►
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).
A
A
A
A
We
got
a
pretty
big
agenda
tonight,
I'll
just
first
start
off
with
introductions.
This
is
george
mcgonagall,
who
represents
the
first
ward,
laura
lewis,
who
represents
the
fifth
ward.
Cynthia
brock
represents
the
first
ward,
I'm
seth
murtagh,
chair
of
the
community,
represent
the
second
ward.
This
is
joanne
cornish,
our
planning
director,
steve
smith,
who
represents
the
fourth
ward
and
donna
fleming
who
represents
the
third
board.
A
So
are
there
any
changes
to
the
agenda?
I
did
have
one
that
came
in
as
a
request
to
move
the
the
couplet
discussion
up
to
the
the
front
of
the
agenda,
so
we'll
do
that
we
can
do
that,
maybe
after
announcements
updates
and
reports
that
sound
okay,
this
was
just
to
facilitate.
I
guess
the
dot
folks.
Is
that
right?
Okay,
any
other
changes,
no
okay!
A
So
next
up
is
public
comment
and
I've
got
two
cards
for
public
comment
and
we
do
have
a
couple
of
public
hearings
tonight.
So
if
you're
here
to
speak
on
the
public
hearing
topic,
if
you'll
wait
to
the
public
hearing,
but
this
is
our
general
public
comment
that
we
hold
at
all
our
meetings
and
the
first
card
I
have
is
fagoo
caucus
and-
and
I
have
a
card
for
theresa
alt,
but
it's
on
the
inlet
island.
So
we'll
wait
for
that
public
hearing.
B
My
name
is
faygo
gakis.
I
live
in
the
city
of
ithaca
on
the
commons,
specifically
I'm
going
to
say
something
that
I
said
two
weeks
ago,
because
it's
still
a
concern
when
I
dress
the
whole
council.
I
talked
about
how
people
are
able
to
speak
before
council.
B
Governor
cuomo
has
opened
things
back
to
to
normal
to
the
way
they
were
pre-covered,
which
means
that
I
expected
to
come
here,
sign
the
card
and
to
speak,
but
I'm
still
told
that
the
way
it
is
with
the
county
and
with
the
city
that
people
could
sign
in
online
and
I've
been
dealing
with
this
issue
for
two
weeks:
I've
called
city
hall
several
times,
julie,
holcomb
emailed
council
last
week
after
waiting
to
see
for
a
meeting
that
happened
in
city
hall,
that
went
nowhere.
B
So
then
we
talked
again
and
she
emailed
only
two
people
responded:
george
mcgonigle
and
seth.
I
believe
you
said
it
doesn't
matter
what
happens
which,
which
is
pretty
outrageous,
and
you
said
something
similar
or
you
you
you.
I
don't
know,
but
the
thing
is
nobody
cared
about
the
process
so
seth.
I
I
called
you
because
I
called
julie
and,
and
I
got
those
responses-
I
left
you
a
message
and
you
called
me
telling
me
you
don't
understand
what
I
was
telling
you.
I
mean
I'm
not
dumb.
Okay,
I'm
not
a
child.
B
Okay,
we're
adults
here!
This
is
not
a
game.
This
is
democracy.
You're
talking
about
I'm
58
years
old.
I
know
people
are
into
high
tech,
but
high
tech
isn't
the
solution
to
everything.
Okay.
I
know
people
are
barking
at
that
at
what
I'm
saying,
but
you
know
it.
It's
very
unfair
what
the
city
is
doing,
okay
and-
and
that's
why,
two
weeks
ago,
I
I
felt
I
said
what
I
said
with
the
process
of
where
the
city
is
going.
B
Okay,
I
don't
say
that
lightly
and
I
don't
say
that
to
be
mean.
I
never
operate
that
way.
Okay,
I
very
very
high
ethics.
Okay.
But
to
tell
me
you
don't
understand
when
julie
emails,
you,
okay
and
you
tell
me
well,
you're
gonna
be
busy,
and
I
respected
that
I
didn't
call
you
back
okay
and
now
we're
here,
because
you
came
in
a
couple
of
minutes
ago.
So
I
didn't
want
to
bother
you
or
go
up
to
you,
but
honestly.
B
This
is
what
I
get
all
the
time.
Either
people
you,
I
mean
it's.
This
is
not
the
way
you
run
the
city.
Cynthia
brock,
you
told
me
a
number
of
years
ago.
I
don't
need
to
return
your
call.
I
mean
the
same
thing
with
deborah
who,
who
you
know
I
said
two
weeks
ago.
She
tells
me,
oh
I
I
didn't
get
your
message.
Oh
and
then
she
says.
Oh,
oh
I
you
know
she
said
that
again
and
then
and
then
she
says
to
me
you
know
I
don't
have
to
call
you.
A
Thanks
faye,
we
do
have
a
public
hearing
I'll
just
say
quickly,
just
to
address
phase
concerns.
I
did
call
you
today.
Honestly.
I
think
I
I
was
distracted.
I
was
I
had
a
busy
day
at
work,
but
just
just
hold
on.
I
apologize
for
that,
but
what
I
will
say
is
that
you
know
what
you
would
you
described,
people
signing
up
in
advance
or
signing
up
at
the
meeting.
I
think
either
would
be
fine.
A
B
A
A
A
Next
up
is
a
public
hearing
on
inlet
island.
This
is
the
inlet
island
preferred
developer.
Is
there
a
motion
on
the
public
hearing
moves
by
laura
seconded
by
steve
all
in
favor
of
opening
the
public
hearing
on
the
island
preferred
developer
that
carries
unanimously?
I
have
one
card
for
that.
It's
theresa.
E
E
There
were
three
applicants
to
develop
on
a
city-owned
parking
lot
on
inlet
island
from
among
them
the
ithaca
urban
renewal
agency,
the
iura
selected.
The
proposal
by
finger
lakes,
development,
steve,
flasch
and
jeffrey-
are,
in
one
featuring
a
home,
tell
a
sort
of
hotel
for
extended
stays
and
only
50
to
60
units
of
workforce
housing.
E
Time
and
again
when
a
new
development
is
proposed,
city
officials
moan
that
they
can't
demand
that
the
development
be
devoted
to
urgently
needed
workforce
housing
because
they
don't
control
the
land.
In
this
case,
they
do
control
the
use
of
the
city's
own
land
by
pointing
in
the
rfp
to
the
whole
scope
of
the
waterfront
development
plan.
They
reduce
the
affordable
housing
part
to
rather
little
when
the
city
controls
a
parcel.
They
should
specify
that
it
goes
for
the
hardest
thing
to
get
workforce
housing.
E
B
B
B
B
B
B
We
haven't
been
around
each
other,
just
zooming.
Our
way
through
is
not
the
only
answer.
Okay,
a
lot
of
people
have
said
that
on
the
news,
even
you
know,
I
watch
a
lot
of
news.
You
know
as
humans.
You
know.
We
also
need
that
one-to-one
interaction,
but
but
you
know
it's
just
I
I
just
really
think
you
have
to
slow
things
down.
You
have
to
take
a
step
back
before
all
this
development
just
ruins
our
city,
it's
just
too
much.
Where's.
All
this
traffic
going
to
go
inland
is
such
a
small
little
little
area.
B
B
A
Is
there
anyone
else
who's
here
to
speak
on
inlet
island,
we're
in
public
on
it?
Okay,
is
there
a
motion
to
close
the
public
hearing,
moved
by
laura
seconded
by
donna
all
in
favor,
of
closing
the
public
hearing,
and
that
carries
unanimously?
We
have
one
more
public
hearing
which
is
on
the
iura
fourth
amendment
to
the
ira
citizenship
plan.
A
Is
there
anyone
here
to
speak
on
that
topic?
We
have
to
go
through
it
anyways
for
legal
purposes.
Why
don't
we
open
the
public
hearing
move
by
donna,
second
by
steve,
all
in
favor
of
opening
the
public
hearing
and
that
carries
unanimously
now
I'll
ask?
Is
there
anyone
here
to
speak
on
that
topic
and
seeing
nana
look
for
a
motion
to
close
the
public
hearing
moved
by
laura
sackett
by
steve,
all
in
favor
of
closing
the
public
hearing
and
that
carries
unanimously
we're
up
to
the
announcements
any
I.
A
So
I
guess
the
first
item
on
our
agenda
is
the
couplet
and
is
this
a
presentation?
Are
you
gonna?
Are
they
zooming
in.
I
Okay,
great
well
thanks
everyone
for
joining
we.
This
is
the
first
time
I
think
we're
trying
this
at
a
common
council
meeting
where
we
have
a
remote
presentation,
but
I
believe
it's
all
set
up
appropriately
I'll
just
introduce
the
topic
a
bit,
but
I
won't
be
doing
at
least
most
of
the
talking
today.
I
don't
think.
I
So
it
is
potentially
something
that
I
think,
as
part
of
the
city's
transportation
plan
could
be
built
upon
to
look
a
little
bit
more
comprehensively
at
the
whole
route
13
area,
but
for
now
this
specifically
is
related
to
the
mitigation
that's
proposed
by
the
developer.
I
So
does
anybody
have
any
general
questions
about
that
before
I
introduce
the
folks
here
on
zoom
nope?
Okay,
so
we
have
here
today,
amy
dake
from
srf
associates
they're
the
transportation
consulting
firm
that
is
working
with
the
developer.
I
J
Yeah,
actually,
scott
bates
is
going
to
start
by
explaining
some
of
the
existing
conditions
and
the
problems
that
dot
is
seeing
with
the
existing
intersections.
G
You
know
well,
while
scott
is
is
doing
that
this
is
dave,
if
I,
if
I
could
just
jump
in
while
scott
is
preparing
and
sharing
his
screen
there,
just
to
provide
some,
maybe
some
overall
context
to
where
we
are
and
kind
of
how
we
got
here.
So
certainly
with
the
proposed
development
right.
It's
it's
going
to
add
some
traffic.
G
Everybody
is
certainly
aware
of
the
the
challenges
on
route
13,
currently
with
delays
and
and
really
crash
patterns
at
some
intersections.
Certainly
so,
certainly
with
the
proposal,
you
know
d.o.t
understands
and
recognizes
the
city's
vision
for
a
more
walkable.
You
know
bikeable,
community
and
and
route.
13
is
a
part
of
that.
G
So
certainly
in
recognition
of
that,
you
know
we
want
to
work
with
the
city
with
the
developer,
with
with
amy
and
and
her
team
as
much
as
possible
to
come
up
with
the
best
solution
possible
that
that
will
will
perform
mitigation
because
we're
adding
traffic
and-
and
you
know,
without
mitigation-
we'd-
be
adding
delay
as
well.
So
so,
in
that
context
you
know
certainly
amy
was
working
on
some
mitigation
and
in
in
you
know
previous
meeting
conversations.
G
One
of
the
things
that
that
came
out
of
the
idea
that
scott
is
going
to
share
that
you're,
somewhat
familiar
with,
I
believe
already,
but
is
the
idea
that
that
maybe
absent
significant
capacity
improvement
to
route
13
to
to
be
able
to
absorb
the
additional
delay
right
without
creating
more
delay,
absent
that
what
is
something
else
that
could
be
done
to
again
recognize
the
city's
vision
for
route
13
and,
at
the
same
time
be
able
to
accommodate
the
the
development
which
is
as
well
an
important
part
of
of
the
city's
vision
moving
forward,
particularly
you
know
in
in
that
area
of
the
city,
certainly
with
the
medical
facilities,
etc,
etc.
G
So
we
recognize
that,
and-
and
so
what
scott's
going
to
share
is
this
idea
that
that
we
think
potentially
could
go
a
long
way
toward
toward
that
mitigation?
And
so,
ideally,
really
what
it
is.
Is
you
know
d.o.t
in,
like
I
said,
conversation
came
up
with
this
thought
and
and
really
turned
it
over
to
amy,
to
do
the
analysis
which
would
be
required
for
mitigation
for
development.
That's
part
of
the
process
right
so
so.
Amy
did
the
analysis.
G
Some
of
some
of
that
you
know,
scott's
gonna,
show
you
and,
and
scott
I
think
has
has-
has
enhanced
that
you
know
with
more
detail
and
certainly
going
to
talk
through
it.
But
but
I
just
wanted
to
add
that,
in
terms
of
context
as
to
how
we
got
here
because
again,
we
think
this
is
a
solution
absent.
You
know
other
mitigation
that
would
require
you
know
other
capacity,
improvements
or
some
other
mechanism
to
be
able
to
absorb
that
delay.
So
I'll
turn
it
over
to
scott.
J
I'd
just
like
to
point
out
one
thing
and
that's
that
this,
what
you're
calling
mitigation
for
this
project
is
really
more
than
just
this
project.
This
will
provide
mitigation
to
allow
the
waterfront
development
that
the
city
re-zoned
recently.
So
it's
more
than
just
this
project.
It's
also
the
city
harbor
project,
it's
the
rest
of
the
waterfront
area,
which
includes
a
parcel
that
was
currently
or
previously
owned
by
dot.
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that's
clear
as.
H
H
Okay,
so
I
guess
with
that
I'll
get
started
and
thanks
dave
for
the
intro
and
amy
for
the
a
little
bit
more
information
on
the
on
the
back.
So
can
everyone
hear
me?
H
Overall,
I
think
it's
recognized
that
the
city
of
ithaca
roadway
system
is
at
capacity
and
and
it's
beyond
simple
signal,
timing
improvements.
I
work
directly
with
eric
and
tim
and
I
can
definitely
say
a
lot
of
the
complaints
that
we
get
here
in
the
regional
office
are
a
lot
of
signal
timing,
but
a
lot
of
just
operations,
congestion
delays,
cues
all
within
the
heart
of
the
city
of
ithaca,
so
obviously
from
a
public
perception
there
there's
issues
out
there
and
I'll
show
you
later.
H
We
have
the
data
that
supports
some
of
the
results
of
what
those
congestions
and
issues
are
really
creating
on
in
terms
of
safety.
H
So
the
capacity
is
a
combination
of
multiple
factors,
so
we
have
very
high
peak
hour
volumes.
It's
the
number
of
pet
crossings,
so
pedestrian
crossings
are
great
for
pedestrians.
You
know
that
provides
an
opportunity
for
them
to
to
safely
cross
at
signalized
intersections,
but
there
is
a
negative
to
that.
