,
citywide,
promote
alternatives
to
single
options,
to
motor
vehicles
for
transit,
biking
and
walking
and,
as
all
of
you
mentioned,
really
getting
some
chapters
of
management
as
the
project
behind
this
project,
so
I
I'm
hardened
by
the
the
third,
even
the
three-way
has
good
pedestrian
and
bike
access
and
so
I
don't
think
it's
not
the
end
of
the
world.
For
this,
but
I
think
the
trans
argument
is
pretty
strong
and
I
generally
like
support
the
slowly
option.
F
Thanks
hearing
the
concerns
of
the
residents
in
the
north
side
really
prompt
me
to
think
more
seriously
and
in
favor
of
the
three-way
stop
I
think
the
work
that
staff
have
done
on
this
is
terrific,
much
appreciated
much
valued.
At
the
same
time,
I
see
on
the
day,
Street
meadow
Street
intersection,
where
there
have
been
huge
problems.
C
And
I
just
want
to
say
one
more
thing
quickly
respond
to
that.
You
know.
One
thing
you
point
out
in
your
memo:
Tim
is
that
you're
likely
to
see
a
lot
of
cross
traffic
from
the
new
development,
a
carpet
business
park,
cars
I
think
that's,
that's
probably
true,
because
it's
gonna
be
a
quick,
convenient
access
to
downtown
I.
Do
worry
about
that
that
there
could
be
some
increased
significantly
increased
traffic
on
this
on
this
street
Steve
and
then
Cynthia
did
you
have
a
comment?
C
J
I
just
wanted
a
second,
what
we're
Ducks-
and
it
said
just
about
taking
a
city
view
to
this
and
that
I
I
definitely
understand
the
need
for
street
calming
I.
Think
there
are
better
tools
than
the
blunt
tool
of
maintaining
a
dead
end
dead
ends.
Are
there
they
undermine
the
city
flow
that
we're
going
for
they
also
under
not
undermine
City
logistics
when
it
comes
to
infrastructure
and
I.
Just
it's
a
it's,
a
very
blunt
tool
to
maintain
traffic
calming
in
one
neighborhood.
I
And
one
other
point
I
want
to
make
is
that
I
think
by
creating
more
breaks,
we
are
moving
towards
amazing
13,
a
more
complete
Street.
Okay,
more
like
the
city
and
I,
know
everyone,
whether
you
know
you
approve
of
the
three
or
four-way
option.
We
all
want
to
see.
13
slowed
down
for
me,
adding
one
more
I
think
it
is
in
the
memo
to
that
it
has
the
potential
for
kind
of
slowing
down
traffic
even
more.
N
Eric,
did
you
okay,
yes,
I
was
gonna,
officially
raised
my
hand,
sorry
yeah
I
do,
and
these
are
all
legitimate
concerns.
I
think.
J
N
Address
everything
within
the
neighborhoods
and
I've
talked
to
many
neighbors
over
time
about
traffic
calming
and
that
something
certainly
will
revisit.
You
know
as
these
develop,
but
would
really
feel
like
those
two
keys
are
a
strong
TDM
program
with
teeth
and
then
also
pushing
that
urban
boulevard
concept.
To
the
extent
we
can
with
this
development.
C
C
The
one
the
one
concern
I
have
with
moving
forward
tonight,
I'm
a
little
bit
because
Tim's
memo
came
and
the
Planning
Board
resolution
came
just
yesterday.
I
know
that
the
the
city
did
the
outreach
to
the
Northside
neighborhood,
but
it
was
really
presented
in
a
like
kind
of
neutral
way
that
the
city
is
now
really
or
the
Department
of
Public.
Works
is
now
really
making
a
recommendation.
I'm,
not
sure
that
people
are
aware
of
that.
I
wonder
is
if
we
did
pause
for
a
month
so
that
that
argument
could
be
presented
to
the
neighborhood.
A
Mean
I
think
that,
whether
it's
a
four-way
or
a
three-way
intersection
I,
don't
I,
think
I
think
that
decision
could
wait
a
month
and
we
could
still
make
seeker
determination
because
you
know
we
could
talk
about
both
I
I
feel
like
it.
You
know
I
I
feel
like
it
would
be
okay
to
wait
another
month.
