At the meeting, Speaker 1, a staff member, described "Caple Project" No. 2 as a design project for proposed improvements and stated it does not meet thresholds in the NYCRR sections the speaker cited.

That statement matters because whether a project is subject to New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) parts can change the review and approval requirements. Speaker 1 said the project does not exceed the thresholds in the cited sections (transcript references include "Seection 6 nYCRar part 6 7. 7" and "NYCRr part 7").

Speaker 1 said the Caple Project No. 2 is focused on design and proposed improvements and described it as not subject to the listed regulations. The transcript records: "Caple Project Caple Projectʒekt is for Design proposd emfrrodments and dosnat exed any of the presholds in Seection 6 nYCRar парт 6 7. 7." The speaker also said the designer would "come back to discuity" and that design changes are expected to be discussed in a future presentation. Later in the record, Speaker 1 referenced a "CD request No 325 млн."; the transcript does not define "CD" or what the amount precisely represents.

No motion, vote, or regulatory determination by a governing body appears in the transcript. The statement that the project is not subject to the cited NYCRR parts is dated to the speaker's explanation and is not recorded as a formal legal finding or an appealable decision.

Because the transcript is partially garbled in places, the exact NYCRR sections and the full meaning of "CD request No 325 млн." were not clarified in the record. The designer returning for further discussion was presented as a next step but no formal direction, deadline, or assignment was recorded.