Obviously,
we
are
limited
with
signal
timing,
adjustments
when
we
have
to
give
the
the
proper
walk
time
and
don't
walk
time
for
these
pedestrians
at
these
intersections.
H
Another
limiting
factor
is
the
short
mid
blocks
and
all
the
intersections.
So
these
are
the
segments.
So
if
you
can
see
my
cursor,
you
know
all
these
short
mid
blocks
within
the
city
of
ithaca.
You
know
we
can't
adjust
the
signal
time
and
crank
up
the
cycle
link,
because
what
happens
is
the
queues
extend
back
into
the
adjacent
intersection?
So
we're
limited
by
some
of
the
timing
improvements
we
can
do
there.
Another
limiting
factor
is
the
railroad
that
exists
basically
on
the
west
side.
H
So
you
know
every
time
a
train
comes
down
that
pre
preempts
the
signal
system
and
basically
gives
the
priority
to
the
railroad.
So
you
know
as
anyone
that's
in
that
traffic
and
you
see
a
railroad,
a
train
come
down
the
railroad.
You
can
see
the
impacts
to
the
signal
timing
to
the
congestion
to
the
progression,
so
that
all
plays
a
role
as
well.
So
it's
a
combination
of
all
those
factors
that
really
it
limits
us
and
it
challenges
us
so
we're
well
beyond
signal
time
improvements.
H
You
know
if
I
adjust
the
signal
at
an
intersection,
it's
basically,
I
always
like
to
use
the
metaphor:
I'm
rob
and
peter
to
pay
paul.
You
know
so
I'm
going
to
help
one
approach,
but
I'm
really
going
to
hurt
another
approach.
So
then
you
know
the
following
week:
I
could
get
the
same
call
at
the
same
intersection,
but
it'll
be
the
approach
that
I
just
fixed,
the
one
that
I
just
took
away
the
time
so
just
something
to
keep
in
mind
as
far
as
signal
timing
along
the
corridor.
H
The
second
challenge
that
we
had
is
that
it's
limited
to
no
room
to
construct
capacity,
improvements
without
significant
impacts
to
existing
buildings,
multiple
intersections,
the
railroad
and
scene
and
without
right-of-way
impacts.
So
that
was
another,
a
challenge
ano.
The
third
challenge,
I
would
say,
is
the
city
of
ithaca's
vision
to
be
more
pedestrian
and
bicycle
friendly
community.
H
So
trying
to
I
guess,
appease
the
city
on
their
overall
vision
for
the
community
was
another
challenge
and
then
a
fourth
fourth
bullet
that
I
had
was
that
the
capacity
issues
that
I
previously
mentioned,
you
know
they
create
operational
crash
patterns
that
exist
all
along
route
13.,
so
the
roadway
network,
the
roadway
network
being
at
capacity,
is
even
more
sensitive
to
any
additional
trips.
H
H
So
those
were
the
some
of
the
challenges
that
we
encountered.
I'm
gonna
switch
my
screen
to
show
a
collision
diagram
at
this
point.
It's
just
kind
of
capture
the
crash
patterns
that
are
occurring.
So
what
you're,
seeing
here
this
intersection
is
fulton
and
buffalo
street,
and
so
you
know
in
traffic
engineering,
this
is
called
the
collision
diagram
and
so
for
each
and
I'll
zoom
in
so
you
can
see
closer.
So
each
diagram
represents
a
crash.
That's
occurred
at
this
intersection
and
this
data
is
pulled
through.
H
We
have
a
crash
software
that
pulls
it
right
from
the
dmv
and
we
took
three
years
of
crash
data
and
you
can
see
obviously
there's
a
crash
pattern
here
at
buffalo
and
fulton,
and
this
is
pretty
significant.
H
It's
very
odd
to
have
like
a
right
angle,
crash
pattern
that
that
you
see
here,
the
the
predominant
pattern
is
southbound
with
westbound
so,
and
that
is
the
movement
that
would
actually
be
the
westbound
movement
is
what
would
be
taken
away
under
the
proposal.
So,
but
you
can
see,
there's
a
lot
of
crashes
here.
You
know
64
crashes
over
three
years
and
17
of
them
being
right
angle.
H
So
a
lot
of
it
is
you
know
when
you're
at
capacity
and
and
you're
sitting
in
traffic,
you
get
more
aggressive
drivers,
they
get
impatient
and
they
try
to
make
maneuvers
and
that
end
result
creates
crashes.
So
at
this
intersection
you
know,
if
you
compare
this
to
similar
intersections
across
the
state.
This
is
three
times
the
statewide
average.
H
Similarly,
you
know
buffalo
taconic.
We
have
some
crashes
here
as
well:
a
lot
of
the
crashes
that
we're
seeing
here
are
a
result
of
buffalo
and
fulton.
There's
cues
that
extend
past
the
bridge
and
extend
it
to
the
taconic
intersection
to
give
you
a
sense
crashes
at
the
taconic
intersection
or
twice
the
statewide
rate.
And
then,
if
you
go
to,
let
me
zoom
out
a
little
bit.
H
Can
you
guys
see
metal
at
buffalo,
but
at
that
one
it's
twice
the
statewide
rate
as
well.
So
we
have
crash
patterns
all
along
buffalo
that
are
pretty
pretty
high
and
and
excessive.
H
So
so,
at
this
point
I'm
gonna
stop
sharing
and
I
think
amy
is
going
to
go
through
a
schematic
of
the
proposed
concept
to
change
buffalo
street
and
one-way
conversion.
That's
between
fulton
and
meadow
street.
So
I'm
going
to
stop
sharing
and
once
she's
done
I'll
I'll
I'll
continue
with
some
more
crash
and
operational
benefits,
and
also
finish
up
with
some.
J
Okay,
so
I'm
sharing
my
screen
now-
and
this
is
a
schematic
that
we
prepared
that
shows
the
improvements
that
would
be
required
in
order
to
make
the
mitigation
that
dave
had
spoken
about
possible
in
this
area
and
the
mitigation
that
we're
talking
about
is
converting
the
block
of
buffalo
street
between
fulton
and
meadow.
So
it's
one
block
and
we're
going
to
convert
that
to
one
way:
westbound.
That's
the
proposal.
J
Sorry
one
way
eastbound,
so
that
would
remove
the
westbound
traffic
through
this
block.
So
in
order
to
do
that,
the
first
thing
we
would
do
is
minor
signal
timing,
improvements
up
at
the
intersection
of
court
and
meadow.
J
J
At
this
time,
there's
certainly
some
options
that
we
could
look
at
as
far
as
pedestrian
improvements
on
street
parking,
bicycle
improvements,
something
that
can
be
explored
with
both
the
city
and
the
state
d.o.t,
then
on
buffalo
street
in
the
segment
that
would
be
converted,
we
are
showing
some
curb
extensions
at
the
intersection
at
meadow,
as
well
as
at
the
intersection
at
fulton.
J
J
We
would
be
able
to
convert
the
westernmost
lane
to
a
left
turn
only
lane
now
to
turn
left
onto
seneca,
which
is
currently
one
one
way.
Westbound.
J
And
then,
over
at
seneca
and
fulton,
we
would
have
some
signal,
timing,
modifications
and
we
are
proposing
to
restripe
what
is
currently
a
right
to
turn
only
lane
south
southbound
on
fulton.
We
would
restrike
that
to
I'm
sorry,
it's
currently
a
through
and
right
turn
lane.
J
No,
it's
a
right
turn
alien.
We
want
to
make
it
a
through
and
right
turn
lane
all
the
way
back
to
the
intersection.
So
this
striping
here
would
go
away
and
then
over
at
toganic
and
buffalo,
we
would
have
some
changes
as
well.
H
Go
okay,
so
can
everyone
see
the
closing
diagram
you
diagram
again
on
the
screen?
Yes,
okay!
So
what
amos
explained?
I'm
going
to
show
you
some
of
the
benefits
from
the
proposal,
so
it
provides
both
safety
and
operational
improvements
really
without
major
reconstruction
widening,
so
your
cost
is
really
limited
and
what
we're
really
trying
to
do
is
really
maximize
that
curb
to
curb
space
and
really
match
it
to
the
volumes
and
then,
at
the
same
time,
try
to
address
some
of
the
safety
issues
that
we
have
on
the
roadway
network.
I
I
I
H
Good
to
go
yes,
okay,
so
some
of
the
safety
benefits
is
that
you
know
at
this
intersection
because
we
are
changing
and
limiting
the
amount
of
conflicting
movements.
41
of
the
total
crashes
at
this
intersection
can
be
prevented
as
part
of
this
proposed
concept
and
also
95
percent
of
all
these
right
angle
crashes.
This,
the
all
these
crashes,
that
you're,
seeing
with
south
to
west
that
are
occurring
at
this
intersection,
since
those
movements
wouldn't
even
be
allowed,
those
would
be
eliminated.
H
Obviously
so,
95
of
all
the
right
angle-
crashes-
that
that's
you
know
a
large
portion,
that's
happening
at
this
intersection
would
be
would
be
preventable
under
the
proposed
concept
at
taconic
and
buffalo,
it's
anticipated
about
25
of
the
total
crashes
can
be
prevented
and
similar
metal
in
buffalo.
It's
it's.
An
approximately
20
percent
of
the
total
crashes
can
be
prevented
under
the
proposed
concept.
H
So
you
know-
and
also
I
call
it
like
an
indirect
operational
benefit
by
having
less
crashes
at
intersections.
You
know
every
time,
one
of
these
crashes.
You
know
this
is
happening
three
times
the
normal
rate,
and
so
when
you're
at
capacity
and
one
of
these
crashes
happens.
I
H
H
You
know:
you're
gonna
have
backups
there
there's
an
element
there
where
you
have
to
get
the
police
there,
you're
causing
backups
cars
can't
get
around
and
that
creates
backups,
especially
when
those
incidents
happen
during
a
peak
hour.
So
obviously
the
less
crashes
that
you
can
prevent
at
an
intersection,
there's
an
operational
benefit
to
that
as
well,
so
they
really
go
hand
in
hand.
H
You
know,
like
I
said
earlier
when
you
have
when
you're
at
capacity
and
drivers
are
frustrated,
they're
going
to
make
more
aggressive
movements,
which
in
turn
will
create
some
crashes
at
intersections.
So
I
think
this
proposal
really
has
a
as
a
bunch
of
safety
benefits.
That's
tied
to
it
operational
benefits.
H
The
exception
is
when
you
have
a
pet
crossing
or
when
the
railroad
is,
is
in
a
preemption
mode,
but
for
the
most
part
that
will
always
receive
a
green.
So
the
progression
along
fulton
street
is
helped
by
these
improvements
here
at
this
intersection.
So
you
know
not
only
are
the
right
angle.
Crashes
are
going
to
be
addressed
just
because
of
the
change,
but
those
rear
ends
that
cars
are
always
stopping
in
a
queue
and
getting
impatient
there.
I
think
there's
going
to
be
a
residual
effect
also
on
the
rear.
H
End
crashes,
all
along
fulton
street
by
this
by
this
improvement,
so
that
kind
of
goes
along,
there's
improved
progression,
all
along
buffalo
at
taconic,
fulton
and
metal.
Really
at
all
these
three
intersections.
As
a
result
of
this
proposal,
the
modification
really
rebalances
and
maxes
maximizes
the
lane
usage
on
buffalo
street
based
on
the
traffic
demand
and
improves
the
eastbound
q
issues
on
buffalo
street.
You
know
currently
the
queues
that
are
going
eastbound
on
buffalo
they
back
up
to
taconic
and
even
beyond.
H
So
you
know,
the
issues
here
are
really
affecting
two
intersections,
and
you
know
under
this
proposal
that
this
because
of
the
phase
change,
it
really
addresses
those
q
issues.
So
really
we
can
really
address
two
intersections.
So
as
a
result
of
it,
the
overall
level
of
service
has
improved.
So
you
know
not.
Everyone
is
familiar
with
level
service,
but
just
in
a
generic
state
level
service
as
a
traffic
engineering
term
is
it's
kind
of
like
it's.
H
It
states
the
health
of
an
intersection
and
it
gives
it
a
letter
grade
and
it's
almost
like
when
you're
in
school,
a
is
like
the
best.
It
means
really
good
operations
and
then
f
is
failing.
You
know
people
are
there's
high
delays
and
it's
it's
just
failing
conditions,
so
the
level
of
service
when
we,
when
we
throw
it
into
the
traffic
engineering
software
that
we
use,
is
synchro
the
level
service
at
fulton
and
buffalo
is
a
projected
to
go.
Go
from
a
d
to
a
c.
H
So
there's
some
small
improvements,
the
level
the
intersection.
I'm
sorry,
the
eastbound
buffalo
that
was
projected
to
be
an
f
goes
to
a
c.
So
we
had
failing
conditions
eastbound
at
buffalo
at
buffalo
fulton,
and
that
goes
now
to
a
c
level
service
for
the
eastbound
left
on
buffalo
and
metal
projected
to
be
an
e
that
goes
to
a
b.
H
So
there
there's
operational,
it's
not
just
safety,
there's
operational
benefits
as
well,
and
so
when
we,
when
we
did
all
the
syncro
we
put
in
the
volumes
we
put
in
the
projected
volumes
for
the
developments,
the
proposed
configurations
and
geometry.
H
We
use
that
we
use
synchro,
which
is
really
a
traffic
engineering
standard
for
software,
and
then
we
simulate
it
and
I'm
going
to
show
you
the
simulations,
but
basically
the
simulations
estimate
over
a
50
percent
reduction
in
total
network
delay
when
you
look
at
the
whole
network
as
a
grid
in
a
forty
percent
in
travel
time
for
the
entire
roadway
and
there's
and
then,
if
you're,
just
looking
at
fulton
southbound,
because
you
know
everyone's
familiar
with
the
peak
hour,
backups
and
queues
there's
a
22
reduction
in
delay
for
southbound
on
fulton
street.
H
So
there's
there's
a
significant
operational
benefit
to
this,
and,
and
that
being
said,
this
is
not
highway.
Widening
it's
not
additional
lengths.
This
is
basically
using
what's
out
there
and
really
just
modifying
some
of
the
lane
assignments
and
really
changing
only
one
block
on
buffalo
street
to
address
both
operational
and
safety
concerns.
H
So
that
being
said,
there's
a
there's,
a
really
great
benefit
cost
ratio.
We
haven't
finalized
the
the
the
cost
associated
with
it,
but
I
can
almost
guarantee
it.