I
guess
I
would
just
want
to
know
what
we
should
do
during
that
month
and
this
project
is
all
projects
you
know.
A
You
you
could
I
think
we,
what
I'm
saying
is
I
think
you
could
table
it
and
I
think
that
you
have
I
think
we,
the
Planning
Board,
could
still
move
forward
with
a
negative
declaration,
because
both
of
the
options
are
outlined
in
the
seeker.
It
would
be
great
to
get
this
going
because
every
you
know
it
just
takes
so
long
with
d-o-t,
especially
these
days
to
to
move
a
project
forward,
but
I
think
we
you
know
we
could
it
wouldn't
delay
the
project
that
much.
C
C
There
are
advantages
to
this
that
you
may
not
realize,
may
not
have
considered
just
I
mean,
even
if
you
know
it
sounds
like
I
think
even
just
presenting
letting
people
know
that
there
is
a
majority
of
the
committee,
at
least
that
wants
to
move
forward
with
the
four
way
I
mean
just
in
the
interest
of
like
transparency
and
letting
people
know
that
this
is.
This
is
the
argument
the
city's
making,
because
I
don't
think
that's
really
been
presented
to
the
well
really
to
the
public.
C
H
If
it
doesn't
upset
the
timeline
too
much
I'm
in
support
of
waiting
for
the
very
reasons
that
that
stuff
mentioned,
it
would
also
give
us
time
because
I
don't
actually
think
we
have
a
resolution.
We
have
the
planning
committees,
resolute,
I,
guess
this
is
the
resolution.
But
then
the
last
result
is
missing.
So
it'll
give
us
a
chance
to
have
a
full
resolution,
and
perhaps
if
we
could,
in
this
coming
weeks,
I
guess
I'm
looking
to
Tim
to
err
or
Eric
on
this?
H
Is
there
any
modeling
with
regards
to
any
difference
in
traffic
flow
through
route?
13
I
know,
while
in
our
in
our
more
residential
neighborhoods,
we
would
like
to
see
traffic
calming
people
do
look
to
route
13
when
they're
getting
out
of
the
city
to
try
to
get
out
quickly
and
is
there
going
to
be
negative
impact
from
the
four-way
versus
the
three-way
in
terms
of
the
ease
of
people
to
go
north
on
route,
13
or
south?
For
that
matter,.
N
C
Well,
what
happened
I
mean
the
outreach
was
I
thought
good
and
the
neighborhood
really
appreciated
it,
but
it
was
presented
as
hey
we're
considering
these
two
different
options
and
the
neighbors
were
like
well.
Okay,
like
we
like
option,
we've
like
the
three-way
when
Tim's
memo
King
yesterday,
which
really
is
like,
sounds
like
it's
the
city,
making
a
recommendation
and
that's
what
I
hadn't
been
presented
and
the
Planning
Board
resolution
so
I.
You
know
I
kind
of
feel
like
it.
C
B
C
C
C
Think
I
think
maybe
share
the
information
that,
like
we
tabled
this,
because
this
was
like
a
late
memo
that
came
in.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
the
neighborhood
has
all
the
information
that
council
is
still
considering.
This
and
I
can
maybe
follow
up
and
say,
look
there's
some
there's
a
majority
of
the
committee,
that's
in
favor
of
the
four-way
and
that's
just
where
we're
at
right
now
and
then
next
month,
we'll
revisit
it
and
if
people
want
to
weigh
in
they
can
weigh
in
okay.
C
E
So
it
came
forward
in
February
and
we
discussed
it
at
that
meeting
and
there
was
a
couple
suggestions
for
changes.
One
was
that
we
had
break
of
at
least
20
feet
in
between
buildings,
and
so
we
made
that
change,
and
then
we
took
we
went
back
into
the
closer
look
and
we
didn't
circulate.
It
were
because
we
wanted
to
bring
it
back
with
some
additional
suggestions
suggested
changes.
E
We
took
a
look
at
the
maximum
setback,
which
was
a
hundred
or
I'm.
Sorry
setback
lock
coverage,
which
was
at
a
hundred
percent,
and
we
drew
up
some
diagrams
of
different
parcels
along
Cherry
Street
and
those
are
the
ones
you
could
see
what
it
looks
like
at
100%,
lock
coverage
and
and
then
we
reduced
it
to
a
coverage
that
we
thought
was
more
in
line
with
what
we're
the
goals
of
the
waterfront
plan,
which
was
to
maintain
visual
access
to
the
waterfront.
