1-8-26 OCIDA Regular Meeting Board Packet (1) ============================================= 335 MONTGOMERY STREET, FLOOR 2M, SYRACUSE, NY 13202 315.435.3770 • ECONOMICDEVELOPMENT@ONGOV.NET • ONGOVED.COM Regular Meeting Agenda January 8, 2026 Call to Order the Regular Meeting of the Agency A. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes: December 11, 2025 B. Treasurer’s Report C. Payment of Bills D. Conflict of Interest Action Items: 1. Board Appointments Agency Action Requested: a. A resolution of the Board appointing Randy Wolken as Chair. Representative: Robert Petrovich, Executive Director 2. Cameron Hinsdale, LLC (Project #3101-25-05A) Second Meeting The applicant is proposing to construct a mixed-use residential building/s consisting of roughly 180 units and a total of roughly 50,000 sq. ft. of commercial space in the Town of Camillus. Agency Action Requested: a. A resolution of the Board authorizing the financial assistance the Agency will provide. Agency benefits requested include exemptions from certain real property taxes, real estate transfer taxes, sales and use taxes and mortgage recording taxes. Representative: Joe Goethe, Cameron Hinsdale LLC Managing Member 3. Immediate Mailing Services, Inc. & 245 Commerce LLC (3101-18-02A) Modification Meeting Immediate Mailing Services, Inc. and 245 Commerce LLC have requested the execution and delivery of a mortgage and related documents with respect to a refinancing. Agency Action Requested: a. A resolution of the Board authorizing the execution and delivery of documents. Representative: Amanda Fitzgerald, Agency Counsel Page 1 of 111 4. Jordan Landing LLC and Jordan Landing Housing Development Fund Corporation (Project #3101-25-07A) First Meeting The applicant is proposing to construct 65 mixed-income housing units on approximately 8 vacant acres of land in the Village of Jordan. The project will also include a community room, fitness area, supporting housing services, offices, and laundry facilities. Agency Action Requested: a. A resolution of the Board authorizing a public hearing. Representative: Patrick Rock, Jordan Landing LLC Managing Member 5. TTM Technologies, Inc. (3101-24-01A) Modification Meeting TTM Technologies, Inc. is requesting an extension of the termination date of their sales and use tax exemption. Agency Action Requested: a. A resolution of the Board authorizing an extension of the sales and use tax exemption of TTM Technologies, Inc. Representative: Robert Petrovich, Executive Director 6. Committee Appointments Agency Action Requested: Finance Committee a. A resolution of the Board appointing Randy Wolken as Chair of the Finance Committee. b. A resolution of the Board appointing Mark Muthumbi to the Finance Committee. Governance Committee a. A resolution of the Board appointing Elizabeth Dreyfuss as Chair of the Governance Committee. b. A resolution of the Board appointing Randy Wolken to the Governance Committee. Audit Committee a. A resolution of the Board appointing Leslie English as Chair of the Audit Committee. b. A resolution of the Board appointing Alan Marzullo to the Audit Committee. 7. Slate of Officers for the 2026 Agency Fiscal Year Robert Petrovich, Executive Director Alexis Rodriguez, Secretary Nate Stevens, Treasurer Evan Carter, Assistant Secretary Robert Schoeneck, Assistant Treasurer Page 2 of 111 Alexis Rodriguez, Public Hearing Officer Robert Petrovich, Freedom of Information Act Officer Randy Wolken, Freedom of Information Act Appeals Officer Adjourn Page 3 of 111 Regular Meeting Minutes December 11, 2025 A Regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Thursday, December 11, 2025, at 335 Montgomery Street, Floor 2M, Syracuse, New York. Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 8:30 AM with the following in attendance: PRESENT: Patrick Hogan Susan Stanczyk Elizabeth Dreyfuss Leslie English ABSENT: Fanny Villarreal Garard Grannell Cydney Johnson ALSO PRESENT: Robert M. Petrovich, Executive Director Nate Stevens, Treasurer Alexis Rodriguez, Secretary Robert Schoeneck, Assistant Treasurer Evan Carter, Assistant Secretary Jeffrey Davis, Esq., Agency Counsel Amanda Fitzgerald, Esq., Agency Counsel (via Zoom) Mark McNamara, Esq., Agency Counsel (via Zoom) Matthew Wells, Esq., Agency Counsel Thomas Clifford, Esq., Agency Counsel Joe Goethe, Cameron Hinsdale, LLC (via Zoom) John Cheney, Cameron Hinsdale, LLC (via Zoom) Approval of Meeting Minutes: November 13, 2025 Upon motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss, the Board approved the regular meeting minutes of November 13, 2025. Motion was carried. Approval of Meeting Minutes: November 18, 2025 Upon motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Leslie English, the Board approved the special meeting minutes of November 18, 2025. Motion was carried. Page 4 of 111 Treasurer’s Report: Nate Stevens gave a brief overview of the Treasurer’s Report for the month of November 2025. Upon motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss, the Board approved the Treasurer’s Report for the month of November 2025. Motion was carried. Payment of Bills: Nate Stevens gave a brief overview of the Payment of Bills. Upon motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss, the Board approved the Payment of Bills. Motion was carried. Action Items: 1. Cameron Hinsdale, LLC (Project #3101-25-05A) The applicant is proposing to construct a mixed-use residential building/s consisting of roughly 175 units and a total of roughly 50,000 sq. ft. of commercial space in the Town of Camillus. Robert Petrovich made the Board aware that Bond, Schoeneck & King is representing the Agency for this project. Joe Goethe introduced the proposed project, explaining that the Applicant is in the process of acquiring approvals for property across the street (Hinsdale Road) from Township 5 to develop mixed-use commercial and residential housing. There will be up to 180 apartments and townhouses and 50,000 sq. ft. of commercial space. 15% of the units will be workforce housing. J. Goethe advised that they plan to start construction when the snow melts. J. Goethe advised that they received their PUD (planned unit development) and are starting to work through the subdivision and planning, which should be done in 90 days. J. Goethe noted that 20 of the 22 acres in this project are being purchased from the Christ Community Church of the Nazarene, which is currently exempt from taxes. He explained that the proposed project on this land will significantly raise the tax revenue on that parcel. Patrick Hogan asked for clarification regarding the project’s PILOT term and the Agency’s UTEP. Page 5 of 111 Alexis Rodriguez advised that the proposed PILOT for the project would be a deviation from the Agency’s UTEP. R. Petrovich stated that the significance of the project, number of units being proposed, and the workforce component is such that the Agency felt this type of project warranted a deviation and the Agency is recommending a 15-year PILOT. Patrick Hogan stated that he agreed with the Agency’s recommended deviation. He noted that this is an exciting project and is quite a step forward. Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board authorizing a public hearing.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. 2. Committee Appointments Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested of, “A resolution of the Board appointing Elizabeth Dreyfuss to the Governance Committee.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Leslie English. Motion was carried. 3. Bid Award: White Pine Commerce Park Demolition The Agency is proposing to accept the bid of a Company to complete site clearance services of vacant Agency owned structures at White Pine Commerce Park. R. Petrovich explained that a number of years ago when the land was purchased at White Pine Commerce Park, there were residential homes on the properties. As part of site readiness, the Agency went out to bid through the appropriate process and selected the low bidder, which was Gorick Construction, to remove the residences. Prior to this, pre-demo surveys for asbestos and asbestos removal were completed. R. Petrovich advised that since then there are a handful of additional properties that require demolition. The bidding process has been repeated, and the Agency is now in a position to recommend an award to the low bidder, which is coincidentally Gorick Construction again. R. Petrovich noted that Gorick Construction is looking forward to assisting the Agency with the rest residue on the remainder of properties that need to be cleared from the site to advance it for Micron’s ultimate construction. R. Petrovich advised that the resolution is to authorize the Agency to begin contract negotiations on the scope of work. Page 6 of 111 Patrick Hogan questioned if this was an RFP process. R. Petrovich confirmed and explained that the Agency coordinated this process with Onondaga County Purchasing. He believes that the Agency is in the best possible position to advance this. Susan Stanczyk questioned if the Agency will use Habitat for Humanity to go through the residences as was done once before. R. Petrovich explained that the possibility is there, and the Agency can reach out to Habitat for Humanity to see if there is enough there for them to want to do a walkthrough of the residences. R. Petrovich clarified that there are some residences, but there are also commercial buildings, such as butler buildings, that were initially going to be salvaged and used during construction operations, but it’s been since determined that they’re not going to be useful and should be taken down. Leslie English questioned if Gorick Construction successfully completed the previous project to the Agency’s satisfaction. R. Petrovich responded yes they did. Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board authorizing the Executive Director to accept a bid and enter into one or more agreements for site clearance services with a Company for site clearance services at White Pine Commerce Park.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Leslie English. Motion was carried. 4. National Grid – Easement Authorization The Agency wishes to grant an easement to National Grid over portions of lands owned by the Agency for the purpose of facilities to provide electric and gas services. R. Petrovich explained that this easement is for National Grid to be able to connect power to the pump station at White Pine South, which will provide sewer service to the area in addition to Micron. The easement would not take any additional land than what has already been put forward, which is approximately 1.3 acres of land that is being conveyed ultimately through a lease and then a purchase to WEP (Onondaga County Department of Water Environment Protection). Jeffrey Davis added that there was a Short EAF prepared this. The resolution includes a negative declaration under SEQR to enter into the easement and authorizes the execution of the easement on the form consistent with National Grid’s right-of-way easement forms. Page 7 of 111 Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board authorizing the execution of an easement in connection with property located at 5064 State Route 31 for facilities to provide electric and gas services.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. 5. Onondaga County Waster District – Easement Authorization The Agency wishes to grant an easement to the Onondaga County Water District over portions of lands owned by the Agency for the purpose of constructing and maintaining pipelines for the distribution of water. R. Petrovich explained that this easement will allow the 54-inch transmission main that runs east to west across the southern boundary to be tapped and lines to be brought forward along the Agency-owned property from north-south to Route 31, and ultimately across Route 31. With respect to the property owned by the Agency, this easement authorization will allow OCWA to install the pipelines necessary for the water service in support of the Micron project. J. Davis added that there is a short form EAF included here for an issuance of a negative declaration for the easement. He stated that it is a 50-foot-wide easement, straight shot, running north to south, that will allow OCWA to install the underground water line. Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board authorizing the execution of an easement in connection with property located on the easterly side of Caughdenoy Road for the purpose of constructing and maintaining pipelines for the distribution of water.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Leslie English. Motion was carried. 6. Discovery Center of Science and Technology – Easement Authorization Amanda Fitzgerald explained that the City of Syracuse has approached the MOST to see if they can move the infamous Shot Clock Monument onto the MOST property. Because the Agency has long outstanding bond financing with the MOST, they’re nominally in the chain of title. A. Fitzgerald noted as the Board has seen before, OCIDA is being asked to join the easement agreement, which will allow for the movement of the monument and continued maintenance of the monument on the MOST property. The action before the Board is the authorization to enter into the easement. A. Fitzgerald advised that counsel will make sure that the easement includes all of the usual Agency indemnification provisions. J. Davis added that this is considered a Type II Action under SEQR, given the Agency’s nominal provision in title to enter into this. Page 8 of 111 Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board authorizing execution of an easement agreement and any related documents in connection with the granting of a non-exclusive easement to the City of Syracuse.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. 