The
benefit
cost
is
going
to
be
very
good
for
these
improvements
to
address
both
operational
safety.
So
now
I'm
going
to
show
you,
I
guess
two
simulations
one
is
going
to
be:
the
existing
network
proposed
volumes,
but
no
improvements,
so
I
am
going
to
run
some
simulations,
so
you
can
kind
of
get
a
feel.
H
This
is
srf
volumes,
but
there's
no
improvements
here.
You
know.
Obviously
we
have
congestions
congestion
on
southbound
fulton
street.
Everyone
can
relate
that
there's
a
congestion
on
buffalo
street
in
both
directions,
but
you
can
see
you
know
in
pm
peak
there's.
Definitely
some
congestion
that
backs.
H
H
And
I'll
just
let
it
run
for
you
know
10
or
15
seconds,
but
you
know
keep
in
mind.
These
are
simulations
it
just
it.
It
simulates
what
the
with
the
data
we
put
in
there.
There
are
other
factors
that
can
make
these
conditions.
Worse.
Obviously,
the
railroad
you
don't
mimic
the
railroad
preemption
that
goes
in
here.
H
You
can
do
pedestrian
crossings,
but
you
know
all
the
driveways
that
coming
in
cars
stopping
to
get
into
an
inter
a
commercial
business.
You
know
it
doesn't
go
to
that
microscopic
level,
but
it
does
paint
the
picture
when
you're
trying
to
compare
apples
and
apples
on
different
concepts
when
one
has
made
or
not
so-
and
that's
just
the
that's
what
that's
if
there
is
no
improvement,
so
I'm
going
to
show
you
now
the
proposed.
H
H
H
I
used
100
percent
kind
of
getting
diverted
and
kind
of
loop
around
and
knowing
that
this
would
never
stop
and
it
worked,
and
you
know
after
we
took
it,
and
that
was
really
at
a
high
level
when
we
spoke
with
the
city
and
we
had
srf,
they
worked
with
the
mpo
and
really
got
a
better
feel
where
traffic
could
come
from
and
I
think
it
was
assumed.
90
of
the
traffic
would
use
seneca,
and
so
this
model
really
represents
seneca
being
used
and
used
as
the
main.
H
I
guess
it
would
be
the
westbound
going
towards
back
towards
buffalo
and
it
still
works.
So
you
know-
and
this
provides
multiple
so
now
you
have
multiple
options
to
go:
westbound
seneca
works.
We
know
that
court
street
could
handle
it
if
there's
a
reason
why
seneca
couldn't
be
utilized
and
obviously
we're
making
the
operations
here
better
and
also
along
buffalo
to
connex.
So
this
is
the
proposed
model.
So,
as
you
can
see
it's
pretty
just
from
a
visual
perspective,
you
can
see
the
difference.
I
H
So
what
you
saw
was
the
pm,
and
that
was
obviously
the
worst
case
scenario,
and
so
you
know
we're
pretty
confident
the
pm
would
dictate
it
was
pretty
significant
amy.
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
elaborate
a
little
bit
more.
The
comparison
between
am
pm,
but
I
think
it
was
pretty
significant
to
the
point
where
we
just
analyzed
the
pm,
because
it
was
the
heaviest
volume.
Metal
street
has
a
lot
more.
H
J
L
J
So
yes,
so
this
is
actually
the
traffic
volumes
that
we
use
in
these
models
are
from
the
study
that
was
done
for
the
cayuga
park
development.
The
traffic
volumes
were
originally
collected
before
kovid.
So
when
scott
said
that
this
is
a
2021
model,
it
means
that
we're
projecting
the
2021
conditions,
assuming
that
both
the
kyuga
park
and
city
harbor
developments
have
been
constructed.
So
this
is
kind
of
a
future
condition
with
those
developments
in
place.
L
Did
that
include
the
the
existence
of
the
tabor
street
bridge?
Yes,
okay,
thank
you!
So
I'm
I
watched
the
model
and
it
was
very
cute.
Thank
you.
So
basically,
seneca
street
and
tigana
boulevard
is
going
to
carry
basic
all
the
traffic
going
to
gigantic
boulevard
to
cliff
street
and
some
of
the
traffic
that
is
going
to
hector
and
floral,
and
it's
all
going
to
go
through
that
little
intersection
of
tiganic
and
seneca,
which
I
realize
in
your
model.
L
You
have
tiganic
at
that
intersection
being
two
lanes
northbound,
which
is
currently
one
lane
northbound,
because
there's
a
bump
out
on
either
side
and
being
someone
who
lives
in
that
neighborhood
who
crosses
this
intersection
several
times
a
day.
L
Seneca
now
is
it's
not
uncommon
for
that
traffic
to
back
up
and
for
that
little
section
between
tiganic,
between
seneca
and
buffalo
to
be
full
and
I'm
trying
to
envision
how
that
intersection
is
going
to
carry
that
weight
for
for
all
of
toganic
boulevard
and
cliff
street.
So
that's
one
of
my
questions.
J
Yeah
so
that
I'll
start-
and
maybe
scott
can
jump
in,
but
all
of
that
traffic
is
traveling
through
that
intersection.
Now
it's
just
doing
it
in
a
different
direction.
So,
right
now
you
have
westbound
traffic
on
buffalo
street,
that
is
through
traffic.
It
passes
through
the
intersection
of
fulton
and
then,
when
it
comes
to
tiganic
it
either
has
the
option
to
obviously
turn
left
go
straight
through
or
turn
right
onto
tiganic.
J
You
do
currently
have
a
left
turn
lane
there.
There
are
three
lanes.
The
left
turn
lane
is
kind
of
short,
though,
because
you
do
have
on-street
parking
on
the
east
side
of
the
street.
So
one
of
the
mitigations
that
we're
looking
at
is
extending
that
left
turn
lane
all
the
way
to
the
south
to
seneca
to
accommodate
the
queuing,
because,
as
you
mentioned,
there
is
currently
some
northbound
healing
that
extends
back
to
seneca.
So
we're
trying
to
mitigate
that
impact.
L
So
so
that
is,
is
a
significant
concern
to
me.
The
second
was
something
that
you
had
mentioned
in
your
presentation
that
I
I
hope
that
you
can
detail
a
little
bit.
You
said
that
you
were
going
to
prohibit
during
peak
periods
at
the
intersection
of
tiganic
and
buffalo
you're,
going
to
prohibit
left
turn.
So
are
you
saying
that
if
you're
coming
eastbound
from
cliff,
you
cannot
take
a
left
to
go
north
on
titanic?
J
L
I
don't
think
so,
because
people
are
going
to
you
know
again.
You
were
talking
about.
This
is
a
mitigation
to
anticipate
development
of
inlet
island
and
we
have
parks.
We
have
recreation,
we
have
sports
venues
that
all
are
occurring
at
cass
park,
there's
a
lot
of
activity
where
people
are
turning
left
from
cliff
to
go
north
onto
toganic.
J
J
State
street
in
the
study,
but
our
assumptions
on
diverting
traffic
diverted
the
majority
of
the
traffic
to
seneca.
So
if
some
of
the
traffic
were
to
divert
to
state,
we
would
have
some
minor
impacts
on
state
and
less
impacts
on
seneca.
H
Yeah,
just
I
just
want
to
elaborate
a
little
bit
more,
you
know
just
I'll
start
a
taconic
and
buffalo
and,
like
I
said,
we're
trying
to
maximize
the
number
what
we
have
as
far
as
lanes
and
so
right
now
we
have
two
lanes
eastbound
and
westbound
at
on
buffalo
at
taconic
right,
so
we
have
about
in
the
pmp
and
we'll
say
it's
the
worst
peak
hour
of
the
day
we
have
about
2
000
vehicles
entering
that
intersection
right
for
the
left
turn
that
we
want
to
restrict,
there's
18
vehicles
during
that
peak
hour
during
the
worst
peak
hour,
there's
only
18
vehicles
that
would
have
to
be
rerouted
and
then
in
the
opposite,
there's
like
only
67..
H
So
what
happens
out
there
is
that,
because
of
the
opposing
movement,
is
so
high.
You
have
one
vehicle.
That's
taken
up
a
whole
through
minute,
and
cars
are
either
got
a
swerve
to
get
around,
but
basically
they're
taking
up
a
whole
through
minute,
which
is
reducing
the
capacity
at
that
intersection
and
really
creating
a
lot
of
the
issues.
Another
point
is
that
the
backups
at
buffalo
and
fulton
really
back
up
with
the
taconic
and
also
contribute
to
that.
H
So
you
know
when
we're
talking
about
the
volume
18
vehicles
on
one
restricted,
unless,
when
you
have
2
000
is
really
a
small
percentage
when
you're
talking
about
them
occupying
a
full
through
lane.
H
So
this
just
something
I'm
trying
to
you
know
put
numbers
to
why
we
came
up
with
that
restriction
and
then
also
at
seneca
at
fulton.
You
know
part
of
that
mitigation
was
converting
a
right
turn
to
a
shared
through
right,
so
you're
actually
getting
some
more
output
southbound
to
go
through
that
intersection
to
address
so
that
signal
timing
could
be
modified
to
help
some
of
the
the
backups
that
you
see
there
and
to
accommodate
the
additional
volume
that
you're
going
to
see
on
seneca.
H
But
again
you
have
options,
it's
not
just
seneca,
we
kind
of
did
it
worst
case.
Let's
assume
all
the
trips
are
going
to
use
seneca
and
it
works,
and
we
okay,
let's
try
all
the
trips
we're
going
to
use
court
street,
which
we
know
they're
not
going
to.
It
still
works
that
way.
So
the
the
concept
has
definitely
flexibility
and
that's
why
we
had
srf
kind
of
look
at
and
take
a
deeper
dive
into
it.
Just
to
make
sure
we
weren't
missing
anything
when
we
first
proposed
it
so.
L
I
appreciate
that
I
will
say
because
again
I
know
this-
these
intersections
intimately
the
illegal
use
of
private
property
to
avoid
those
turns
is
a
very
active
past
time,
whether
or
not
you're
going
through
the
bank
there,
an
island
health
and
fitness
parking
lot
or
the
pete's
gas
parking
lot.
So
I
appreciate
the
the
interest
in
reducing
the
the
ask
accident
rate
at
buffalo
and
fulton.
L
I
am
concerned
that
the
anxiety
and
stress
level
will
be
transferred
to
other
intersections
and
the
ability
to
serve
those
those
needs
are
just
going
to
be
transferred
to
different
locations.
A
A
Because
we,
you
know,
we
do
have
a
lot
on
the
agenda
tonight
and
we
don't
have
time
to
be
discussing
this
all
night.
So
if
you,
if
others
do
have
comments,
maybe
just
try
to
keep
them
economical
and
I'll
just
say.
I
agree
with
what
cynthia
said.
I
have
concerns
about
rerouting
traffic
down
seneca
street
as
well
george.
N
East
on
buffalo
street
in
the
morning
is
a
big
problem
and
the
and
the
intersection
of
gigantic
gigantic
and
buffalo
street
is
one
of
the
worst
in
the
city.
There's
no
question
about
it.
O
N
Okay,
so,
as
mr
bates
said,
you
can
rob
peter,
but
you
have
to
pay
paul
sometimes
and
if,
if
you
go,
there
actually
go
there
in
the
afternoon
and
you
see
how
many
cars
are
traveling
west
on
buffalo
street
and
on
seneca
street.
N
The
whole
idea
of
putting
all
those
cars
on
seneca
street
seems
crazy,
absolutely
crazy
and
to
make
people
turn
right
off
of
seneca
onto
toganic.
That
very
short
block
is
also
just
robbing
paul
or
peter
or
whoever.
N
Finally,
I'll
say:
if
there's
a
problem
like
an
accident
on
seneca
street,
say
you
no
longer
have
the
option
of
going
west
on
buffalo,
so
you
could
have
you're
going
to
be
making
things
worse,
and
I'd
also
like
to
point
out
that
there's
businesses
on
on
buffalo
street
that
would
be
affected
by
this.
I
don't
know
if
anybody's
spoken
to
them,
there's
residents
on
buffalo
street.
N
P
O
Thank
you
and
thanks
for
the
presentation,
I
agree
with
some
of
the
comments
made
by
colleagues.
I
noted
that
we
didn't
really
see
the
potential
impact
going
into
the
neighborhoods.
O
On
the
eastern
side
of
of
buffalo,
I'm
concerned
about
the
the
spillover
traffic
into
the
quieter
neighborhoods,
and
I
I
also
will
just
say
I
appreciated
amy's.
I
think
it
was
amy's
comment
that,
while
this
study
was
perhaps
sparked
by
the
kuga
park
development,
we
have
a
lot
of
development
going
on
on
the
west
end
and
that's
intentional.
The
waterfront
plan
intentionally
speaks
to
the
city's
desire
for
development
on
the
west
end.
So
I
you
know.
O
I
just
want
to
make
that
comment,
because
we
might
be
talking
about
this
specific
to
the
cuga
park
development
where
there's
shovels
in
the
ground
at
the
moment.
But
there
is
a
lot
of
development
on
on
the
west
end.
But
if
you
could
address
the
bike
safety
that
my
colleague
george
raises
on
on
court
street
and
throughout,
but
also
the
impact
in
neighborhoods
to
the
west.
O
No
to
I'm
sorry
to
the
east
of
the
area
of
study.
J
Well,
one
thing
I
would
say
about
the
impact
on
neighborhoods
to
the
east
is
that
you
know
on
buffalo
street
you
have
a
school
and
right
now,
buffalo
street
is
carrying
a
fair
amount
of
westbound
traffic
and
we're
talking
about
moving
that
westbound
traffic
to
seneca
street,
which
is
already
a
one-way
street.
That's
capable
of
handling
that
additional
traffic.
J
J
I
don't
see
a
lot
of
traffic
opting
to
use
court
street
instead
because
you
still
have
to
enter
the
traffic
stream
on
fulton,
where
it's
quite
heavy
to
go
south
to
that
buffalo
street
intersection,
and
I
think,
if
you're
you're,
already
east
of
meadow
street,
I
think
you're
going
to
find
your
way
more
likely
to
seneca
street
to
make
that
westbound
travel
across
route.
13.
H
I
think
that
was
one
of
the
initial
concerns
too,
that
both
tim
logan
and
eric
hathaway
brought
to
our
attention,
and
we
worked
with
ithaca's
mpo
to
make
sure
the
impacts
to
the
neighborhoods
to
the
east
and
that
you
know
they
have
a
big.