L
H
There's
some
reason:
I'm
not
seeing
100
feet
in
the
one
that's
circulating
in
front
of
me
and
I
apologize.
Oh
no
I
see
it
I'm
wondering
because
the
purpose
is
to
be
able
to
maintain
visual
access
to
the
water.
Is
it
beneficial
to
sort
of
split
out
a
sub
zone
which
is
having
these
things
apply?
Only
to
the
waterfront
properties?
Is
it
necessary
to
apply
the
20
foot
break
between
buildings
on
the
other
side
of
the
street.
E
Yeah
we
did
talk
about
having
having
it
apply
to
the
waterfront
side.
We
could
make
it
only
to
the
waterfront
side.
Another
suggestion
that
came
up
was
actually
that
it
not
applied
to
properties
south
of
Cecil
Malone,
because
the
hundred
foot
maximum
building
lengths
might
be
difficult
if
we
have
any
manufacturing
users
come
in,
and
since
that
is
the
one
area
that
we
were
hoping
to
keep
as
an
option
for
any
type
of
manufacturing
uses.
The
thought
was
that
maybe
we
don't
have
that
apply
to
that
section.
H
Is
it
possible
I
agree
if
it
is
a
manufacturing
use,
but
to
remove
it
without
it
being
a
manufacturing
use?
Just
it
does
lose
the
opportunity
of
again
maintaining
that
visual
access
to
the
waterfront
south
of
Cecil
Malone
I
know
we
have
lots
of
different
projects
coming
forward
and
the
parcels
actually
on
that
side
are
quite
sizable.
E
The
second
sample
parcel
is
actually
one
of
the
ones
south
of
season
Malone
that
larger
parcel
there
yeah,
but
residents
aren't
allowed
south
of
see
similan.
So
that's
why
we
were
thinking
that
it
could
just
be
removed
there,
but
we
could
also
just
apply
it
to
certain
uses.
Certain
uses
could
be
exempt
from
that
right.
H
B
C
J
J
You
can't
you
can't
really
there's
like
not
much
to
see
there.
There
we
go,
there's
like
even
even
in
the
case
of
this,
like
you
know
this
auto
yard,
like
you
can't
you
can't
see
the
water
from
the
street
there's
no,
there's,
no
visual!
That's
going
to
what
compel
someone
to
to
take
this
walk
versus
walking
on
the
other
side
of
the
street.
That
I
can
that
I
can
see.
J
H
The
waterfront
trail
is
expected
to
run
along
that
waterfront.
There
all
the
way
down
both
to
the
fish
ladder
and
then
to
connect
to
Wegmans,
and
there
is
going
to
be
a
pedestrian
bicycle
bridge
that
will
connect
the
IHS
development
across
the
inlet
over
to
see
some
alone
drive.
So
there
actually
is
going
to
be
a
public
recreational
area
along
the
waterfront
there,
and
you
know
honestly,
you
know
if
that
would
be
true,
I
suppose
then
anywhere
on
the
inlet
island.
H
You
know
you
you're
not
really
looking
at
the
water,
but
there
is
a
public
access
that
is
attractive.
That
is
a
public
resource,
so
I
think
the
intention
of
at
least
that
that
strip
of
property
between
Renly's
Street
and
the
water
has
a
much
more
pub
park
like
recreational
public
personality
to
it
than
the
property
is
on
the
other
side
of
friendly
street.
E
I
just
wanted
to
respond
about
the
public
access
part,
so
we
were
suggesting
that
the
break,
but
well
first
of
all,
the
break
between
the
buildings
is
an
actual
break
between
the
buildings.
But
we
were
suggesting
that
we
we
we
could
allow
for
the
break
to
only
be
at
the
ground
level
and
that's
where
the
public
access
came
in.
So
it
says.
In
addition,
there
needs
to
be
a
minimum
of
20
feet.
Break
between
the
buildings.
D
E
C
B
J
D
E
We
were
looking
at
sample
buildings
I'm,
looking
also
at
what
it
looks
like
at
the
part
on
the
parcels
in
that
area
and
the
visual
access
that
you'd
have
to
the
waterfront.