7. EDPL – SSO Properties Mark McNamara explained that this is the culmination of the process with respect to the Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL) Article 2, which started with the public hearing on November 20, 2025 and comments that were received both at the hearing, as well as in writing subsequent to that including from the various counsel who were involved. M. McNamara stated that there was a record that was made of the hearing, including a transcript. All of that was made available at the Agency’s office as well as the Onondaga County Clerk’s Office, pursuant to the statute. The action before the Board today is in regards to the determination and findings, which is required under EDPL 204 by the Agency, having had the hearing. The determination and findings is with respect to the acquisition of the easements over the two SSO properties for the proposed wastewater conveyance pipeline that is necessary for Phase I of the Micron project. M. McNamara advised that the determination of findings essentially sets forth the public use, benefit, and purpose of the project for which these easements are being acquired, the location and any alternative locations which were considered in connection with the project, the environmental impacts, which is a restatement and adoption of the findings statement which the Agency made a couple of weeks ago by having completed the entire SEQR process, and anything else that one wants to make a finding about, as stated in the statute. M. McNamara stated that before the Board is the resolution with an attached exhibit of the determination of findings and attached to that are two exhibits. The first exhibit is a map showing where the SSO easements on the two parcels are located, and the map that comes from the Final Environmental Impact Statement that shows the general orientation of the project and where the wastewater line would be. The second exhibit to the determination of findings is the actual SEQR findings statement and resolution which was adopted a few weeks ago. J. Davis added for context that the resolution before the Board is the adoption of the determination and finding as M. McNamara explained. That determination and findings statement is only related to the two easement properties for SSO. J. Davis noted that the determination and findings specifically states that it does not relate to and does not include the land on Caughdenoy Road owned by Azalia King. This Page 9 of 111 determination and findings is only proceeding with the acquisition of the easements necessary for the conveyance system across the SSO properties. Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board adopting the New York Eminent Domain Procedure Law 204 Determination and Findings Regarding Potential Acquisition of Property Interest by purchase or eminent domain and related actions for the Micron New York Semiconductor Manufacturing LLC Project.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. 8. PSL of Fayetteville LLC & Fayetteville MC Owner (3101-22-09A) Modification Meeting PSL of Fayetteville LLC & Fayetteville MC Owner are requesting an increase to their mortgage recording tax exemption amount from $92,326 to $115,500. A. Fitzgerald explained that this is regarding the Peregrine project that the Board approved several years ago in connection with a senior care facility in the Town of Manlius. The project is now ready to close and their costs have increased by $2.5 million. Their corresponding mortgage has increased by that much. The action before the Board is that the Agency authorizes an increase in the mortgage recording tax exemption to cover the mortgage recording tax that will be due on that increased mortgage amount. A. Fitzgerald noted that as the Board has seen before, increases of financial assistance over $100,000 do not require a new public hearing. If the Board approves the increase, the Agency can move forward with processing the increase, which will be about $23,174 more in mortgage recording tax exemption. Susan Stanczyk asked why the project has been delayed. R. Petrovich stated that the Agency has been monitoring the project for a while. The Applicant’s position is that there’s a very tough financing market for these types of projects. He added that they pivoted to involve HUD in the project and that a key partner in the project passed away. R. Petrovich advised that the Applicant is ready to close on the project, noting that the Agency staff advised to the Applicant that if they didn’t close soon, they’d have to come before the Board again. He stated that he thinks it’s a worthy project to advance. Susan Stanczyk concurred that this is a great project. Patrick Hogan added that this project serves part of the population that’s certainly needed. Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested, “A resolution of the Board authorizing an increase of the mortgage recording tax exemption for PSL of Fayetteville LLC & Fayetteville Page 10 of 111 MC Owner.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. 9. Executive Session J. Davis brought the action of Executive Session for the purpose of discussing a potential settlement of pending and threatened litigation. Motion to enter Executive Session was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. Motion to come out of Executive Session was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. 10. Litigation Settlement Agreement J. Davis explained that the first resolution before the Board is requesting authorization to enter into and execute a settlement agreement with Azalia King. This will settle pending litigation involving the license and occupancy agreement, as well as resolving the eminent domain process that the Agency started with regard to the King property. J. Davis stated that the settlement agreement is broken down in a couple different ways. He explained that the first part is the resolution of the license and occupancy agreement in an amount of $450,000, which allows Mrs. King to stay on the property until May 1, 2026, but also allows necessary work that needs to be done at the property to continue while that occupancy remains until May 1, 2026. J. Davis advised that the second part of the agreement is the purchase of land that the Agency does not own but some time ago had tried to acquire. The land is across the street from the King property on Caughdenoy Road. The second resolution is entering into a purchase and sale agreement to acquire 6.5 acres of vacant land for $2.5 million across the street from the White Pine Commerce Park site that was previously identified as a location for potential supply chain. J. Davis advised that there two components to this in terms of the resolution before the Board. Because the Agency is acquiring land, there is an EAF that has been prepared and a SEQR determination that will need to be passed by the Board to enter into a negative declaration to acquire the land that the Agency does not own. The second part is authorizing the acceptance and entering into the settlement agreement, which includes the total payment of $450,000, the $2.5 million, as well as other provisions in the settlement agreement. Page 11 of 111 R. Petrovich added that by entering into this agreement, the EDPL action and any pending litigation relative to the license agreement will be resolved. J. Davis confirmed, and added that it resolves the pending litigation, threatened litigation, and the EDPL action will all be resolved as a result of entering into this settlement agreement. Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested (a), “A resolution of the Board authorizing the adoption of a SEQRA determination for the acquisition of property.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. Patrick Hogan read the Agency action requested (b), “A resolution of the Board authorizing execution and delivery of a settlement agreement which includes termination of an Occupancy Agreement and acquisition of lands on Caughdenoy Road designated as tax map no. 047.-01- 14.4.” Motion was made by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss. Motion was carried. Prior to adjournment, Patrick Hogan wanted to express his gratitude for serving with this Board through all the years and being appointed by who’s now the County Executive, Mr. McMahon, when he was Chair of the Legislature. He stated that it’s been a real pleasure and the Agency has accomplished a lot of things, and he appreciates all of the Board members and Agency staff. R. Petrovich expressed his gratitude for Patrick Hogan stating that he’s been the Chairman for his entire time as Executive Director of the Agency, and he thanked for his partnership, clear vision, and support. R. Petrovich expressed his gratitude for Susan Stanczyk, stating that she’s had an instrumental role in what the Agency has been doing from the very beginning in expanding the White Pine site. Susan Stanczyk thanked the team at the Agency and commended the work that they do. She noted that over the years the Board has gotten stronger and has helped with so many great projects. She expressed her appreciation for executive leadership, the department, and the legislature. Elizabeth Dreyfuss thanked Patrick Hogan and Susan Stanczyk for their leadership, wisdom, and willingness to work with the Board members and staff. Motion to adjourn was made by Susan Stanczyk and seconded by Elizabeth Dreyfuss at 9:15 AM. ___________________________________ Alexis Rodriguez, Secretary Page 12 of 111 