You
know:
traffic
demand,
a
travel
demand
model
that
they
use
for
any
significant
changes
and
kind
of
see
what
the
impacts
are
to
the
whole
community
as
a
whole,
and
I
think
it
was
very
minimal
is
that
is
that
your
recollection,
eric
too.
I
Well,
I
think
it
what
the
model
suggested
is
that
a
lot
of
people
would
like
we've
talked
about,
would
would
probably
the
overwhelming
majority
would
opt
for
the
more
southerly
route
to
cuga
street,
and
so
the
neighborhoods
in
question.
You
know,
court
street
would
be
less
likely
to
see
a
significant
change.
An
uptick.
M
Yeah
I
do,
but
it's
pretty
much
the
same
question.
Everybody
else
has
had
about
westbound
traffic
coming
from
most
other
parts
of
the
city
right.
We
would
either
go
on
court
street
or
cascadilla
street
and
then
go
south
on
fulton
and
get
stuck
in
traffic
or
we
would
go
west
on
seneca
and
make
a
right
on
tiganic
and
then
try
to
make
a
left
onto
route
96
from
tiganic.
That
sounds
terrible.
That's
awes!
That's
already
a
bad
intersection,
so
I
I
don't
see
the
net
gain.
A
F
I
I
just
wanted
to
respond
to
something
that
george
said
and
in
fact
the
developer
did
fund
this
traffic
study,
but
at
our
request,
because
we
did
not
simply
have
the
money
in
our
budget
to
do
that.
F
So
I
just
wanted
to
clear
that
up
and-
and
I
also
wanted
to-
and
I
think
eric
could
probably
speak
to
this
a
little
bit
better
is
in
that
we
have
a
plan
to
do
a
much
larger
traffic
study,
citywide
traffic
study,
because
this
whole
area
really
does
need
to
be
analyzed,
and
the
thought
was
that
this
solution
could
help
in
the
immediate.
It
may
not
be
forever
if
we
in
five
years
have
completed
a
city-wide
traffic
study
and
maybe
find
a
better
solution.
I
Well,
I
think
it
is
an
opportunity
as
part
of
the
transportation
and
parking
plan.
The
parking
pen
piece
has
already
started.
The
transportation
plan
is
in
scoping.
I
certainly
think
there's
an
opportunity
based
on
the
work.
That's
already
been
done,
pretty
extensive
analysis
throughout
up
and
down
the
route
13
corridor
and
a
little
bit
beyond
for
stantec
our
consultant
to
build
on
that.
You
know
it's.
I
Obviously,
the
scope
of
what
this
project
has
been
doing
is
trying
to
focus
on
specific
mitigation
for
their
project
and
they've
had
to
look
at
a
fairly
wide
area
with
that,
I
definitely
think
there's
an
opportunity
for
us
to
potentially
take
that
within
the
concept
of
our
transportation
plan
and
look
a
little
bit
more
comprehensively
at
everything
that
matters
to
us,
not
just
mitigating
the
impact
for
a
specific
development.
So
I
think
that's
certainly
true.
N
N
N
L
Cynthia,
thank
you,
george,
and
it's
good
to
know
that
there's
going
to
be
a
larger
citywide
traffic
study.
To
that
point,
is
there
going
to,
or
can
we
initiate
an
effort
to
have
a
traffic
study
that
involves
the
town?
L
L
One
of
the
concepts
that
I
understand
was
discussed
over
a
decade
ago
was
a
connecting
road
that
was
in
the
town
that
would
allow
options
for
cliff
and
taganak
and
hector
to
actually
avoid
this
whole
area
in
a
way
to
go
south,
which
may
in
fact
reduce
some
of
the
traffic.
One
of
the
things
that
I
anticipate
is
likely
to
happen.
L
For
this,
for
example,
is
people
will
try
to
find
ways
higher
up
the
hill
to
go
from
cliff
to
hop
onto
hector
so
that
they
can
only
make
one
left
turn
instead
of
having
to
do
an
entire
loop
to
go
north
antagonic?
So
obviously
people
are
going
to
find
other
ways
anyway.
If
there
could
be
a
larger
study
that
involved
the
town
that
could
provide
more
options
to
keep
the
traffic
from
coming
into
the
area,
to
begin
with
might
be
able
to
reduce
some
of
the
pressure.
I
Yeah,
I
mean
there's
always
a
cascading
effect
of
any
change
like
this.
So
you're
right,
I
think,
potentially,
when
I
think
about
that
idea,
probably
it'd
be
appropriate
to
engage
the
mpo
for
engage
fernando
de
aragon
because
he
obviously
represents
a
much
larger
area
than
just
the
city
for
potentially
funding
and
for
coordinating
an
effort
like
that.
A
So
you
know
I
I
think
you
can
tell
from
just
hearing
us
tonight.
I
don't
think
anyone's
particularly
thrilled
by
this
proposal,
but
understanding
that
this
is
also
tied
to
the
future
of
the
waterfront.
You
know
there's
a
lot
of
things
to
weigh,
and
there
were
some
things
tonight
that
I
heard
that
you
know
were
appealing
like
relieving
traffic
on
on
buffalo.
I
think,
could
really
help.
A
There
is
a
school
there
and
you
know
there's
a
big
development
going
in
right
now,
but
I
think,
like
everybody,
I'm
concerned
that
we're
just
like
asking
too
much
of
seneca
street
that
you
know
worried
about
what
the
future
impacts
will
be.
But
all
of
that
said
this
is
down
to
circulate,
and
so
I'm
curious
what
people
think
if
we're
willing
to
circulate
this
and
just
try
to
get
more
public
input
on
it
and
then
continue
the
discussion.
O
It's
been
moved
and
seconded.
I
guess
I
would
third,
because
the
proposal
we
had
been
looking
at
involved
turning
court
street
one
way-
and
I
was
not
in
favor
of
that.
So
this
is
complex.
It
may
not
be
perfect.
It
is
an
improvement
to
my
mind
on
what
we
had
been
looking
at
at
an
earlier
time.
So
I
I
will,
third,
that
steve.
D
You
know
I
just
want
to
add.
I
think
what
george
said
earlier
is
important,
like
we
do
have
to
mitigate
the
the
traffic
to
the
extent
possible
and
improve
the
situation
as
much
as
possible,
but
our
I
don't
see
it
as
the
city's
job
to
help
people
move
about
the
county.
D
I
see
it
as
allowing
people
to
move
as
well
as
possible,
but
keeping
in
mind
that
our
job
really
isn't
to
design
these
roads
in
a
way
that
helps
people
move
through
the
city,
because
there
are
people
who
need
to
live
work
and
play
here
and
there
there's
a
lot.
That's
been
written
about
cities
that
have
focused
on
helping
people
move
through
their
cities
and
we're.
D
Fortunately,
now
in
an
era
where,
where
a
lot
of
those
decisions
are
being
made,
we
have
cities
like
rochester
that
are
reclaiming
lands
that
were
dedicated
to
moving
people
through
their
city,
and
so
I
in
syracuse
too,
and
turning
that
land
back
into
parkland,
turning
it
into
to
land
that
can
be
used
to
develop
small
businesses
and
so
and
re-knit
the
fabric
of
that
community
back
together.
And
so
I
just
want
a
second.
What
george
said
and
that's
why
I'll
be
supporting
this.
A
All
right,
so
it's
been
moved
and
seconded,
so
all
those
in
favor
of
circulating
and
that
carries
unanimously.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
right.
P
A
P
A
So
we're
gonna
go
back
to
the
so.
The
next
on
the
agenda
is
the
amendment
to
the
iura
citizen
participation
plan
and
I
see
nell's
here:
do
you
want
to
move
it?
Okay,
laura's
laura's,
gonna,
move
it
and
is
there
a
second
cynthia
seconds?
A
Q
Sure
yeah
and
there
was
a
confusion
on
the
agenda
because
it
wasn't
the
citizen
citizenship
plan.
It's
a
citizen
participation
plan,
as
it
says,
on
the
action
item
here,
and
what
this
is
is
is
establishes
the
procedures
for
engaging
public
in
proposals
to
spend
hud
funds
in
the
community
on
projects.
So
what,
during
the
copa
period,
they
created
a
expedited
process
where
it's
a
five-day
notice
period
with
three
day
of
public
comment,
and
that
expires
at
the
end
of
july.
Q
Funding
coming
in
with
you
know
the
variant
parents
running
around.
We
want
to
keep
that
option
open.
We
can
still.
We
can
always
expand
it
to
30
days
as
the
normal
standard
is,
but
this
if
we
have
a
project
that
we
want
to
find
funding
for
in
a
quicker
time
frame.
This
gives
us
the
opportunity
to
do
it.
Do
it
consistent
with
the
hud
guidelines,
so
they
have
been
extending
the
deadlines
on
many
of
the
projects,
so
this
might
be
one
where
we
want.
We
find
a
project.
Q
We
want
to
fund
that's
timely
or
time
sensitive,
and
we
would
just
quicken
the
opportunity
to
do
that.
So
this
is
extending
this
to
be
consistent
with
whatever
head
hud
deadlines.
There
are
for
those
projects
so
be
consistent
with
the
federal
regulations,
but
if
we
don't
take
action,
our
clock
will
stop
on
july
31st
we'll
go
back
to
the
30-day
time
periods.
P
L
Just
a
quick
question:
how
beneficial
has
it
been
to
have
these
new
guidelines.
Q
Well,
it
can
be
helpful
when
we
have
meetings
that
occur.
You
know
where
we
don't
have
time
to
pick
make
a
you
know.
An
action
meeting
occurs,
and
then
we
have
to
look
at
31
days.
Where
are
we?
It
gets
pushed
to
like
two
months
out
and
a
lot
of
these
projects.
You
really
want
to
implement
as
quickly
as
possible.
They
they
already
seem
to
take
forever
to
start
from
start
to
finish
to
get
going,
so
I
think
it
could
be
helpful.
It's
not
critical.
Q
I
don't
think
I
think
we
could
live
with
the
30-day
comment
period,
but
I
think
we
could
find
a
project
where
we'd
really
like
to
find
a
way
to
speed
up
implementation
because
it
would
impact
you
know,
people
experiencing
covid
related
issues.
It
could
be
like
the
reach
program
going
into
in
the
homeless,
homeless
areas
and
providing
health
services
if
they
run
out
of
money
and
they
want
to
seek
more
funding.
We
could
extend
this
relatively
quickly,
for
example,.
A
R
R
Great
well
thanks
for
allowing
me
to
present
the
project
and
its
background
and
history
a
little
bit
and,
and
many
of
you
have
attended
some
of
our
meetings.
So
I
appreciate
that-
and
I
know
you're
somewhat
up
to
speed
just
for
everyone's
benefit,
I'm
on
the
board
of
the
ithaca
urban
renewal
agency
and
the
chair
of
its
economic
development
committee.
R
So
I'm
just
going
to
give
just
a
brief
background,
going
all
the
way
back
to
2006
of
the
parcels
that
we're
talking
about
and
then
the
process
that
the
ira
went
through.
To
kind
of
get
to
this
point,
and-
and
that
brings
us
to
the
discussion
we'll
have
tonight
about
what
we're
we're
seeking
from
common
council
and
then
the
preferred
the
the
proposed
preferred
developer
will
also
give
a
short
presentation.
R
So
when
that
happened,
the
ira
did
not
rescind
that
preferred
developer
status,
nor
did
that
agreement
or
resolution
have
a
termination
date.
So,
although
economic
conditions
through
2008
and
the
economic
downturn
and
everything
that
followed
you
know,
basically,
there
was
no
proposal
that
came
forward
until
they
came
back
to
us
in
late
2020,
with
a
revised
proposal
kind
of
catching
us
a
little
off
guard
to
be
honest,
because
we
didn't
know
in
some
ways
that
that
option
was
still
out
there.
R
So
what
we
decided
at
that
time,
though,
was
to
rescind
that
preferred
developer
status
from
2006,
so
that
we
could
foster
a
more
open,
transparent
and
competitive
process
for
a
potential
disposition
of
city
and
iori
lands
on
the
northern
end
of
inlet
island.
So
what
happened
from
then
is
the
creation
of
that
process,
and
what
we
did
is
an
rfei,
a
request
for
expressions
of
interest
to
encourage
developers
to
bring
forward
basically
project
concepts.
R
That
process
is
slightly
different
than
what
we
did
with
the
green
street
garage,
which
I
know
all
of
you
are
familiar
with,
and
that
was
quite
intentional.
We
wanted
a
lighter
weight
process
for
this.
R
So
that
neither
the
developer
ira,
the
city
would
over
invest
in
resources
for
a
concept
that
ultimately,
common
council
may
not
find
suitable,
and
so
specifically,
we're
here
tonight,
because
you
know
we've
kind
of
worked
through
that
lighter
weight
process
to
be
able
to
engage
in
broader
issues
that
council
might
want
to
discuss
about
how
development
happens
in
the
west
end.
The
timing
of
this
proposal
after
the
traffic
study
would
have
loved
to
gone
first
anyway,
so
the
so.
R
What
happened
is
you
know
we
defined
design
that
rfei
it
was
issued
by
ira
in
march
of
2021
and
the
economic
development
committee
set
out
to
establish
a
scoring
system
to
rank
the
proposals
that
scoring
system
was
quite
similar.
Actually,
though,
to
what
we
did
use
for
green
street
garage.
So
we
looked
at
four
criteria:
community
benefit
project
concept.
You
know
how
much
does
what
what's
the
components
of
the
concept,
the
financial
capacity
capacity
and
project
feasibility.
R
R
The
outcome
of
that
was
that
we
requested
each
of
the
developers
to
submit
clarifications
on
several
issues
so
that
we
could
kind
of
compare
apples
to
apples
on
key
components
of
like
parking
housing
units,
waterfront
access,
financials
and
responses
that
fingerless
development
submitted
are
in
your
packet.
If,
if
you
had
a
chance
to
take
a
look
at
that,
we
received
additional
public
comment
at
the
june
meeting
and
additional
discussion
with
the
applicants
and
we
scored
the
proposal
and
finglets
development
narrowly
was
the
highest
scoring
of
those
proposals
by
just
a
small
margin.
R
So
edc
recommended
to
the
ira
board
that
we
move
forward
with
english
development
as
the
preferred
developer.
