As you are perhaps aware, we had received great interest from planning firms around the region and across the state to help facilitate the redrafting of our zoning ordinances. This has been in discussion for a year or more, as is evidenced by the press release issued after our joint meeting of the Planning Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals last summer.
“A joint meeting between the City of Amsterdam’s Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, August 28th and presided over by Mayor Ann Thane. The meeting was called to bring both bodies together to discuss the updating of the City’s zoning maps and legislation and the need to incorporate suggested changes articulated in Amsterdam’s 2003 Comprehensive Plan. “It has become increasingly evident that this work must be done now, given several recent projects that have been brought to the attention of these boards”, said Thane, referring to a proposed biodiesel plant, as well as storage facilities, in areas that are predominantly residential in the Fourth Ward.
Suggestions for change were numerous. The Mayor’s office will ensure that each board member is provided a binder containing contact information of board members & aldermen, relevant Municipal Law & local ordinances, zoning maps, training opportunities, meeting minutes, pertinent resolutions, sample applications, and most importantly, the comprehensive plan. Both boards recognized the need for clarification and simplification of the permitting process. It was agreed that classifications should be added to the schedule of usage, the section of code that explains what structures are appropriate for any given area. Guidelines must be established for the historic overlay districts and the downtown district expanded. The permitting fee structure must be also revisited to reflect a sliding scale for applications and penalties strengthened for work that has occurred without a permit. Planning Commissioner Pam Ritter recognized that “a push for compliance and enforcement is especially important.” It was noted by the group that an effort must be made to educate the public as to the permitting process and that information must be streamlined and easily available to interested parties.”
I am asking that you please contact the aldermen to strongly urge them to proceed with the award of the zoning rehab to HB Solutions. This group had been chosen after a much publicized RFP process – documented in area newspapers and posted to on-line professional associations, and sent to two residents that had expressed interest in this project. The seven responses were reviewed by my office, the City Engineer, URA, and representatives from each of the Planning and Zoning boards. A recommendation was put forward to the Council, was discussed and approved in committee, and allocated for in this year’s budget. A resolution was moved at a Council meeting when it was suddenly suggested that the County facilitate this process.
The County was then contacted and indicated that at the time of the RFP, they could not provide us the service we had requested given the time restraints. There is now talk that they may be able to start our project in a year, perhaps for less money, though the particulars have not been put into writing.
Let me be very clear here: I have great respect for the County.
We are looking at a process that once started may take as long as nine months to complete; I am distressed to think we are now pushing this out almost another two years. Additionally, I would suggest our reputation is once again at risk: we set a dead line, have people expend time and expense to jump through hoops, and then change the game plan.
I had anticipated the County Planning Department would be intimately involved as a partner in this process, but not as the lead in this holistic project. I would suggest that HB Solutions offers a highly qualified, experienced team of professional project managers, economic development planners, architects, and attorneys. Their expertise comes from years of work with municipalities like ours across the state. I feel we are best served in accessing the immediate and exceptional talents, resources and capabilities of the HB team.
My frustration is that we have been trying to move this process forward for so long. At last year’s joint meeting, it was widely recognized that these revisions were needed as soon as possible to address problems mentioned in the excerpt above and in regard to possible revitalization of areas in the City through economic development. My concerns now focus on redevelopment along the River, in our downtown, in residential neighborhoods and at the Esquire site. We have several exciting projects in the works that make this project so necessary.
A resolution has been put forward to move this project forward at Tuesday night’s Council meeting. I hope you will support my efforts to bring positive change to this community. We must not keep putting off what should have been done years ago. The community deserves better.
The contact for the aldermen is as follows:
First Ward:
Joseph Isabel 843-5185
P.O. Box 581, 26 Yale Street, Amsterdam, NY 12010
jmiwcss@verizon.net
Second Ward:
Daniel V. Roth 542-0723
7 Creekway, Amsterdam, NY 12010
droth518@hotmail.com
Third Ward:
Kim Brumley 843-4311
75 Evelyn Avenue, Amsterdam, NY 12010
kimbrumley@nycap.rr.com
Fourth Ward:
William Wills 843-4660
17 Catherine St., Amsterdam, NY 12010
wdwills@ymail.com
Fifth Ward:
Richard Leggiero 843-0808
101 Florida Ave., Amsterdam, NY 12010
rleggier@nycap.rr.com
I do not understand why you are recommending us to circumvent the public bidding process in this case. You mentioned there were seven qualified bidders. By law the contract should go to the the lowest bidder. Who were the other six bidders and was HB Solutions the lowest bidder?