December 31, 2025 Revenue / Expense / Income Current Period Current YTD Operating/Non-Op Revenue 328,106 5,111,005 Administrative Expense 97,650 721,884 Operating/Program Expense 553,104 2,368,816 Net Ordinary Income (322,649) 2,020,306 Current Assets Current YTD Total Cash 10,467,592 Less Pass Through Received Net Cash 10,467,592 Page 13 of 111 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Profit and Loss December 2025 TOTAL Income 500 Operating Revenue 2116 Fees 2116.1 Agency Fees 272,840.99 2116.2 Application Fees 1,000.00 Total 2116 Fees 273,840.99 2410 Lease Income 1,224.30 2655 Other Operating Revenue 2660 FTZ 8,875.00 Total 2655 Other Operating Revenue 8,875.00 Total 500 Operating Revenue 283,940.29 501 Non-Operating Revenue 2401 Interest Income 33,355.23 Total 501 Non-Operating Revenue 33,355.23 527 Nat Grid Matching Grant 10,810.00 534 Pilot & Pass Thru Revenue 528.003 OHB Redev LLC Funds Pass Thru 6,308.80 529 PILOT Income 248,356.13 Total 534 Pilot & Pass Thru Revenue 254,664.93 550 WPCP Pass Thru Revenue 4,365.00 Total Income $587,135.45 GROSS PROFIT $587,135.45 Expenses 6400 Operating Expense 6406 Other Professional Services 6406.50 Consulting Services 3,000.00 Total 6406 Other Professional Services 3,000.00 6407 Administrative Expense 97,650.21 6409 Conference Attendence 221.12 6410 Office Expense 1,802.40 6415 FTZ 1,250.00 Total 6400 Operating Expense 103,923.73 6440 Legal Fees 6450 Barclay Damon 6460 IDA General Legal 600.00 Total 6450 Barclay Damon 600.00 Total 6440 Legal Fees 600.00 Page 14 of 111 Accrual Basis Monday, January 5, 2026 11:02 AM GMT-05:00 1/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Profit and Loss December 2025 TOTAL 6500 Agency Program Expenses 6510 White Pine Commerce Park 6510.3 Legal 1,293.00 6510.7 WPCP Marketing 91,651.91 6511 WPCP Closing Costs 450,000.00 Total 6510 White Pine Commerce Park 542,944.91 6530 800 Hiawatha Blvd. West 6530.3 Engineering 3,286.00 Total 6530 800 Hiawatha Blvd. West 3,286.00 Total 6500 Agency Program Expenses 546,230.91 6514 White Pine Science & Technology Park 6514.1 Legal 1,277.70 6514.2 Engineering 19,836.64 Total 6514 White Pine Science & Technology Park 21,114.34 6600 Non-Operating Expenses 6605 Pilot & Pass Thru Expenses 6606 OHB Redev LLC Funds Pass Thru 6,308.80 Total 6605 Pilot & Pass Thru Expenses 6,308.80 Total 6600 Non-Operating Expenses 6,308.80 6610 WPCP Pass Thru Expenses 6610.6 Barton & Loguidice 4,365.00 Total 6610 WPCP Pass Thru Expenses 4,365.00 Total Expenses $682,542.78 NET OPERATING INCOME $ -95,407.33 NET INCOME $ -95,407.33 Page 15 of 111 Accrual Basis Monday, January 5, 2026 11:02 AM GMT-05:00 2/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of December 31, 2025 TOTAL ASSETS Current Assets Bank Accounts 200 Cash 0.00 200.5 NBT Checking 1,437,171.87 Total 200 Cash 1,437,171.87 200.6 NBT Savings 9,030,419.88 Total Bank Accounts $10,467,591.75 Accounts Receivable 380 Accounts Rec. 380.6 A/R Fees, Lease & PILOT 956,738.90 Total 380 Accounts Rec. 956,738.90 Total Accounts Receivable $956,738.90 Other Current Assets 480 Prepaid Expenses 480.4 Credit Balance on Card -1,473.67 Total 480 Prepaid Expenses -1,473.67 Total Other Current Assets $ -1,473.67 Total Current Assets $11,422,856.98 Fixed Assets 100 Land 101 White Pines Commerce Park 0.00 101.3 Engineering Services 0.00 101.4 Environmental/Demo Services 110.00 Total 101.3 Engineering Services 110.00 Total 101 White Pines Commerce Park 110.00 105 3649 Erie Blvd East 5,590,296.64 107 800 Hiawatha 604,840.42 108 White Pine Science & Technology Park 2,140,557.00 Total 100 Land 8,335,804.06 104 Machinery & Equipment 104.1 Office Furniture 2,076.11 104.2 Equipment 4,589.00 Total 104 Machinery & Equipment 6,665.11 211 A/D Office Furniture -6,018.00 250 Investment in Real Property 30,756,703.00 Total Fixed Assets $39,093,154.17 Page 16 of 111 Accrual Basis Monday, January 5, 2026 12:22 PM GMT-05:00 1/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of December 31, 2025 TOTAL Other Assets 240 Blue Sky Redevelopment 1,641.76 Total Other Assets $1,641.76 TOTAL ASSETS $50,517,652.91 LIABILITIES AND EQUITY Liabilities Current Liabilities Accounts Payable 300 WPCP Pass Thru Payable 488,708.44 Total Accounts Payable $488,708.44 Other Current Liabilities 600 Accounts Payable 0.00 600.1 Due to Related Party - OED 721,883.87 600.209 Syracuse Rail Overpayment 500.00 600.3 Onondaga County Loan 28,079,656.77 600.31 Accrued Interest - OC Note Payable 3,095,059.00 Total 600.3 Onondaga County Loan 31,174,715.77 Total 600 Accounts Payable 31,897,099.64 Total Other Current Liabilities $31,897,099.64 Total Current Liabilities $32,385,808.08 Long-Term Liabilities 600.5 Onondaga