For
that
parcel,
the
board
unanimously
adopted
that
decision,
but
only
after
robust
discussion
of
all
three
proposals:
the
option
of
accepting
none
of
those
proposals
which
I
know
has
been
discussed
and
then
the
related
issues
of
density
on
the
island
parking
public
access,
as
well
as
continued
and
boating
water-based
uses
for
that
island
and
keeping
that
option
in
the
city
so
including
tonight's
public
hearing.
R
There
have
also
been
four
opportunities
already
for
public
comment
at
the
economic
development
committee:
twice
the
ira
and
then
tonight.
So
what
you're
going
to
hear
tonight
is
about
the
finger
lakes,
development
concept,
so
just
to
sum
up
its
kind
of
main
components.
R
So,
essentially,
you
know
we're
we're
seeking
common
council's
ability
to
you
know
kind
of
transfer
the
land
to
the
ira
that
the
city
owns,
because
there
are
parcels
that
the
ira
already
owns.
We
would
then
seek
with
sort
of
essentially
that
transfer
of
land
as
being
your
kind
of
initial
support
of
the
concept
to
then
enter
into
a
development
and
disposition
agreement
and
bring
back
to
council.
R
So
it's
kind
of
a
two-step
process
on
your
part,
but
I
think
it's
important
that
any
kind
of
key
issues
for
discussion
really
get
resolved
at
this
level,
because
that
was
the
point
is
to
kind
of
do
this
lightweight
process.
We
don't
want
to
go
through
several
months
of
negotiating
a
development
disposition,
agreement
with
the
developer,
only
to
find
out
that
there
are
larger
issues
to
be
addressed
later.
So
I
think
this
is
a
good
opportunity
to
raise
those.
T
A
T
Okay,
okay,
my
name
is
it's
stopped
working.
K
T
P
T
T
I
might
just
go
with
that:
if
it
doesn't
stay,
this
is
the
stays
building.
Is
a
home
tell
also
a
five-story
building
roughly
70
units?
These
are
long-term
kind
of
a
combination
between
an
apartment
and
a
hotel,
and
this
is
also
the
site
where
there
is
some
environmental
cleanup.
That
needs
to
be
done
and
should
I
just
bag.
This
then
traveling
north
is
a
coast
guard
auxiliary
building
which
we
would
intend
to
maintain
and
provide
the
possibility
of
some
private
commercial
activity.
T
So,
okay,
and
so
then
also
the
docs,
would.
T
P
T
K
T
T
T
Describe
it
so
so
the
next
building
is
the
coast
guard
auxiliary,
building
it's
owned
by
the
state
we
would
propose
acquiring
it
and
that
I
continue
to
allow
the
coast
guard
auxiliary
to
be
able
to
operate
its
its
classes
and
safety
and
water
safety
classes,
and
the
design,
as
you
can
see,
together
with
the
continues
of
those
docks,
allows
greater
waterfront
access
with,
and
visual
access
for
the
slots
between
the
buildings
and
then
the
the
docks
that
are
currently
used
by
the
coast.
T
Guard
auxiliary
would
be
maintained,
but
as
truly
public
right
now
they
are
locked
and
closed
and
controlled
by
the
coast
guard
auxiliary.
We
would
propose
to
make
them
actually
open
to
the
public
and
because
they
are
low
and
as
they
come
down
from
the
walkway,
they
are
much
more
accessible
than
the
wall
is
for
kayaks
canoes,
and
you
know
person-powered
boats,
smaller
boats
and
also
by
opening
those
up.
You
create
a
natural
corridor
of
basically
access
and
connection
to
the
northern
end.
T
Where
off
of
the
point,
we
would
add
also
a
dock
which
will
also
allow
for
more
boating
access,
both
people,
powered
and
otherwise,
and
by
making
that
circular
pattern
more
accessible,
we
could
bring
it
around
the
eastern
side
of
the
restaurant
and
on
the
eastern
side
of
the
restaurant
we
would
bring
the
back
south.
I
don't
have
a
pointer
it's
hard
to
describe,
but
right
at
the
northern
part
of
the
finger
lakes
boating
center
long
boat
house,
we
would
open
that
up.
S
T
T
No,
no,
there
would
be
an
open
and
public
dock
and
then
the
vertical
components
of
the
boathouse
would
be
opened
up
again,
and
this
and
the
shed
area
at
the
northern
end
would
also
be
removed.
So
that
again
you
are
getting
people
closer
to
the
water
and
increasing
the
the
visual
and
actual
access
we
would
then
travel.
People
would
then
be
able
to
travel
westerly
on
that
blue
section
and
then
southerly
back
to
the
waterfront
trail
and
also
access
through
to
the
flood
control
canal.
T
T
So
the
next
slide-
if
we
can-
I
don't
know
if
we
can
get
to
it.
I
can
show
that
to
you,
but
part
of
our
proposal
is
that
at
the
north
end
right
now,
it's
got
the
hard
aluminum
siding
that
comes
down
and
then
there's
a
shed
over
shed
area
where
boats
park
under
it,
and
then
the
parking
is
kind
of
parallel
in
front
of
it
that
shed
area
gets
removed.
The
vertical
component
gets
removed,
the
sidewalk
gets
brought
closer
to
the
water,
and
then
you
have
the
water
right
there.
T
You
can
see
right
through
so
it
opens
it
up.
It
opens
up
the
visual
access
and
then
the
other
component
of
the
project
is
that
the
boating
center
is
a
critical
access
for
for
boating
in
this
area
and
therefore
the
hall
and
launch
facility,
which
is
at
the
south
end
of
the
boat
house
would
be
maintained
and
also
the
the
ability
to
operate
in
conjunction
of
fingerless
voting
center,
in
conjunction
with
the
other.
The
rest
of
the
development
would
be
allowed
in
some
configuration.
P
T
T
Available
to
the
to
the
other
businesses,
you
know
whether
or
not
it's
the
island,
health,
the
dock
and
other
facilities
that
use
the
more
southern
end
of
the
parking
and
then
at
the
northern
end,
there's
also
parking
closer
to
the
restaurant.
T
The
other
demand,
other
you
know,
demand
uses
and
from
a
planning
point.
The
kind
of
the
corridor
or
the
the
straight
line
of
the
buildings
also
opens
up
areas
along
the
water
on
the
flood
control
side
for
more
public
access.
Whether
or
not
it's
you
know
multitude
of
uses
there.
So
we've
also
put
this
in
context
of
another
project:
the
agora
project,
with
the
the
the
bridge
that's
shown
down
across
the
inuit,
and
that
really
is
aspirational,
but
we
believe
that
the
inlet
island
development
should
be
in
context
of
a
larger.
S
R
T
It
reflects
a
balance
and
we
believe
it's
a
good
balance
of
the
competing
needs
that
you
know
and
demands
that
are
made
on
this
small
parcel.
It
is
consistent
with-
probably
I
don't
know,
20
plus
years
of
of
planning
and
the
zoning
and
the
comprehensive
plan
and
the
waterfront
plan.
K
Q
The
slide
that's
up
on
the
screen
is
also
in
your
packet
on
page
45.
It
doesn't
have
the
arrows
on
it,
but
if
you
want
to,
if
you
happen
to
have
a
computer,
you
can
also
look
at
a
similar
schematic
of
the
proposal
with
some
more
additional
detail.
Actually
added
that
links
up
the
numbers
and
the
letters
on
that
plan.
Q
K
T
T
There
we
go
so
that
shows,
if
you're
looking
at
the
boating
center
to
the
left
right
now,
that's
a
solid
wall.
The
idea
would
be
open
it
up.
I
did
not
mention
in
this
project.
The
unique
feature
of
this
project
is
that
it
provides
the
capital
to
basically
adaptively
reuse,
the
roof
of
the
finger
lakes
boating
center
and
do
these
improvements
into
a
solar
micro
grid.
I'm
familiar
with
doing
this.
Having
done
this
with
the
323
project,
it
makes
it
a
net
zero,
a
net
zero
building.
A
A
Thank
you
for
the
presentation
and
we
do
have.
We
have
the
lead
agency
resolution,
the
environmental
significance
and
the
resolution
itself.
So
maybe
maybe
we
should
go
ahead
and
move
the
lead
agency
and
the
environmental
review
laura.
You
want
to
move
that
lead
agency.
Is
there
a
second
on
the
lead
agency
moved
by
donna?
A
So
this
is
just
common
council
declaring
itself
lead
agency
to
conduct
the
environmental
review,
all
those
in
favor
and
that
carries
unanimously
and
then
the
the
resolution
on
the
environmental
review
and
that's
an
amended
resolution.
I
believe
that
was
sent
around
you
had
a
concern
about
it.
Laura
I'm
sorry,
I
don't
have
it
in
front
of
me,
but
it
was
amended
to
just
reflect
that
it
would
be
it's
segmented.
A
So
the
the
key.
The
key
point
is
the
first
resolve
that
the
city
of
ithaca,
common
council's
lead
agency
in
this
matter
hereby
determines
that
circumstances
warrant
a
segment
of
review
of
the
contingent
property
transfer
from
the
other
stages
of
the
proposed
urban
renewal
project
and
that
subsequent
environmental
review
during
the
site
plan
review
process
will
be
no
less
protective
of
the
environment.
Q
So
this
is
the
action
that's
proposed.
Is
the
conveyance
of
city-owned
lands
to
the
ira
for
the
purpose
of
a
structuring
and
urban
renewable
project
that
we
would
bring
back
to
the
common
council
for
approval.
So
the
action
of
the
council
is
a
way
to
authorize
the
agency
to
move
forward
to
advance
it
to
the
next
step,
but
you
always
have
veto
power.
Essentially
still
so
the
option
is
contingent
upon
common
council
approval.
Q
A
So
it's
removed
all
those
in
favor
and
that
carries
unanimously,
and
so
then
we
have
the
resolution
itself
and
is
there
a
motion
on
that
or
do
we
want
to
discuss
it
first?
A
L
It's
page
eight.
L
A
Easier
than
I
thought
it
would
be
yes,
so
yeah,
so
we
have
the
so.
A
Be
it
further
resolve
that
the
mayor,
subject
to
review
by
the
city
attorney,
is
authorized
to
implement
this
resolution.
So
that's
the
resolution.
So
essentially,
if
we
vote
on
this
we're
if
council
votes
on
this
will
be
going
with
finger
lakes,
development
llc
is
the
preferred
developer.
Is
that
correct.
Q
L
A
I
mean
maybe
before
moving
it
might
make
sense
just
to
kind
of
go
around
the
room
and
hear
what
people's
initial
reactions
to
this.
Maybe
that's
the
best
thing
I
can
start.
I
guess
so
some
of
the
things
I
like
about
this,
I
really
I
like
that
inhs
is
involved.
I
like
the
affordable
housing
piece.
I
you
know.
I
think
we
want
to
make
sure
that
as
we're
developing
the
waterfront
that
it's
equitable
from
a
housing
standpoint,
you
know
I
like
the
the
pedestrian
access,
that's
included.
A
You
know
I
I
like
the
the
support
for
existing
local
businesses.
I
think
that's
also
really
important.
Some
of
the
issues
I
have
with
it
I
mean
parking
is
always
a
concern
that
we're
always
going
to
have.
I
think
the
amount
of
surface
parking
on
the
waterfront
is.
Is
you
know
I
think,
to
to
try
to
mitigate
that
as
much
as
possible?
I
also
have
a
concern.
P
E
K
A
A
vision
of
what
the
waterfront
could
be,
you
know
it's.
We
have
these
canals
that
come
through
and
people
could
you
know
on
their
kayak
pull-off
and
like
go
to
a
bar
restaurant
or
go
to
some.
You
know
nice
cafe
or
something,
but
I
think
in
order
to
make
that
happen,
you
need
to
have
attractions
for
people.
A
There's
not
going
to
be
a
lot
of
reasons
for
people
to
visit
the
place
and
the
big
one
I
think
of
is
I
don't
know
if
people
have
been
behind
like
huge
green
over
by
the
creek,
the
creek
walk
area
with
six
mile
creek,
it's
kind
of
behind
the
lofts
that
were
built
a
few
years
ago.
If
you
go
back
there,
I
mean
a
lot
of
money
was
poured
into
that
area
to
make
it
look
very
nice
and
be
attractive.
You
know-
and
I
think
probably
when
people
were
conceiving
it,
they
would
think.
A
Oh
people
are
going
to
go
back
here
because
it's
a
nice
space,
there's
green
space,
it's
kind
of
a
park
like
area.
If
you
go
back
there,
nobody
go
really
goes
back
there
I
mean
occasionally
I
walk
through,
but
I'm
always
traveling
somewhere
else.
It's
not
a
great
like
hangout
spot,
and
the
reason
is
that
there
isn't
anything
on
the
ground
floor.
A
It's
all
residential
and
there's
nothing
to
draw
people
back
there,
and
I
I
do
have
a
concern
about
this
proposal
that
a
lot
especially
a
lot
of
the
green
space
and
kind
of
the
park
like
areas
that
have
been
proposed,
which
looks
really
good
on
paper.
If
there's
not
something
to
draw
people,
there
nobody's
going
to
go
there
right.
So
I
think
those
are
that's.
Probably
a
summary
of
just
kind
of
my
overall
concerns.
O
O
I
can
imagine
people
living
at
the
anchors
who
would
be
working
at
the
hospital
in
the
schools
at
the
boating
center
at
boatyard
grill,
easy
access
to
downtown
it
just
seems
a
perfect
spot,
and
we
know
that
inh
inhs
has
a
very
good
record
of
managing
affordable
workforce
housing.
So
that
really
appeals
to
me.
I
do
have
a
similar
concern
about
the
level
of
parking
and
I
wonder
if,
in
the
home
tell
model,
if
you
would
be
looking
at
some
ground
floor,
active
use,
because
I
had
I
had
that
concern
too.
O
I
do
see
this
site
as
being
different
from
that
which
you
described
because
of
the
boating
center,
the
restaurants.
There
are
other
things
that
draw
people
to
this
area
that
wouldn't
apply
in
the
other
area
that
you
mentioned,
but
steve.
Perhaps
you
could
comment
on
your
vision
of
the
home.
Tell
and
any
possible
ground
floor
use.
T
We
would,
we
would
certainly
be
open
to
it
and
what
we
well.
We
had
not
envisioned
a
separate
one
at
this
point.
It's
certainly
something
we
would
consider
as
space
allows.
We
we
do
envision
right
next
door.
