Is playing out.

Most notably, of course, we have projects that were not initially contemplated, including the project that's under construction on Comstock Street or Comstock Av.

And so I think that what we have done and what we're presenting and talking through today is really has been a team effort involving several different departments.

It's most notably engineering, it has been coordination with the law department and really taking a look at how to structure this and how to identify some of these things that we've noticed, feedback as well from DPW and the coordination around the thought process of monitoring enforcement, looking at the ability for what is the staffing that is necessary and also what's the impact on staff as we think about some of these things with this ordinance.

So I will talk through some of those things right now, and certainly Mary will be able to also add additional insight and look forward to your questions.

So, in terms of the purpose of what we have and what's been presented in the summary outline, this would be to account for, as I was just touching on a moment ago, the current deficiencies that we have identified within the fee schedule, most notably that has been around has been around the work zone traffic control and construction staging.

This is where it has been structured based on per square footage.

It has been, there's there's been areas where the interpretation of some of that area of what is construction staging, what is utilization looking like has been more challenging to be able to have a clear cut, easy to interpret and concise manner for both the applicant, but also making sure that on the back end from a city monitoring perspective, um that that is that is easy to interpret.

So that is one area that we are specifically focusing on with these proposed changes, uh including in that as part of the structure and as part of this discussion, it's really looking at breaking into two schedules depending on the type of project.

One for public utility work.

Um, and I I have extra copies, council here.

So and so the the thought process was, as I mentioned, the intent of this and where we had seen beginning to get our our applicants more comfortable with this was working around the public utility structure and the public utility schedule, and then creating a separate schedule for construction and development.

That is what is included as part of that outline, and I'll be able to talk through when I pulled up a copy of the table.

So we'll be able to go through that in in more detail.

The other thing is addressing challenges that we have seen and encountered as part of the monitoring.

Um, and one of the examples that we've talked about already with Comstock is then the utilization reports.

Uh, there has been daily reports that have been compiled and collected that we have then needed to be able to review, but also it is created a significant amount of staff time going in to be able to review those reports from the applicant's perspective, being able to compile that information and then verifying it as it in accordance with the current ordinance as is.

Um, the other thing that we'll talk about as well is aligning long-term closures.

So again, given the unique circumstance that we've had with the project that has generated the most discussion, how do we approach long-term closures going forward and what would be the role between the city but also with the council and looking at what is the right way to consider a future project when this comes before us in the future.

We also took a look at the violation schedule.

That was one piece of information too that we heard from counselors was looking at ways to look at the fees and penalties associated with these projects, and can we modernize those?

Can we update those in light of everything that we've learned over the last year and a half as well.

Um, and then finally, this is a piece that we also are incorporating or seeking to incorporate here, which would be using the consumer price index or CPI.

There are other fees uh that we currently utilize, including in engineering in the right of way, but other other fees as well, where every year we use that CPI structure uh that comes out of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and we're able to then determine if there's an increase, then we would immediately apply that so that we can keep our fees rising with inflation, you know, it's consistent with inflationary elements.

And so that is again in other aspects of city government, we do use that CPI or that indexing of fees.

We would be looking to incorporate that here as well.

So I just touched on the uh the two schedules that were being proposed.

One that is focused more on construction and development, the other that is focusing on public utility work.

Again, this is intended to address that work zone traffic control and construction staging.

The intent is that in the other areas where it is more straightforward in terms of what exactly the cost is for right-of-way fees, either refundable or or or non-refundable, we are looking to retain those elements of the right-of-way ordinance as is.

It is specifically that work zone traffic control and construction staging section that would be replaced by the two tables that we've presented, and that I will get into in just a moment.

One of the other things I just want to call out, and you'll see it in the table too, is that we had a lot of conversation about what is the level of disruption or impact in the right-of-way when you are in some of our more high density areas, including downtown Syracuse, including areas like some sections of University Hill.

So one of the things that's been built in here is that specifically where we have boundaries where it is a business improvement district or a BID, there is an additional boost in what the proposed rate is, which we'll get into in just a moment.

But this is really looking at a structure that would be based upon individual lane closures and then full road closures.

And that has the ability to create something that is a per daily rate.

It's a per daily rate that is assigned based on the length and duration of the project.

It's taking away for construction and development, that is, it is taking away the per square foot, the number of trailers, the pieces of this that you have to then continuously monitor and be able to look at from an enforcement standpoint, and simply creating a is the lane closed and or is a road closed, here is the per day expectation of what that's assigned, and then it's monitoring, making sure that that roadway is being impacted for that amount of time that the applicant says it is.

So the proposal would be depending on if this is a residential project, so there's a smaller fee for residential projects compared to let's just say a commercial building like a brick repointing project, where every 14 days uh there is a fee.

It's either 100 or 300, and that is being assessed specifically if you are simply just closing down the right-of-way area in front of your building.

It may result in a sidewalk closure.

There is still impact on the right-of-way, but it is something that is um we we feel one just being able to look at this from a management standpoint, but also what is the impact on small businesses or small firms if they are impacting the right-of-way, but not to the effect of a full road closure or not to the effect of a traffic lane closure or a parking lane closure.

So getting into the actual lane and street closure structure.

So one of the things, the the thought process behind this is that we were really wanting to develop a structure that became more expensive over time, depending on your length of duration.

And so, as part of that, you will see that there is a preliminary 90 day where there is a set fee, and then as the project goes on, if it exceeds 90 days, if it then exceeds 180 days, there is an increase where it steps up the way that that schedule is structured.

So just talking through an example here, if you have a project where you're closing down one lane of traffic and you have a project that you expect will be taking under 90 days, then what you can anticipate is that 200 per day is that rate that you'll be paying for the length of the duration of that lane closure.

If that project is in the downtown business improvement district, it's in a downtown bid, again, a more high density area where there's greater impact, that is a $325 day fee per the lane that or for a one-lane closure.

If there is two lanes or more, which wouldn't and include a um a road closure, that fee is 400 per day.

And then if you are in a high density area in a business improvement district, that fee would have a boost of $525 per day.

And so, again, the point behind that had being a consistent fee that is charged and levied on a daily basis depending on the number of days in your project.

So just the two B IDs for the boost.

Correct.

Yep.

So what about areas that are high impact to businesses that are not in BIDs?

Like are we are we shortchanging ourselves by not expanding that just using the two B IDs?

I think it it's a good question.

I think what we were trying to give thought to is where we there's a delineated boundary that we have the ability to point to of and the business improvement districts are just good examples, particularly downtown, given the fact that the BID boundary is consistent with what we largely view as downtown Syracuse.

And then the other business improvement district we have in Syracuse is the cross marshall business district as well, which income incorporates Marshall Street and then the immediate blocks surrounding uh that area.

But it doesn't incorporate anything on East Genesis Street.

Does not um and I think about like what if we were if someone was to ask us to close Solar Street from Destiny all the way up to Kirkpatrick.

That's not a BID either, but the impact on that would be pretty big.