County Loan - Non WPCP 4,575,298.64 Total Long-Term Liabilities $4,575,298.64 Total Liabilities $36,961,106.72 Equity 3900 Equity Unreserved 8,432,294.51 3901 Equity-Investment Fixed Assets 2,345,838.63 463 Reserve For Contracts 368,811.84 465 Equity - Unreserved 4,017.16 Net Income 2,405,584.05 Total Equity $13,556,546.19 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $50,517,652.91 Page 17 of 111 Accrual Basis Monday, January 5, 2026 12:22 PM GMT-05:00 2/2 ONONDAGA COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT OF BILLS - SCHEDULE #513 January 8, 2026 GENERAL EXPENSES 1. BARCLAY DAMON $ 177,777.78 November 2025 Legal Costs 2. JMT OF NEW YORK, LLP $ 128,787.88 November 2025 Engineering Costs 3. BARCLAY DAMON $ 2,500.00 Micron Rail Spur Legal Fee 4. JMT OF NEW YORK, LLP $ 6,258.38 Roth Steel - Inv #45-106647 5. LOVELL & ASSOCIATES $ 3,000.00 December 2025 Consulting 6. BARCLAY DAMON $ 523.64 Inv #5370532 7. BARCLAY DAMON $ 16,670.75 OCIDA v. King - Inv #5371984 8. BARCLAY DAMON $ 4,706.44 King - EDPL - Inv #5371986 9. ROBERT PETROVICH $ 49.72 Conference Expense 10. BARCLAY DAMON $ 3,525.00 Retained Corporate & Public Finance Matters, Inv#5371975 11. NEW YORK STATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL $ 2,300.00 2026 Membeship Renewal - Inv#16257 12. DUSTY'S OUTDOOR SERVICE $ 2,500.00 3649 Erie Blvd E - Property Maint 13. BARTON & LOUGIDICE $ 1,910.00 Statement of Work 2023-6, Inv #155587 14. ONONDAGA COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY $ 17.73 8538 Caughdenoy Rd TOTAL $ 350,527.32 Page 18 of 111 12/10/2025 Project: Cameron Hinsdale, LLC Project Number: 3101-25-05-A Location: Camillus School District: West Genesee Project Type: New Construction 017.-04-08.1, 017.-04-09.0, 017.-04-10.0, 017.-04-048.1, Village: N/A Tax Parcel(s): 017.-04-05.0, 017.-04-06.0 Total Project Cost: $ 52,208,912 8. Total Jobs 25 Land Acquisition $ 1,800,000 8A. Job Retention 0 Site Work/Demo $ 7,437,696 8B: Job Creation 25 Building Construction & Renovation $ 35,101,343 (Next 5 Years) Furniture & Fixtures $ - Equipment $ - Project Soft Cost $ 7,869,873 Community Investment /Abatement Project Description Fiscal Impact ($) Abatement Summary $6,751,285 Sales Tax Abatement $2,400,000 Mortgage Tax Abatement $375,000 Property Tax Relief (PILOT) $3,976,285 The applicant is proposing to construct a mixed-use residential building/s consisting of Community Investment $73,092,438 50,000 sq. ft. of commercial space and 155,000 sq. ft. of multi-family residential units PILOT Payments $4,478,651 in the Town of Camillus. Project Salaries and Benefits Estimated (10 yrs) $11,507,750 Construction Benefit Estimate $4,897,125 Total Project Cost $52,208,912 Investment:Abatement Ratio 10.83 :1 © 2025 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency. All rights reserved. Page 19 of 111 Cameron Hinsdale, LLC A) PILOTS Estimate Table Worksheet for 15 years OCIDA estimate of current market value $ 1,146,000 Projected investment $ 35,101,343 OCIDA estimate of increase in value $ 17,338,000 OCIDA estimated value after project is completed $ 18,484,000 Taxes that would have been collected if the project did not occur $ 524,202 Scheduled PILOT payments $ 4,478,651 Full Tax County PILOT School PILOT YEAR Exemption % Town Village Total PILOT Payment w/o Net Exemption Amount District PILOT $ 1,990.62 $ 3,195.18 $ 10,331.26 $ 15,517.06 1 100% $ 3,889 $ 6,242 $ 20,182 $ - $ 30,312.25 $ 488,911 $ 458,598 2 100% $ 3,966 $ 6,367 $ 20,586 $ - $ 30,918.50 $ 498,689 $ 467,770 3 100% $ 4,046 $ 6,494 $ 20,997 $ - $ 31,536.87 $ 508,663 $ 477,126 4 90% $ 10,370 $ 16,645 $ 53,820 $ - $ 80,834.44 $ 518,836 $ 438,001 5 80% $ 16,946 $ 27,199 $ 87,946 $ - $ 132,091.30 $ 529,213 $ 397,121 6 70% $ 23,780 $ 38,169 $ 123,417 $ - $ 185,366.09 $ 539,797 $ 354,431 7 60% $ 30,881 $ 49,567 $ 160,271 $ - $ 240,719.05 $ 550,593 $ 309,874 8 50% $ 38,257 $ 61,406 $ 198,550 $ - $ 298,211.98 $ 561,605 $ 263,393 9 40% $ 45,915 $ 73,698 $ 238,295 $ - $ 357,908.33 $ 572,837 $ 214,928 10 30% $ 53,864 $ 86,458 $ 279,552 $ - $ 419,873.26 $ 584,294 $ 164,420 11 25% $ 58,527 $ 93,942 $ 303,753 $ - $ 456,222.17 $ 595,979 $ 139,757 12 20% $ 63,355 $ 101,692 $ 328,810 $ - $ 493,857.09 $ 607,899 $ 114,042 13 15% $ 68,353 $ 109,714 $ 354,748 $ - $ 532,814.92 $ 620,057 $ 87,242 14 10% $ 73,525 $ 118,016 $ 381,592 $ - $ 573,133.51 $ 632,458 $ 59,325 15 5% $ 78,877 $ 126,606 $ 409,368 $ - $ 614,851.73 $ 645,107 $ 30,256 TOTAL $ 574,550 $ 922,216 $ 2,981,886 $ - $ 4,478,651 $ 8,454,936 $ 3,976,285 Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 Jobs Current/Actuals Creation Goals 10 10 5 Total Employment Goals 0 0 10 20 25 25 Page 20 of 111 Page 