There is no stated emergency in this case that would qualify circumventing the bidding process. Tarnishing the city’s reputation does not qualify as an emergency. You also state that the County is willing to provide the service in a year. According to NYS General Municipal Law/ Article 5A Public Contracts:
“* NB Effective June 1, 2008 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision one of this section, any officer, board or agency of a political subdivision or of any district therein authorized to make purchases of materials, equipment or supplies, or to contract for services, may make such purchases, or may contract for services, other than services subject to article eight or nine of the labor law, when available, through the county in which the political subdivision or district is located or through any county within the state subject to the rules established pursuant to subdivision two of section four hundred eight-a of the county law”
Could you please clarify the situation if we are expected to contact our aldermen urging them to vote a certain way?
Jerry,
We have not circumvented the process. We requested comprehensive proposals by a certain deadline. Seven well-qualified, professional entities replied as stipulated. The County was aware of our RFP then, and did not submit. HB Solutions was the lowest bidder. My concern is that we tarnish the City’s reputation when we set the parameters for proposals, requesting that specific information (scope of work, timelines, qualifications, cost, etc.) be submitted on a particular date, and then change course just as we are going to award the project… not sound business practice. It is not fair to the businesses that submitted proposals in good faith and on time.
I hope this clarifies your understanding of this situation.
Thanks for the clarification. When you stated HB Solutions was “selected” it led me to believe the bidding process was not used.
While it does appear as if this was approved by the Council, if it is a service that can be provided by the County we would be able to save money. Again this may be water under the bridge, but the Comprehensive Plan doesn’t recommend rezoning until Phase 4 of the plan.
What has not been initiated is the physical restructuring of the downtown streets allowing better access to downtown businesses. This is recommended in Phase 1 of the plan which has not been initiated since the plan was adopted by the Common Council 6 years ago. While we a picking a choosing pet projects from the plan, the community would be better served to stick to the strategic incremental steps described in the plan to achieve our goal.
We should be hiring a consultant for the Transportation Planning and Engineering work outlined in the plan as the first step in revitalizing our City through physical transformation of the downtown streets.
There is no sense reinventing the wheel or putting the cart before the horse. We have a well thought out vision for Amsterdam through the Comprehensive Plan, let’s stick to it.
Jerry,
Thank you for again calling attention to the Comprehensive Plan because we have steadfastly kept to its recommendations since I took office in January of 2008. We have been pushing forward with goals outlined in the plan, though we are constrained by limitations of both staff and funding. Implementation of the $76 million dollar plan is not based on the bias of administration, but on the availability of funding at State and Federal levels. As stated in the plan, it is also expected to take between 10 to 15 years to realize.
I am proud of the progress we are making toward realizing identified goals. Remember, when the plan was adopted, the City had a Community and Economic Development Department. The plan indicated that the role of the department be strengthened and expanded to pursue “projects identified in the plan in a coordinated and integrated manner.” The past administration chose to eliminate the department completely and little attention was given to this plan for four years. Currently, I do the best I can to make up for the void left in absence of this department, attempting to implement the department’s tasks: “identify and plan for grant funding, develop and administer home ownership/housing and neighborhood commercial reinvestment programs, (and) work to organize downtown initiatives”. Most importantly, I “coordinate the various economic development initiatives as the City’s “one-stop shop” for economic development assistance.”
Please note that the plan is “organized around seven goals and are not presented in any order of priority.” That said, we have developed our new branding strategy, website and printed materials to “market Amsterdam to the Capital District and beyond.” (goal one) This is especially important now, as opportunity for growth presents itself in the nano-technology, innnovative energy production and bio-medical fields. It is our chance to “rebuild Amsterdam’s economic foundation.” (goal two) Thus our attention to establishing “downtown as the community center.” (goal three)” The plan states “a high quality, urban environment is recognized as a critical ingredient for successful efforts to attract and retain businesses and skilled workers.” Our Downtown Development Committee has come up with several very exciting incentives to kick start this revitalization. We are hopeful that we will may celebrate significant success in this regard next summer, again recognizing this is a “long-term, evolutionary process.” This is coupled with planned improvements to Bridge Street connected by the pedestrian bridge and a possible relocation of the train station.
It is given in the plan that we must simultaneously tackle our deficiencies, hence goal four: “stabilize and strengthen Amsterdam neighborhoods“, identified as our “greatest asset.” As I have said repeatedly, most of Amsterdam’s neighborhoods are truly beautiful – meticulously maintained and affordable. I wish more people focused on our fortunes rather than what we are lacking, but perhaps that is human nature. Of course, we must address blighted areas with legislation, more incentives for rehabilitation, aggressive code enforcement and demolition. Yet again, we are challenged by a shortage of staffing and funding. We are attempting to better our efforts by partnering with the County to demolish dilapidated structures. We are reorganizing the code enforcement department and are introducing new software to schedule, track and respond to code complaints more effectively. The property maintenance crews fight a continuous war against growing vegetation, trash and graffiti. We have introduced new laws that deal with out-of-town landlords and nuisance situations, and are starting a neighborhood watch program. I hope you will attend our introductory meeting this week.
