Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Downtown Alley Improvements topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Binghamton council reviews five‑year lease to enable Crowbar alley improvements
Summary
Council members discussed a proposed five‑year, $1,000‑per‑year lease with S2 Property Development to allow city-funded alleyway improvements adjacent to 195 State Street (the Crowbar property), including concerns about maintenance, a clawback to protect city investment, and connection to an ordinance authorizing project funding.
Binghamton City Council members on Monday discussed a proposed five‑year lease with S2 Property Development that would give the city site control to build a pedestrian connection and utilities between State Street and Washington Street adjacent to 195 State Street, a property commonly called Crowbar.
The lease, described by staff as a five‑year term at $1,000 per year, would allow the city to install a sidewalk and electrical conduit needed for a later public art project while the council pursues a separate ordinance to fund the construction. City staff said the arrangement is intended to let the city spend the matching funds required by grant paperwork without committing to long‑term ownership.
City planner Sarah Glosse told council the lease would be “negotiated between corporation counsel and the lawyer for S2 Property Development,” and is intended to “give us some flexibility in actually being able to spend the money on the alley while also not necessarily locking us into the long term purchase of a property.” The lease as described would not include an option to buy, though staff said the agreement could include a clawback provision to prevent a private owner from profiting from city improvements.
Council members pressed staff on which entity would handle ongoing maintenance if the city undertakes the work. Staff said the county currently maintains contiguous spaces near the forum and a parking lot behind it, but county officials have not agreed to take long‑term responsibility for the small alley area. Staff said they are negotiating maintenance arrangements with the county and the property owner, and that the lease is intended to allow the city to perform needed work while preserving flexibility on permanent ownership.
The lease proposal is tied to ordinance O25‑35, which staff said will appear on the council agenda; that ordinance provides the primary project funding, except for a roughly $10,000 local match noted in the grant worksheet. Staff said about $5,000 is still required to secure the site for the immediate project work, and that negotiating a lease first avoids spending legal time negotiating a full purchase before the council agrees on basic terms.
Council members also asked whether the city’s parks or public works crews would have to add snow‑removal and sidewalk maintenance for the new area; staff said that is under negotiation with the county and the property owner. Staff emphasized the lease is intended to address the need for site control so the project can proceed without committing the city to long‑term ownership if that later proves impractical.
Council did not take a final vote on the lease during the work session; staff said they would return with specific negotiated terms for council review if the body approves the general terms.
The immediate next steps outlined by staff are: the council to approve the general lease terms so corporation counsel can negotiate a detailed agreement, and for the council to consider ordinance O25‑35 to appropriate the project funding on Wednesday’s agenda.
