Geneva council debate over Foundry site sale centers on Jackson Street development and neighborhood concerns

The Geneva City Council faced hours of public comment and in-chamber debate over the sale of the city-owned Foundry site on Jackson Street, after neighbors and preservation advocates urged the council to pause or reverse the sale to developer Home Leasing.

Neighbors told the council they fear soil contamination from past foundry operations, increased traffic and loss of neighborhood character if a 60'75-unit apartment proposal moves forward. They urged either a different location or more community engagement before the city finalizes the transaction.

The dispute matters because the council already voted to sell the parcel at a previous meeting; opponents said the sale was approved with insufficient neighborhood outreach and incomplete environmental details. Supporters and some council members said the project could bring needed, largely income-restricted housing and private investment to the city.

During public comment, residents described longstanding concerns at the site. Nancy Velez Anderson said the site had previously required removal of lead, chromium and mercury and warned that disturbing deeper soil layers could expose neighbors and gardens to contaminants. "Please review your decision on allowing the disturbance of the soil once again after it's been removed," she told the council. Mark Gramley and other speakers argued the project would concentrate poverty and called for alternatives such as a neighborhood park.

Megan Hooper of Home Leasing, the developer under contract, told the council the company has not finalized a design and plans a community meeting in May. Hooper said the firm will complete a site suitability analysis and environmental review required by New York State Homes and Community Renewal and that any additional remediation would be monitored and required before occupancy. "We would never build any kind of community on unsafe soil," Hooper said, adding that projects of this type typically include soil-mitigation measures and vapor controls.

Councilors split over whether the council should reopen approval of the sale. Councilor James Peeler, who had voted in favor of the sale, moved to reopen (a motion to reconsider); Councilor Petropoulos seconded. The motion to reconsider passed 5'4, with Councilors Whitfield, Morocco, Petropoulos, Grimaldi and Peeler voting yes; Councilors Gillette, Lavin, Brennan and Mayor Valentino voted no.

Peeler then moved to rescind the earlier sale. The rescind motion required a two-thirds majority (six votes) to succeed; council discussion focused on questions about the proposed project's tax implications, the developer's proposed pilot/PILOT-like contribution and the adequacy of prior neighborhood outreach. The rescind motion failed 5'4 (Yes: Whitfield, Morocco, Petropoulos, Grimaldi, Peeler; No: Gillette, Lavin, Brennan, Mayor Valentino), so the prior sale approval remained in place.

Council members who supported keeping the sale said the parcel is zoned for multifamily use and that the sale process produced a financially viable offer (Home Leasing placed a deposit and proposed to pursue funding). Several councilors urged patience: the project must still proceed through planning-board and permitting steps, environmental review and public hearings before construction could begin.

Opponents said those later steps do not address their immediate concerns about preliminary city decisions and asked the council to require earlier, deeper neighborhood consultation before any binding transaction is completed. The developer said a community meeting is being scheduled and that the project team will perform geotechnical and environmental work required by state funding programs.

The council did not rescind the sale. Next procedural steps cited by staff and the developer include scheduling a neighborhood meeting, conducting a site suitability and geotechnical study, and the planning- and zoning-board review that would be required for any future special-use permit or site plan.

For now the sale remains approved and the developer retains the option period while it pursues funding and prepares the environmental and planning filings that will determine final design and any additional remediation requirements.