Goal five (redevelop old mill sites and improve connections to neighborhoods) speaks to the redevelopment of the Mohasco and Chalmers sites as “a catalyst for improvements to the surrounding areas.” Everyone knows where I stand on this topic; historic preservation = economic development.
Enhancing important gateways to the community (goal six) is perhaps one of our toughest challenges for the same reasons as stated above: staff and funding. Our plan is to target our code enforcement efforts along these corridors, to continue to look for the financial resources needed to rehabilitate these areas and to work with the Department of Transportation to rehabilitate traffic patterns in the City. The Urban Renewal debacle of the 1970’s directly ties to precipitous attrition of businesses and neighborhood demise along Rt. 5 all of the way from the eastern entrance to the City to the west.
You frequently cite that the traffic repatterning should begin at Grove Street. We have spoken to DOT about this approach, but they recommend that this must be a phased process and not necessarily as described in the plan. They are focusing their initial efforts on RT5 and RT30. I bow to their expertise, but think it may be beneficial to start a committee of residents like you that have a vested interest in this matter to oversee and ensure that the needs of the constituents are being addressed. Would you be interested in chairing this committee? This group could also address goal seven, “create a city greenway system“. Your knowledge of the comprehensive plan would be invaluable in facilitating the implementation of these goals.
Back to the topic on my blog, the very first task outlined in the implementation strategy of the plan suggested an immediate rewrite of the City Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals are identified as key players in this process as they are the “primary users of the City’s land use regulations” and “will ensure that new development projects are consistent with the City’s zoning once the zoning has been amended to reflect the comprehensive plan.” They have made their recommendations to the Council. I agree with them and can only hope that the Council takes immediate action on Tuesday night. You advocacy would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you again for your thoughtful investigation of matters that are of great importance to us all. A.
“You frequently cite that the traffic repatterning should begin at Grove Street. We have spoken to DOT about this approach, but they recommend that this must be a phased process and not necessarily as described in the plan. They are focusing their initial efforts on RT5 and RT30.”
This is not my opinion, this is factual taken directly from the plan Page IV-14.
It is time to hire a professional consultant for this project.
The short term goal that was to be established within 1 year was to secure funding for the street restructuring. The physical construction was to start within 3-5 years. This is all part of your 7 goals and the plan does call for a priority order. How can we reestablish the downtown businesses if we cannot physically get there?
I’m sorry but someone dropped the ball on this one and while it is easy to place blame on past administrations, you have done little regarding this vital step in Reestablishing Downtown as the Community Center.
NYSDOT is not running the show, while they will be a major partner in the endeavor, it is up to YOU and your administration to see this through. We should have already secured funding through NYS Quality Communities program for this project and begun construction.
The arterialization from the 60/70’s caused the death of downtown Amsterdam and until we undo that damage all the other projects are fruitless.
Page IV-13: “The public improvements (physical transformation) will set the stage for private investment downtown worth many million dollars more (than the estimated $17-26 million required for this project).
The ball is in your court.
Again, implementation is dependent on funding. We are actively working with DOT to facilitate the traffic repatterning, starting with two-way flow downtown. There isn’t difficulty getting there; the is trouble flow around the downtown areas. We will also be rehabilitating RT5W, as allocations were made at the State level. Consultants and construction come down to cold, hard cash.
The plan is not law, it is a plan. It must evolve as time and resources allow. I disagree with you that all other efforts are fruitless and I am pleased with the progress I, my small staff and numerous volunteers from the community are making. If you’d like to get involved as I had suggested, please contact my office.
While the Comprehensive Plan is not law, it is a State mandate that functions as a directive. Several municipal laws incorporate language to insure that City officials, Planning, Zoning and Urban Renewal do not deviate from the plan. The plan relies heavily on the physical restructuring of downtown as key to revitalization and to my knowledge has not been altered, amended or rescinded.
I don’t enjoy playing an adversarial role but find it to be an effective way of bringing attention to a particular issue. I would like to be part of the solution and am willing to help in any way you deem fitting.
Getting back to the original topic, yes the rezoning is listed in the Comprehensive Plan both in Phase 4 and as an immediate action. The funding has been allocated and the contractor established, I don’t see why there would be a problem awarding the bid. Anything that will help initiate the physical restructuring of downtown should be overwhelmingly approved!
Gosh, Jerry, you keep me on my toes. I appreciate the dialog as long as we are getting somewhere. The comprehensive plan is not a state mandate. It is a useful tool adopted by the Common Council during the Duchessi administration to direct our revitalization efforts and is often necessary as a first step in acquiring funding. Again, it is subject to evolution and should be revisited in the near future.
I appreciate that you will become involved. I think your energy would be a fine match for oversight of the traffic issues.
Lastly (shall we take a break and enjoy the rest of this Sunday afternoon?), I would be very grateful if you’d reach out to the aldermen as I had requested. They need to know the constituency is behind this effort.
Thanks again, A.