The
coast
guard
auxiliary,
could
have
some
commercial
use
and
also
with
the
open
spaces,
mindful
the
fact
that
the
dec
that
easement
the
25-foot
easement
there
can
be
no
obstructions
in
that
easement,
and
so
we've
allowed
space
for
the
setup
of
things
as
to
whether
or
not
I
mean
it's
fairly
seasonal
in
the
cold
in
the
winter.
T
There's
not
a
lot
of
people
anywhere
down
there,
but
some
you
know
seasonal,
whether
or
not
it's
it's
food
trucks
or
you
know
you
know,
there's
space
to
be,
I
think,
of
I've.
Thought
of
you
know
the
book
vendors
in
paris
and
that
sort
of
thing
you
know
if
we
could
engender
that
and
don't
forget,
you
also
do
have
the
activity
of
the
flood
control
channel.
T
You've
got
the
boats,
there,
you've
got
crew
races,
and
so
you
do
have
a
draw
of
people
being
able
to
watch
those,
and
you
know
the
canoes
and
the
kayak
access
through
the
through
the
dock,
but
sure
I
mean
they're
glad
to
have
some
commercial
space.
It
is,
it
is
and-
and
you
know,
we've
got
the
you
know
inside
the
finger
lakes
boating
center.
On
the
other
side,
we've
got
the
boat
shop,
we
have
we
sell
bait,
we
have
a
fish,
you
know
we're
doing
fishing,
we
rent
kayaks.
T
So
there
are
people
and
are
creating
places
to
go
down
there.
In
addition
to
I
don't
know,
kayaks
we
rent
pontoons,
pontoon
boats
and
other
boats,
and
then
you
have
the
boulevard
grill.
So
we
have
that
activity,
but
in
the
building
itself,
I
think
that's
you
know
certainly
could
be
possible.
L
Yeah,
thank
you
for
mentioning
that.
I
think
that
I
would
like
to
see
that
flushed
out
a
bit
more,
not
you
know,
opportunities
for
for
job
creation
and
job
development
is
is
important
and
seeing
this
as
a
recreational
space,
I
recognize
a
lot
of
the
the
focus
seems
to
root
to
support
the
existing
buildings
there
so
making
sure
that
there
would
be
opportunities
for
new
job
opportunities,
new
business
opportunities
and
recreational
opportunities,
whether
they
be
dining
or
retail,
and
how
would
that
be
incorporated
into
the
model
that's
presented.
L
The
I'm
noticing
that
the
proposal
seems
to
visualize
and
as
you've
just
mentioned,
use
of
the
coast
guard
auxiliary
site,
which
is
not
listed
as
one
of
the
parcels
included
here.
Nor
is
that
parcel
that
is
associated
with
the
parking
adjacent
to
the
boatyard
grill
is
not
listed,
so
I'm
not
sure
where
we
are
with
that
and
how
that's
being
included
in
this
discussion.
If
it's
not
part
of
this
transaction.
Q
Important
nelson
just
just
kevin,
if
you
don't
know
how
to
feel
those
things.
The
the
cleanup
approach
is
that
the
developer
would
take
the
responsibility
for
the
cleanup,
but
the
costs
would
be
deducted
from
the
fair
market
value
of
the
lands
they
purchase.
So
they
would
have
the
responsibility
to
do
the
cleanup,
but
it
would
basically
come
out
of
the
purchase
price.
We've
got
about
a
half
acre
of
land
that
is
pretty
significantly
contaminated
from
former
bulk
fuel
storage
on
the
site
is
similar
to
what
was
done
for
the
boatyard
grill
project.
Q
I
think
that
was
about
a
350
thousand
to
400
thousand
dollar
cleanup
around
circa
2000,
so
we're
probably
closer
to
seven
hundred
thousand
dollars
as
a
starting
point.
Maybe
for
the
cleanup
look
going
forward
and
that's
on
city-owned
land,
so
that's
a
site
that
would
need
to
be
remediated
to
move
the
project
forward
as
it
relates
to
the
parcels
you
mentioned
cynthia.
I
think
the
intent
is
to
have.
The
resolution
include
the
city-owned
parcels
that
are
in
that
island.
The
coast
guard
auxiliary
property
is
not
owned
by
the
city.
Q
It
may
be
acquired
by
the
city
that
we've
had
years
of
negotiation
to
acquire
that
parcel,
and
it
would
be
proposed
that
the
city
would
acquire
that
and
sell
it
at
the
same
price
to
the
developer.
So
it
would
be
a
pass-through
to
facilitate
the
project.
But
I
believe
that
the
resolution
does
list
that
parcel
as
one
of
the
proposed
projects
to
be
conveyed.
A
Other
thoughts,
donna.
M
What
I
like
about
this
proposal
is
that
it
it
does
build
itself
will
not
build
itself.
It
does
accommodate
the
coast
guard
facility,
as
is,
and
leaves
that
as
an
active
coast
guard
facility
also,
the
boating
center
is
supported,
as
well
as
the
space
needed.
For
that
I,
like
the
affordable
housing.
I
very
much
like
the
idea
of
the
home
tell,
I
think,
that's
a
huge
need
for
that.
I'm
curious
about
how
it
would
be
regulated,
since
it's
neither
a
hotel
nor
an
apartment,
but
that's
a
trivial
point.
M
I
had
asked
in
one
of
the
the
zoom
meetings:
what
benefit
aside
from
increasing
the
tax
base?
What
benefit
this
these
projects
would
be
to
to
residents
of
the
city?
What
and
seth
put
it
better?
He
said
what
would
be
the
draw
for
if
you
don't
live
there,
what
would
be
the
draw
of
going
there
using
this
space
and
he
articulated
the
question?
Well,
so
I
think,
if
there's
some
potential
for
incorporating.
M
Useful
retail
space
or
another
restaurant,
or
something
that
would
draw
local
people,
not
necessarily
tourists
to
the
space
I
that
would
be
of
benefit
to
city
residents.
I
think
that
would
be
great,
but
I
already
think
it
has
a
lot.
The
proposal
already
has
some
attractive
features.
O
O
These
soils
are
challenging
as
they
are
in
a
number
of
areas
in
the
city
that
are
currently
being
developed,
and
I
wonder
if
you
could
comment
on
the
possibility
of
reducing
somewhat
the
size.
I
mean
right
now.
O
T
Right
so
it's
hard
to
quantify
that
possibility.
You
know
kind
of
in
the
abstract.
It
certainly
exists.
It's
a
matter
of
achieving
a
balance
between
financial
feasibility
and
size,
so
in
other
words,
the
size
is
generated
by
the
demands
that
are
placed
upon
the
building.
If
we're
going
to
pay
for
the
cleanup
pay
for
the
property,
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
then
that
and
also
the
foundations,
then
there
has
to
be
a
give
and
a
take,
and
this
balance
I
mean
this
is
a
balance.
T
T
The
municipal
improvements,
the
you
know,
things
like
that.
So
I'd
be
happy.
I
need
to
in
order
to
be
able
to
answer
that
question.
We
need
to
be
in
the
position
to
be
able
to
to
negotiate
and,
as
as
nella
said,
we're
going
to
come
back
to
the
planning
board
in
order
to
to
approve
that-
and
my
guess
is
we
talked
about
it
briefly,
there
may
be
some
interim,
you
know,
meetings
with
the
planning
board.
U
T
Council
say,
say,
nay
and,
and
then
joe
is
here,
if
you
know
they
also
have
demands
on
you
know
financial
demands,
I
think,
on
the
size
and
the
minimum
size
that
they
could
go
to
or
reduce
size.
U
Oh
yeah,
I
mean
our
our
constraints
are
similar
to
any
developer
in
terms
of
what
does
it
cost
to
purchase
the
property?
What
does
it
cost
to
build?
The
building
we've
definitely
done
projects
that
are
smaller
in
size.
You
know
stone.
Quarry
was
35
units
cedar,
creek
was
39
units.
You
know,
breckenridge
is
50.
we're
sort
of
modeling
this
on
breckenridge
because
of
the
size
of
the
site
and
50
units
feels
like
it's
not
too
large.
Our
you
know
our
opinion
of
how
to
develop.
Affordable
housing
is
to
sort
of
spread
it
around.
The.
U
Sort
of
smaller
what
we
consider
smaller
buildings-
and
I
think
you
know
30
to
50
units-
is
what
we
would
consider
small
to
mid
size,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
we
would
take
all
of
this
into
consideration
in
determining.
Can
we
do
35
units?
What
does
it
cost
to
build,
and
and
can
we
get
the
financing
put
together
for
it?
D
I'm
I'm
less
concerned,
I'm
less
concerned
with
the
the
size
as
much
and
for
me
I
mean
especially
looking
at
the
pictures
on
that
site.
These
seem
like
really
reasonably
sized
buildings,
especially
because
we're
going
to
be
getting
so
much
housing
there
and
we
all
know
that's
a
persistent
crisis
in
the
community.
So
I'm
I'm
not
as
concerned
with
it
again,
because
it's
not
the
massing,
just
really
isn't
isn't
that
dramatic
and
if
we
can
create
more
affordable
housing.
That's
in
such
a
nice
location
I
feel
like
we
should.
We
should
do
that.
D
We
should
give
these
people.
We
should
give
people
in
our
community
a
nice
affordable
place
to
live
right
here
on
the
water
with
so
many
nice
amenities
around
us.
A
N
So
2008
was
the
first
common
council
meeting
I
ever
went
to
and
it
was
about
the
project
in
2008
and
the
vote
was
really
close
and
it
was
that
it
was
actually
a
weird
night
and
and
that
project
which
was
a
hotel,
was
defeated,
and
so
everybody
who
says
geez
I
wish
mcgonagall
wasn't
here.
It's
your
fault.
N
N
N
Johnson
boatyard
is
no
longer
there.
The
neat
we
need
waterfront
uses
on
our
waterfront.
I
think
that's
very
important.
N
I
also
like
the
fact
that
I
nhs
is
involved
and
that
there
would
be
affordable
housing
here,
unlike
steve
I
and,
and
my
friend
seth.
I
think
it's
too
big,
but
I'm
glad
inhs
is
involved.
I
have
confidence
that
their
skill
in
finding
different
funding
sources.
N
Now
I
don't
know
how
you
have
a
second
restaurant
to
compete
with
your
existing
restaurant,
but
I
think
inland
island
needs
at
least
another
restaurant,
a
bar
restaurant,
and
I
like
the
idea
of
actually
people
being
able
to
sit.
N
N
Potentially
the
first
stop
after
you've
been
at
cass
park,
and
that's
why
this
this
site
or
somewhere
on
gigantic
boulevard,
is
in
desperate
need
of
an
ice
cream.
Stand
I'm
serious
because
that
that
was
a
charming
aspect
of
the
scoop
kids
coming
back
from
playing
whatever
sport,
they're
playing
and
stop
and
have
an
ice
cream,
and
if
there's
another,
perhaps
more
modestly
priced
restaurant
people
can
stop
off
for
tofu
burger
or
whatever
they
want
to
eat.
N
A
L
Yeah,
I
guess
I'm.
I
am
also
looking
for
other
options,
the
the
proposal
that
I
I
appreciate
it
for
all
the
reasons
that
have
been
mentioned,
but
it
it
lacks,
there's
so
many
benefits
of
in
that
island.
L
L
If
we
proceed
with
this
as
it's
being
proposed,
it
doesn't
take
advantage
of
the
view
sheds
the
units
don't
even
face
the
the
the
lake
they
face,
the
cliff
and
the
and
the
bridge
and
the
traffic.
You
know
I
it
it's.
I
think
that
there's
there's
it
could
just
go
a
little
bit
farther
to
satisfy
and
and
exemplify
all
the
wonderful
things
that
we
have
here
in
ithaca
and
how
to
bring
this
forward
to
the
people
who
live
here
and
those
who
are
visiting.
L
I
would
be
interested
in
either
of
those
two,
and
you
know
I
will
also
say
that
there's
a
tremendous
amount
of
development
and
traffic
fatigue
that
residents
feel
and
to
go
through
this
process
and
bring
forward
this
this
city
directed
project,
and
I
think
there
needs
to
be
significant
value
that
we
are
presenting
to
our
community
to
say
that
this
is
worth
it.
It's
almost
there.
It's
not
there
yet.
A
N
At
least
the
one
on
the
south
end
for
do
two
different
clienteles:
a
daytime
clientele
and
an
evening
clientele.
N
So
you
get
twice
as
much
use
out
of
this
parking
area
as
you
would,
if
everybody
parked
there
all
day,
but
just
hearkening
back
to
our
conversation
about
traffic
on
the
west
end
to
me,
that's
another
cautionary
note
about
not
making
our
developments
too
large,
because
not
only
does
this
all
end
up
at
the
corner
of
buffalo
and
toganic,
but
it
also
has
to
get
out
onto
gigantic
boulevard
from
that
little
appendix
and
that
can
be
problematic
now.
So
that's
another
reason.
Another
argument
to
maybe
scale
it
back
a
little.
D
Yeah,
I
something
george
said:
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
it's
the
the
trends
of
the
last
50
years
have
gotten
us
where
we
are
on
traffic.
It's
a
lot
of
suburban
sprawl
and
it's
not
like
the
folks
who
are
are
clogging
the
streets
are
very
typically
not.
D
We
do
need
more
development
in
the
city
to
create
more
places
for
people
to
live
where
they
work
and
play,
and
that's
those
are
the
things
that
will
get
us
away
from
car,
centric
culture
and
away
from
clogging
our
streets
with
with
with
vehicles.
R
Chris
yeah
just
another
thing
that
the
ira
considered
because
we
knew
parking
and
traffic
were
gonna,
be
an
issue
is
the
more
the
the
more
there's
transient
uses
in
this
development,
the
more
you're
likely
to
increase
traffic
and
increase
demands
on
parking,
and
so
this
project
we
felt
like
kind
of
found
the
right
mix
of
having
less
demand,
but
not
no
demand.
R
The
business
probably
had
the
least
amount
of
demand
and
waterfront
outcome.
We
had
the
most,
and
so
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
creative
ideas
here
tonight
around
other
uses
and
that's
up
for
steve
to
sort
of
consider
about
how
he
incorporates
them.
But
keep
in
mind
that
the
more
the
use
is
transient.
The
more
you're
going
to
increase
traffic
and
parking
demands
on
inner
island.