So
a
hundred
feet
seemed
like
the
maximum
length
that
you'd
want
there
without
actually
cutting
off
the
visibility
to
that
area.
C
So
I
had
a
question
about
the
the
max
lock
coverage.
Actually
because
you
know
I,
don't
remember
this
being
a
part
of
our
discussion
in
February.
I,
remember
talking
about
the
maximum
building
length,
so
this
is
seems
like
a
new
addition
and
I
guess
I'm
wondering
kind
of
similar
to
Steve
like
where
did
that
number
come
from
60%?
Just
because
my
initial
reaction
of
this
is
this
seems
more
on
par
with
the
sort
of
suburban
residential
neighborhood
rather
than
a
more
urban
neighborhood,
which
I
thought
was
what
we
were
trying
to
achieve
in
this
area.
E
Okay,
so
we
just
say
it
was
basically
us
taking
a
look
at
the
parcels
and
seeing
what
it
looked
like
and
that's
where
we
landed.
So
that's
what
I
tried
to
show
you
what
the
diagrams
it's
just
after
looking
at
what
it
looks
like
at
maximum
build-out,
we
felt
that
60
percent
was
more
appropriate
and
more
in
line
with
the
goals
of
the
waterfront
plan
were.
C
D
Well,
probably,
would
be
green
space
or
plaza
outdoor,
it
would
be
open
space
and
preferably
it
would
be
green,
but
certainly
as
we've
seen
with
with
some
other
projects
recently,
there's
some
really
beautiful
outdoor
spaces.
There,
you
know,
may
have
some
plantings,
but
they
could,
you
know,
be
paved
as
patio
areas
or
whatever.
C
C
C
L
Idea
right
now,
yeah,
okay,
so
I
I
really
would
encourage
the
committee
to
read
the
waterfront
plans
recommendations.
A
big
part
of
it
is
access
to
the
water
and
a
big
part
of
it
was
actually
to
maintain
a
light
industrial
character.
For
this
section
of
of
Cherry
Street
was
supposed
to
be
housing
and
work.
I
I
think.
If
we
look
at
other
parts
of
the
city
60%
lot.
Coverages
is
a
good
part
of
college
town.
Is
it
not
a
part
of
the
the
more
developed
part
of
college
town
I?
L
C
J
Yeah
I
agree
with
George
that
we
do
have
a
blank
slate
here
and
we
do
need
to
make
it
nice
but
I
what
you
need
in
order
to
have
a
neighborhood
in
order
to
support
vibrancy
is
people,
and
you
know,
for
the
reality,
is
we
we
aren't
at
a
hundred
percent
lock
coverage.
There's
this
step
back.
There's
this
space
on
the
other
side
of
the
lot
between
the
lot
in
the
water.
There
are
not
step
back
setback.
J
J
That's
nice,
that's
that's
quality
that
gives
people
something
of
a
neighborhood,
feel
that
encourages
people
to
to
walk
around
and
hopefully
has
some
stuff
in
the
neighborhood
for
them
to
check
out,
but
I
think
the
the
more
mitigating
factors
we
put
on
these
Lots,
the
less
likely
we
are
to
have
the
number
of
people
that
a
neighborhood
needs.
That's
I
mean
that's
I,
think
that's
pretty
clear.
C
If
they
were,
you
know,
one
of
the
things
that
I
keep
hearing
is,
that
is
a
desire
for
green
space,
a
desire
for
playgrounds
and
I'm,
not
sure
just
putting
in
a
60%
lot
covers
just
gonna
get
us
those
things,
and
you
know
I'm
I'm,
just
thinking
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
I
mean.
Has
there
been
any
thought
about?
C
Maybe
like
some
kind
of
incentive,
zoning
or
you
know,
maybe
there
could
be
some
extra
allowance
on
the
lot
coverage
if
the
developers
willing
to
put
in
a
playground
or
some
kind
of
community
benefit
cuz.
My
worry
is
you
just
if
you
just
pass
the
60%
la
coverage,
I
mean
that
the
rest
of
this
the
lot
could
be
anything
right.
C
L
D
D
H
So
we
seem
to
already
have
put
out
some
guidance
of
what
we
are
looking
for
in
a
mixed
use
area.
Is
that
something
that
would
be
appropriate
here
and
again?
I
guess:
I
keep
thinking
very
separately
about
the
area
between
brinly
in
the
water
I.
Don't
know
that
I
feel
as
committed
about
it
for
the
area
between
brinly
and
the
train
tracks.
D
D
You
know
it
also
encouraged
people
to
look
at
that
because
it
does
give
guidance
to
you
know
what
you
can
do
on
those
parcels.
H
H
I
mean
it's
without
without
those
protections
we
do
have
this
monolithic
structure
that
you
know
goes
all
the
way
out
to
I
guess:
10
feet
from
the
boundary
and
right
up
to
the
sidewalk,
so
even
with
design
guidelines
without
requirement
for
green
space
or
minimum
lot
coverage
or
maximum
lot
coverage.
What
flexibility
does
a
design
guideline
have
to
provide
visual
access
to
the
water
or
amenities
for
the
rest
of
residents.
D
No,
your
point
is
really
well
taken
and
I.
Think
that's
one
of
the
reasons
we
because
this
all
wasn't
in
place
when
that
proposal
came
through
when
art
house
came
through
and
I
think
when
we
saw
how
massive
that
building
was.
It
gave
us
pause
and
we
thought
if
every
building
on
that
side
of
Cherry
Street
with
that
same
size,
it
it
would,
it
would
be.
D
You
know
it
would
be
like
you
know
the
core
court,
the
court,
the
city,
and,
if
that's
the
look
that
that
we
were
going
for,
that
would
probably
would
be
fine,
but
I
think
it
does
go
counter
to
what
the
vision
for
the
waterfront
was,
which
was
an
integration
of
the
water
and
the
development,
and
we
are
seeing
a
lot
of
development
pressure
down
there.
So
we
just
want
to
get
it
right
before
before
it's
too
late
to
to
put
the
brakes
on
a
little
bit.
C
Had
a
question
just
because
we
got
a
memo
from
visum
who
are
there
planning
a
project
down
there
I
know
that
they're
gonna
do
the
Planning
Board,
obviously
they're
not
thrilled
about
these
proposed
changes.
Has
there
been
any
kind
of
outreach
to
the
project
team
just
to
see
if
there's
potential
for
compromised
or
is
the
project's
still
feasible
under
the
zoning
I
guess
well,.
D
We
did
meet
with
the
design
team
a
while
ago
and
we
did
mention
that
we
were
looking
at,
maybe
revising
the
zoning
a
little
bit
and,
to
be
perfectly
honest
with
you,
the
the
buildings
were
very
large,
very
long
and
from
my
perspective
it
was
a.
It
was
a
little
bit
shocking
and
I
truly.
Don't
think
that
that
was
the
vision
he
had
when
we
did
the
originals.
No
me
yeah,
I,
think
I.
E
Was
just
gonna
add
that
that
us,
the
part
that
we
suggested
allowing
for
the
buildings
to
be
connected
and
the
upper
floors
actually
came
out
of
the
discussion
than
we
had
with
them,
where
they
talked
about
the
expense
of
having
two
elevators
and
and
having
to
create
two
completely
separate
buildings
and
being
able
to
connect.
The
buildings
would
help
a
project
to
be
feasible.
C
D
And
I
agree
with
yourself
and
I
think
it's
probably
yeah.
It's
incumbent
upon
us
to
to
have
guidelines
that
developers
can
follow.
I
will
say,
though,
that
some
developers
will
build
out
to
the
maximum
extent
possible
in
order
to
make
the
most
money
they
can,
and
it
is
not
all
he's
in
the
best
interest
of
the
city,
so
I'll
just
put
that
out.
There
Jen's
got
her
hand
up
yeah.
L
L
C
H
That's
why
I
was
looking
at
the
existing
zoning
for
our
mixed
use
zone,
which
proposes
70%
lot
coverage
and
10%
green
space
requirement.
I
just
put
that
out
there
and
it's
a
framework
that
we've
already
adopted.
It's
something
as
part
of
our
vision
for
a
mixed
use.
Neighborhood,
which
this
is
it
seems
I
mean
I'd
love
to
see
how
it
works
out
on
a
on
a
sample
design
like
these
Lots
that
are
included
in
the
agenda.
Thank
you
so
much
for
creating
this.
By
the
way.
It's
so
helpful.