A
Back
because
we
do
have
to
make
a
decision
soon
and
kind
of
move
forward
in
this,
but
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
you
know
what
we're
doing
tonight
is
not
really
choosing
a
project
because,
as
steve
was
saying,
this
is
going
to
go
through
a
lengthy
negotiation
and
there's.
I
imagine
this
is
going
to
change
quite
a
bit,
and
you
know
we've
heard
all
kinds
of
suggestions.
A
Tonight
I
mean
what
we're
really
doing
tonight
is
choosing
a
developer
and
a
team
to
partner
with
who
we
believe
can
eventually
get
us
to
the
point
where
we
have
the
project
that
we
want.
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
because,
ultimately,
that's
what
we're
voting
on
tonight,
it's
whether
to
go
with
finger
lakes,
development
as
a
developer
and.
K
A
Say-
and
this
is
really
to
the
the
team-
is
that
the
council
is
going
to
change
in
five
months
quite
a
bit,
because
you
have
four
members
who
are
leaving
and
there
are
new
folks
coming
in.
So
just
knowing
that
that
it's,
you
know
this
group
and
what
we
say
and
what
we
agree
to
might
not
be
what
somebody
a
year
from
now
agrees
to
just
throwing
that
out
there.
A
But
that
said,
you
know,
I
I
think
I'm
comfortable
moving
forward
with
this
resolution
tonight.
You
know
based
on
especially
based
on
you
know
the
the
experience
and
prior
projects
that
you've
done
in
the
city.
I
I
have
faith
that
we
can
negotiate
and
get
to
a
point
where
this
council,
at
least,
would
be
hopefully
be
satisfied
and
our
constituents
would
be
satisfied
so
I'll,
be
re.
I'd
be
willing
to
move
this
on
tonight.
A
With
that,
maybe
I
see
some
nodding
so
is
there
a
motion
on
it?
Is
that
a
motion
moved
by
steve?
Is
there
a
second
seconded
by
donna
any
further
discussion,
cynthia.
L
Just
for
clarification-
and
I
think
chris
said
that
this
he
said
the
transfer
shows
support
for
the
proposal
and
the
development
of
the
parcel.
I
wrote
it
down
because
I
thought
that
was
important,
that
this
gives
a
green
light
to
the
developer,
based
on
our
discussion
or
based
on
the
proposal
that
is
being
supported
here
to
proceed
with
the
investment
that
would
get
them
through
site
plan
review.
L
L
So
it's
not
a
matter
of
you
know
like
we're
going
to
be
working
with
the
developer
to
come
up
with
the
proposal.
We
all
agree
with.
I
think
we
need
to
decide
what,
if
we
agree
with
this
now
and
then
vote
to
move
it
forward.
That
was
the
understanding
that
I
got
in
the
conversations
with
chris
and
definitely
what
I
heard
today.
Q
Are
going
to
be
changes
as
it
goes
along
and
they've
heard
the
comments
and
try
to
incorporate
those
that
are
feasible,
but
not
all
of
them
are
going
to
be
feasible.
Some
of
them
are
going
to
work
out
and
some
aren't.
So
the
question
is:
does
this
have
the
framework
or
the
foundation
for
a
project
you
could
see
would
be
approvable
with
the
with
the
concepts
you
see
here,
probably
adjusted
by
trying
to
incorporate
the
issues
raised.
R
D
R
Is
not
a
project
right
now,
so
if
you
said
any
of
the
elements
that
are
in
here,
you
really
don't
want
to
see
or
there's
an
element.
You
really
want
to
see
and
you're
not
going
to
approve
it
one
way,
the
other
that's
useful
feedback,
but
to
nelson's
point
like
yeah,
they're
gonna,
be
some
of
those
things
may
or
may
not
be
able
to
be
integrated.
So
you
know
this
is
this
is
like
I
would
say
this
is
a
container.
P
O
A
I
have
one
last
question:
I
want
to
go
back
to
a
point
that
george
made
about
splitting
off
the
parcels
and
I
I
don't
know
how
feasible
that
is,
or
what
the
financials
that
are
involved
with
that.
But
is
there
an
option
to
do
that
as
part
of
the
negotiation
that
the
ira
is
going
to
be
doing
with
the
with
the
developer,
whereas
if
we,
if
we
vote
on
this
resolution
tonight,
is
that
these
parcels
are
getting
transferred.
Q
E
Q
I
mean
I'm
sure
steve
would
be
happy
to
say
well,
maybe
I'll
give
up
part
of
that
brown
field,
so
I
can
make
that
available.
It
really
does
hold
together
better
as
a
package.
It's
not
that
large
of
a
site
to
begin
with,
so
you
know
a
little
under
three
acres
total,
so
I
think
it
would
be
very
difficult
to
split
it
up.
This
is
different
from
the
green
street
garage
project,
in
that
the
common
council
identified
the
aspects
you
wanted
in
the
project,
the.
F
Q
Components
in
this
case
it's
open
to
the
developers
to
come
forward
with
the
framework
of
the
of
the
waterfront
plan
being
kind
of
a
driver
and
the
existing
uses
of
the
island
and
opportunities.
So
it's
a
little
different
process
here
and
and
that
you
know
we
weren't
able
to
get
a
clear.
I
think
we
would
ask
you
what
you
want
from
scratch.
Q
It
would
have
been
difficult
to
come
up
with
exactly
what
you
wanted,
because
you
you,
wouldn't
you
know
the
developers
brought
forward
things
they
thought
were
feasible
and
also
beneficial,
and
I
think
that
was
helpful.
But
I
think
this
is
a
different
process
and
it
leaves
that
that
final
definition
of
the
project
a
little
more
in
flux-
and
that's
I
mean-
and
because
we
did
this
kind
of
a
lighter
approach
as
schematic
we
got.
We
can't
bring
forward
and
tell
you
what
things
are
really
feasible
necessarily
until
we
go
into
deeper
dive
on
them
right.
L
So,
in
which
case,
because
I'm
always
loathed
to
try
to
do
things
on
the
floor
of
council,
I'd
like
to
suggest
something
that
I
mentioned
by
email,
could
we
approve
to
circulate
this?
Give
council
and
members
of
the
community
who
many
of
which
you
know
I,
because
this
was
with
the
iura
and
had
not
been
selected.
L
The
public
will
have
the
first
time
to
really
delve
into
this
one
project
and
and
provide
feedback
on
aspects
of
it
that
they
support
or
would
like
to
see
amended
in
a
different
way.
Could
we
approve
to
circulate
encourage
council
members
to
provide
feedback
community
to
provide
feedback?
Therefore,
we
could
incorporate
into
this
resolution
similar
to
the
green
street
garage.
What
exactly
it
is
that
we're
looking
for
and
then
move
that
on
to
council,
rather
than
leaving
just
basically
it
it
as
is
and
trying
to
do
this
on
the
floor
of
council.
P
F
My
only
cautionary
note
is
that,
since
this
isn't
the
final
design,
people
will
pick
it
apart
as
a
design,
and
it
won't
be
very
productive.
The
concept
I
think
is
worthy
of
circulation
and,
and
maybe
a
narrative
is
better
than
the
drawing
itself,
and
I
think
we
did
fall
into
this
trap.
What
10
years
ago,
when
a
concept
drawing
was
proposed-
and
everyone
just
went
nuts
because,
but
it
really
wasn't
reality,
it
was
just
a
concept.
So
that's
my
only
concern
with
that.
Oh.
P
L
If
there's
a
way,
then,
if
you
could
outline
how
we
would
have
that
feedback
when
it
would
be
appropriate,
does
it
go
to
the
planning
board?
Does
it
go
to
council,
you
know
so
that
we
could
clearly
understand
how
what
the
community
involvement
as
well
as
council
involvement
would
be
to
make
sure
that
we
could
come
up
with
a
design
that
would
actually
be
successful.
F
Yet
well,
it
certainly
would
be
distributed
widely,
including
common
council,
but
I
I
think
it
needs
a
green
light
to
go
forward
to
to
start
to
develop
those
plans
more
fully,
and
we
can
certainly
commit
to
working
with
council
as
plans.
Progress.
F
Well,
the
narrative
is,
is,
you
know,
pretty
thorough,
and
I
think
that
we
could.
I
don't
know
that
I
would
do
it
community-wide,
but
I
could.
I
think
we
certainly
could
do
it
to
a
select
group
of
people
counsel,
all
of
council
being
one,
but
they
already
got
this
a
mall
of
council
did.
I
have
to
think
about
it.
A
little
bit.
O
I'm
comfortable
moving
it
on
to
council.
I
will
note
that
at
at
least
one
and
your
recollection
may
be
better
than
mine,
but
at
least
one
of
the
iura
meetings.
There
were
a
number
of
common
council
members
who
heard
the
presentations,
so
I
am
comfortable
that
there
has
been
some
information
already
shared.
I
take
joanne's
point
that
this
is
conceptual
at
this
stage,
but
I'm
comfortable
moving
this
on
to
council.
A
All
right,
that
said,
so,
are
we
ready
to
vote
so
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
all
in
favor
of
moving
this
on
the
council
all
opposed
and
that
carries
401.
Thank
you
so
that
will
go
to
the
august
council
meeting.
K
A
V
A
And
carpenter,
business
carpenter,
product
materials-
do
you
maybe
want
to
just
summarize
this
and
explain.
V
There
are
two
easements
on
the
property
this
one.
This
is
the
this
is
401
east
state
street,
the
gate.
What
many
people
call
the
gateway
property?
That's
currently
in
development
being
proposed
for
that
property.
There
is
a
five
foot
wide
pedestrian
easement
going
down
the
edge
of
the
property.
It
doesn't
even
go
all
the
way
to
state
street
and
it
doesn't
go
all
the
way
to
the
bottom
and
then
there's
a
there's,
a
drainage
easement
on
the
property
and
then
there's
an
easement
along
the
trail.
V
As
you
know,
there's
a
there's
a
trail
publicly
accessible
trail
through
two-thirds
of
the
property,
so
the
drainage
easement
needs
to
be
relocated
because
it
needs
to
be
relocated,
and
this
is
the
new
alignment
for
that
and
the
proposal
is
to
extinguish
this
pedestrian
easement
because
it's
not
in
the
right
place,
and
it's
not
wide
enough
and
and
the
resolution
that
crin
prepared.
The
the
the
proposal
is
that
this
is
extinguished
and
because
the
applicant
is
proposing
pretty
significant
pedestrian
amenities
on
the
site
that
that
would
be.
V
They
don't
need
to
pay
for
the
easement
being
extinguished.
It's
there
because
the
city
is
getting
a
lot
back.
So
what
they're
getting
back
is
you
know?
The
gateway
trail
goes
about
two-thirds
of
the
way
down
the
property,
so
they
will
be
extending
it
to
the
end
of
the
property,
same
design
same
railing,
repairing
of
the
creek
wall
and
then,
in
addition
to
that,
they
will
be
extending
it's
not
on
this
drawing,
but
they
will
be
extending
a
trail
into
public
property
adjacent
to
the
end
of
this
property
into
sigma.
F
V
A
Thank
you.
Is
there
a
promotion
on
this
resolution
moved
by
donna
seconded
by
cynthia
any
discussion,
cynthia.
L
Thank
you.
Could
you
describe
on
the
map?
It
indicates
a
19
foot
by
19
foot
easement
for
pedestrian
bridge.
Could
you
clarify
what
that
is.
V
V
A
M
Access
from
state
street
into
the
property
over
onto
the
creek-
yes,
okay-
and
this
is
totally
irrelevant,
but
we've
been
talking
about
traffic
so
much
this
evening.
I
can't
believe:
there's
not
going
to
be
a
traffic
problem
with
this
development,
it's
already
horrible
trying
to
negotiate
a
vehicle
in
and
out
of
that
gateway,
former
ithaca
coffee
company,
little
plaza.
A
Next
is
the
proposed
dryden:
this
is
the
dryden
road
parking
garage
mural,
but
I'm
sorry
if
I
get
this
name
right,
it's
yurka
abuba,
it's
in
solidarity
with
the
asian
pacific,
islander
destiny,
american
community
and
there's
a
resolution
in
the
packet,
as
well
as
a
a
memo
from
megan
and
a
lovely
picture
of
the
mural,
which
looks
great
and
looks
like
this
is
going
to
be
a
great
spot
for
anyways.
Those
are
my
thoughts.
F
It
will
also
be
it's
proposed
to
be
in
a
pre-approved
location
by
the
board
of
public
works,
so
we
would
take
it
to
the
community
life
commission,
but
they're
not
currently
meeting,
and
they
this
these
students
would
love
to
get
started
on
this
so,
and
I
would
like
to
see
it
get
started
before
we
have
snow.
A
Does
somebody
want
to
move
that
moved
wow,
okay,
moved
by
steve
seconded
by
laura
any
just
further
discussion,
all
those
in
favor?
Oh
sorry,
did
you,
okay,.
L
L
L
I
don't
want
to
say
warranted,
but
but
because
of
their
their
dedication,
either
historically
nationwide
or
locally,
there
is
an
attribution
as
to
why
they
are
being
honored
in
this
way
and
and
having
their
their
image
on
city
property,
and
in
that
sense
I
am
hesitant
to
to
have
an
image
of
an
individual
that
is
not
tied
to
the
community.
L
L
In
addition
to
that,
I
recognizing,
as
part
of
the
description,
these
the
reference
to
the
kazakh
community,
the
kazakh
communities,
predominantly
muslim,
the
muslim
culture
and
religion
is
very
reticent
to
portray
human
figures
in
art
form.
L
F
I
see
your
point
and
I
know
that
we
in
the
past
have
been
very
concerned
about
memorializing
anyone,
because
we
could
have
this
everywhere
memorials,
but
and
and
as
far
as
the
portrayal
of
an
actual
image,
I'm
not
as
familiar
with
that
as
you,
but
I
will
say
that
we
do
have
lots
and
lots
of
murals
throughout
the
city,
that
of
images
that
don't
necessarily
reflect
anyone
that
we
know
I
mean
you
just
sent
me
the
black
alchemy
proposal
with
many
many
images.
F
A
Mean
I
also
just
point
out
that
you
know
from
the
project
description.
I
mean
this
is
a
really
personal
painting.
I
mean
it's
the
artist's:
it's
a
rendition
of
the
artist's
grandmother
and
best
friend's
grandfather
who
both
of
whom
died
from
covid,
and
so
I
think,
just
from
that
standpoint
I
mean
this
is
a
personal
expression
of
an
individual
artist.
M
Yeah,
I
thought
I
just
think
it's
very
sweet
that,
because
a
young
woman
is
a
cornell
student
and
she
somehow
learned
about
our
public
art
program
and
had
an
idea
to
honor
her
grandmother,
I'm
sure
she
misses
and
her
the
grandfather.
And
I
just
thought
it
was
a
very
sweet
story
and
it
can
only
make.
M
A
So
we're
ready
to
vote
all
in
favor
all
opposed
and
that
carries
4-1
next
step.
Is
the
ithaca
housing
authority
that
north
side
part
5a?
So
is
it
like
a
housing
authority,
yes,
team
here.
C
A
That's
okay:
there
might
be
some
questions
about
this
wondering
so
and
correct
me
if
I
get
anything
wrong
on
this,
but
just
to
kind
of
briefly
summarize,
this
is
conveying
the
the
north
side
apartments
overlooked,
terrace
in
south
view,
gardens
which
currently
is
public
housing,
federally
supported
public
housing
to
a
new
sort
of
development
corporation,
that's
more
in
line
with
what.
C
They've
said
anything
crazy,
then
it's
section,
58b
of
the
public
housing
law
requires
a
housing
authority
to
get
permission
from
the
legislative
body
to
transfer
a
property
over.
So
that's,
essentially
what
this
resolution
is
doing,
that
we
are
pretty
close
to
getting
the
project
finally
moving
forward,
so
we
are
asking
permission
for
the
housing
authority
to
be
able
to
convey
it
to
a
non-for-profit
entity
that
it's
cayuga
housing
development
corporation,
which
is
the
not-for-profit
partner
of
ithaca
housing
authority.
Oh
I'm
sorry
I
apologize.
C
M
C
This
is
the
housing
authority's
first
low
income,
housing
tax,
credit
project,
okay,.
C
That's
going
on
yeah,
this
is
yes,
this
is
that's
exactly
the
rad
in
section
18
section
18
will
be
for
north
side,
which
is
what
is
allowing
it
to
be
demolished
and
newly
constructed,
and
then
the
other
two
will
be
under
red.
F
The
south
side,
apartments
that
are
owned.
C
C
C
Well
that
that
just
wasn't
part
of
the
this
proposed
project,
it's
also
in
a
different
amp.
So
generally
we
would,
we
would
the
tightest
towers
would
probably
be
a
separate,
completely
separate
project,
but
that's
not,
but.
O
O
O
O
In
that
same,
whereas
which
I
now
understand
better,
it
indicates
that
the
residential
units
are
for.
Excuse
me
for
low
and
very
low
income
persons,
and
on
the
next
page
it
indicates
that
there
will
be
an
addition
of
12
units
to
the
total,
so
a
total
bringing
it
up
to
118
unit
housing
project
for
persons
of
low
income
at
the
property.
Do
you
anticipate
any
difference
in
the
population
being
served?
Will
it
still
be
serving
low
and
very
low
income
people?
Yes,.
C
Those
who
are
at
south
view
and
overlook
if
there
are
any
who
are
above
that
income,
they
have
a
right
to
return,
so
they
will
be
able
to
remain
so.
There
may
be
some
tenants
at
south
view
or
overlook,
who
are
above
that
area
median
income,
but
that's
because
they're
currently
residents
there
and
they
have
a
right
to
return
to
the
property,
regardless
of
their
current
income
level.
A
So
that
was
going
to
be.
My
next
question
was
to
just
and
I've
I've
exchanged
several
emails
with
brenda
westfall
about
this
already,
but
I
just
think
it'd
be
good
to
just
talk
about
it
publicly
like
what
is
the
plan
to
ensure
that
people
who
are
currently
living
there
can
continue
to
live
there
and
then
also?
What
is
the
plan?
The
relocation,
because
obviously
this
is
going
to
be
extremely
disruptive
to
people's
lives.
A
C
So
I
actually
started
relocation
meetings
today
I
attended
my
first
one
with
the
tenants,
so
personally,
I'm
meeting
face-to-face
with
every
household
and
we
work
with
them
to
help
them
with
the
relocation
during
this
process.
Tenants
who
reside
at
south
view
and
overlook,
regardless
of
their
income,
will
be
able
to
return.
If
that's
what
they
want,
so
it
will
be
temporary
relocation.
C
Any
tenants
who
are
above
60
area
median
income
will
not
be
income
qualified
to
return,
because
it's
under
section
18
versus
the
rad
program,
any
of
those
tenants
died,
I'm
still
working
with
them
to
help
them
permanently
relocate
to
new
housing.
C
I
think
there
were
six
households
last
time
I
checked
now
it
is
also
based
on
income
at
the
time.
You
know
the
time
the
property
opens,
so
northside
will
not
be
newly
constructed
for
another
two
two
years
or
so
there
are
some
tenants
that
are
just
barely
over.
Is
that
me?
P
C
So
there
is
a
possibility
that
some
may
come
below
that
some
have
already
come
below
who
were
there
before
who
were
above
the
level
before.
However,
there
was
covid,
so
we
take
that
into
you
know
into
account
it's
possible
that
their
income
decreased
between
previously
and
now
due
due
to
coping,
so
that
might
go
back
up,
but
there
are
about
six
households
currently
that
are
above
60
area
median
income.
C
H
C
C
But
the
housing
authority
values
the
tenants
who
are
there.
So
anybody
who
is
income
eligible
which
for
this
project
would
be
60
area
median
income
or
below,
will
be
given
a
priority
to
return.
If
they
choose,
they
just
have
to
apply
and
they
will
automatically
be
given
a
priority
to
return
to
the
property.
C
Yes,
but
they
will
be,
I
will
be
working
with
them
to
provide
to
to
help
them
find
appropriate
housing.
A
C
Housed
in
subsidized
housing
really
depends
on
their
preferences
and
their.
You
know
their
that's
why
I
meet
with
them.
So
I
me
I
meet
with
them
to
find
out
what
their
personal
preferences
are.
Neighborhoods
some
may
they
get
a
tenant
protection
protection
voucher.
Those
who
you
know
who
income
qualified
so
they
can.
Actually.
C
I
spoke
to
somebody
the
other
day.
That's
considering
relocating
back
to
their
original
home
in
new
york
city,
because
they
could
not
have
a
section
8
voucher
before
so
it's
possible
that
some
people
may.
P
C
To
move
to
an
area,
that's
actually
more
more
what
they
want
so,
but
it's
really
based
on
their
personal
preferences.
We
work
with
them
closely
to
find
a
it
may
be
another.
It
could
be
another
ina,
you
know
their
inh
inh
s
has
a
property
opening.
Soon
some
may
decide
that
they
want
to
go
there.
Others
could
want
a
private
landlord
situation.
Some
may
want
to
rent
a
house.
It.
H
A
I'm
sorry
one
last
question:
I'm
sorry,
do
you
have
a
sense?
Is
there
enough
availability
of
housing
within
because
this
is
I
mean
north
side
is
very
centrally
located?
It's
downtown,
it's
close
to
amenities,
close
to
jobs.
Schools.
Do
you
have
a
sense
that
there's
enough
available
housing
in
the
city
so
that
when
people
are
displaced,
are
they
going
to
be
able
to
find?
You
know?
I
assume
a
lot
of
people
are
in
section
8.
Are
they
going
to
be
able
to
find
landlords
who
take
section
8?
Are
they
that's?
C
That
that
is-
and
that
is
why
we
are
starting
it
so
early.
That's
why
I've
started
meeting
with
them.
We
cannot
actually
close
this
project
until
everybody
at
northside
has
been
relocated.
They
have
to
be
relocated,
safely,
relocated
first,
because
the
entire
property
is
being
demolished.
We
cannot
have
one
tenant
remaining
before
we,
we
even
close.
C
So
that's
something
that
we're
starting
now,
so
that
that
to
avoid
that
from
happening,
because
I
agree
with
you
it's
you
know,
I
mean
I
heard
other
affordable
housing
projects
being
discussed
here,
because
there
is
it's
difficult,
I'm
you
know
it
certainly
is
going
to
be
challenging,
but
we
we're
taking
the
time
ahead
of
time
to
help
people
individually
so
that
when
the
time
comes
to
start
this
we're
we're
prepared
to
do
that
and
everybody's
been
safely
relocated.
C
Currently,
we're
only
focusing
on
north
side
first,
because
that
property
will
start
first
and
we'll
actually
start
the
other
ones
later
and
the
others
are
much
smaller,
but
it
will
be
challenging,
but
we'll
we'll
work
through
it
with
them
and
we're
confident
that
we
will
find
enough.
The
first
family
I
met
with
today,
they're
actually
interested
in
living
outside
of
the
city,
because
they
have
a
family
member.
C
There
so
it
I
don't,
we
don't
know
until
we
meet
with
every
family,
but
we
we
will
work
closely
with
them
to
help
them.
You
know
relocate
to
a
place
that
they're
comfortable
with
and
that
they're
happy.
O
If
I
may,
thank
you
yeah.
Your
last
comment
reminded
me
of
something
I.
I
would
hope
that
we
would
not
see
a
displacement
and
a
relocation
of
residents
who
currently
live
in
the
city,
low,
very
low
income
residents
who
currently
live
in
the
city,
I'm
hoping
that
we
don't
see
a
displacement
of
them
to
out
outside
the
city.
O
And
it
may
be
in
the
document,
so
I
apologize
if
I'm
overlooking
it,
but
how
long
then
is
the
process,
the
demolition
and
the
rebuilding
and
you're
going
to
be
doing
it
in
phases
right.
C
So
total
32
months
will
be
for
all
three
properties.
We
believe
that
northside
will
take
about
that
full
32
months,
probably
maybe
approximately
four.
You
know
these
are
approximates,
but
approximately
four
to
six
months
for
demolition,
and
we
will.
The
current
plan
is
to
is
to
construct
about
50
of
north
side.
First
open
that
so
the
tenants
are
some
are
able
to
come
back
and
you
know
other
other
new
tenants.
C
If
you
know,
depending
on
how
many
decide
to
come
back
to
north
side
of
the
former
tenants
come
in,
and
then
we
will
finish.
The
second
half
overlook
will
be
second,
and
we
will
start
that
either
when
demolition
is
completed
at
north
side
or
about
when
it's
about
about
completed
and
then
we
believe
that
will
take
about
six
to
nine
months
to
there's
only
10
units
there.
So
that
should
be
pretty
quick
and
it's
a
it's
a
moderate
rehabilitation.
C
And
then,
when
overlook
is
completely
finished
and
the
tenants
have
returned,
we
will
start
at
southview
and
we
anticipate
south
view
taking
about
a
year.
So
actually,
even
though
north
side
is
starting
first
overlooking
south
view
are
anticipated
to
be
completed
before
all
of
north
side
is
completed,.
A
I
don't
think
we've
actually
moved
and
seconded
this.
So
if
there's
a
motion,
cynthia
move
a
synthesis
second
by
steve,
any
further
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
and
that
carries
unanimously.
Thanks
and
we'll
see
you.
A
A
So
I
think
I
believe
we
said
that
we
would
maybe
just
start
with
the
discussion
and
q
a
and
then
refer,
there's
a
there's,
an
online
presentation.
There
is.
W
Two,
I
think
at
this
point
the
ilpc
meeting
had
an
initial
presentation
in
april.
I
believe,
and
then
another
one
in
may
christine
o'malley
at
historic
ithaca
who
prepared
many
of
the
materials
that
I
inundated
you
with
this
month.
That's.
W
Prepared
so
yeah
I
can.
I
can
share
a
link
to
those
youtube
videos
after
the
meeting.
A
Okay,
so
with
that,
maybe
I
guess
maybe
we
could
start
with
this-
is
just
to
circulate
tonight,
so
we're
just
gonna
circulate
it
and
get
more
feedback
and
come
back
next
month,
but
maybe
we
could
just
hear
kind
of
initial
reactions.
A
I
had
the
opportunity
to
take
a
tour
of
the
district
with
with
brian
and
duckson,
and
you
know
I
was
impressed
with
brian's
knowledge
of
the
history
behind
each
of
the
properties.
As
you
can
see
in
the
agenda
package,
you
know-
and
it's
like
several
of
those
pro
I've
even
I
was
even
surprised
that
a
few
of
those
weren't
protected
just
because
I've
noticed
them
that
and
I've
assumed
that
they
must
have
been
that
you
know
they're
on
the
register
or
whatever.
But
so
you
know
in
general.
A
I
think
that
the
expansion
made
sense
to
me
based
on
what
I
learned
on
the
tour.
So
this
is
something
I
can
see
myself
supporting.
I'm
curious
to
hear
hear
from
others.
M
W
The
the
argument
there
is
the
the
concentration
of
the
number
you
know
there.
I
would
agree
with
you.
There
are
some
buildings
within
the
expansion
area
that
are
not
spectacular.
W
I
can,
I
can
think
of
two,
but
overall,
all
of
the
majority
of
the
19
properties,
I
would
say
all
of
them
to
some
extent,
have
or
meet
the
criteria
for
local
designation,
they're
associated
with
significant
people,
they're
incredible
examples
of
their
architectural
style,
they're
associated
with
prominent
local
architects.
Those
are
you
know,
a
few
of
the
criteria
that
we
use.
So
you
know
with
so
many
properties
that
have
are
in
one
geographic
area
that
meet
that
criteria.
W
It's
it's
well
and
that's,
and
that
is
has
been
a
lot
of
the
questions
that
I've
received
is
there's.
You
know
a
debate.
Is
this
east
hill,
or
is
this
part
of
downtown
and
dewitt?
So,
but
then
what
is
the
dividing
line
between
east
hill
and
our
neighborhoods
are
so
amorphous
they
change,
depending
on
who
you
talk
to
what
is
east
hill?
What
is
downtown,
what
is
bell
sherman?
What
is
you
know,
fall
creek,
so
you
know
it's
really
just.
A
Are
we
okay
with
circulating
this?
Is
there
a
motion
to
circulate
moved
by
steve
second,
by
laura
all
in
favor
of
circulating
and
coming
back
next
month.
A
Okay
minutes,
I
guess
we
have
minutes
from
december
we're
running
a
little
behind
everything
all
right.
What's
your
motion
on
the
minutes
moved
by
laura
seconded
by
steve,
all
in
favor
of
approving
the
minutes
that
carries
unanimously
motion
to
adjourn
moved
by
laura
second
by.