21 of 111 Page 22 of 111 Page 23 of 111 Page 24 of 111 Page 25 of 111 Page 26 of 111 Page 27 of 111 Page 28 of 111 Page 29 of 111 Page 30 of 111 Page 31 of 111 Page 32 of 111 Page 33 of 111 Page 34 of 111 Page 35 of 111 Page 36 of 111 Page 37 of 111 Page 38 of 111 Page 39 of 111 Page 40 of 111 Page 41 of 111 Page 42 of 111 Page 43 of 111 Page 44 of 111 Page 45 of 111 Page 46 of 111 Page 47 of 111 Page 48 of 111 Page 49 of 111 Page 50 of 111 Page 51 of 111 Page 52 of 111 Page 53 of 111 Page 54 of 111 Page 55 of 111 Page 56 of 111 Page 57 of 111 Page 58 of 111 Page 59 of 111 1/5/2026 Project: Jordan Landing LLC Project Number: 3101-25-07A Location: 577 Peru Road School District: Jordan-Elbridge Project Type: New Construction, Housing Tax Parcel(s): 006.1-01-03.1; 006.1-01-04.1; 006.1-01-05.0 Village: Jordan Total Project Cost: $ 31,974,380 8. Total Jobs 5 Land Acquisition $ 200,000 8A. Job Retention 0 Site Work/Demo $ 3,051,000 8B: Job Creation 5 Building Construction & Renovation $ 19,289,831 (Next 5 Years) Furniture & Fixtures $ - Equipment $ 25,000 Project Soft Cost $ 9,408,549 Community Investment /Abatement Project Description Fiscal Impact ($) Abatement Summary $852,921 Sales Tax Abatement $0 Mortgage Tax Abatement $0 Property Tax Relief (PILOT) $852,921 Community Investment $37,995,378 Jordan Landing is proposing to construct 65 mixed-income housing units on 8 vacant PILOT Payments $866,361 acres of land adjacent to the Erie Canal Trail in the Village of Jordan. Project Salaries and Benefits Estimated (10 yrs) $3,306,816 Construction Benefit Estimate $1,847,822 Total Project Cost $31,974,380 Investment:Abatement Ratio 44.55 :1 © 2026 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency. All rights reserved. Page 60 of 111 Jordan Landing LLC A) PILOTS Estimate Table Worksheet for 15 years OCIDA estimate of current market value $ 37,950 Projected investment $ 19,289,831 OCIDA estimate of increase in value $ 3,562,050 OCIDA estimated value after project is completed $ 3,600,000 Taxes that would have been collected if the project did not occur $ 25,464 Scheduled PILOT payments $ 866,361 Full Tax County PILOT School PILOT YEAR Exemption % Town Village Total PILOT Payment w/o Net Exemption Amount District PILOT 1 100% $ 128 $ 74 $ 640 $ 205 $ 1,048.03 $ 99,418 $ 98,370 2 100% $ 131 $ 76 $ 653 $ 209 $ 1,069.00 $ 101,407 $ 100,338 3 100% $ 133 $ 77 $ 666 $ 213 $ 1,090.38 $ 103,435 $ 102,344 4 90% $ 1,411 $ 821 $ 7,058 $ 2,261 $ 11,551.31 $ 105,503 $ 93,952 5 80% $ 2,741 $ 1,594 $ 13,705 $ 4,391 $ 22,430.25 $ 107,614 $ 85,183 6 70% $ 4,123 $ 2,398 $ 20,615 $ 6,605 $ 33,739.73 $ 109,766 $ 76,026 7 60% $ 5,559 $ 3,233 $ 27,795 $ 8,905 $ 45,492.61 $ 111,961 $ 66,469 8 50% $ 7,050 $ 4,101 $ 35,255 $ 11,295 $ 57,702.11 $ 114,200 $ 56,498 9 40% $ 8,600 $ 5,002 $ 43,002 $ 13,778 $ 70,381.80 $ 116,484 $ 46,103 10 30% $ 10,208 $ 5,938 $ 51,045 $ 16,354 $ 83,545.59 $ 118,814 $ 35,268 11 25% $ 11,145 $ 6,482 $ 55,729 $ 17,855 $ 91,212.14 $ 121,190 $ 29,978 12 20% $ 12,115 $ 7,047 $ 60,581 $ 19,409 $ 99,151.94 $ 123,614 $ 24,462 13 15% $ 13,120 $ 7,631 $ 65,603 $ 21,019 $ 107,372.84 $ 126,086 $ 18,714 14 10% $ 14,159 $ 8,236 $ 70,803 $ 22,685 $ 115,882.92 $ 128,608 $ 12,725 15 5% $ 15,236 $ 8,862 $ 76,184 $ 24,409 $ 124,690.45 $ 131,180 $ 6,490 TOTAL $ 105,859 $ 61,572 $ 529,336 $ 169,594 $ 866,361 $ 1,719,282 $ 852,921 Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 Jobs Current/Actuals Creation Goals 5 Total Employment Goals 0 5 5 5 5 5 Page 61 of 111 Page 62 of 111 Page 63 of 111 Jordan Landing Proposed Organizational Chart Jordan Landing Housing Development Fund Corporation Jordan Landing LLC New York Housing Development Fund Nominee Agreement New York Limited Liability Company Corporation Beneficial Owner Nominee Owner/Fee Title Holder Eagle Star Housing Inc. Jordan Landing Managers LLC To be Formed Investor LLC New York not-for-profit Managing Member Investor Member corporation .01% 99.99% 100% Member Eagle Star Housing, Inc. Jordan Developers LLC Tax Credit Investor New York not-for-profit New York for-profit New York for-profit corporation corporation corporation 51% Member 49% Member 100% Member Rock PMC Rockabill Development LLC New York for-profit New York for-profit corporation corporation 51% Member 49% Member Page 64 of 111 Page 65 of 111 Page 66 of 111 Page 67 of 111 Page 68 of 111 Page 69 of 111 Page 70 of 111 Page 71 of 111 Page 72 of 111 Page 73 of 111 Page 74 of 111 Page 75 of 111 Page 76 of 111 Page 77 of 111 Page 78 of 111 Page 79 of 111 Page 80 of 111 Page 81 of 111 Page 82 of 111 Page 83 of 111 Page 84 of 111 Page 85 of 111 Section I: C) 4.Has the Applicant/Owner received assistance from Onondaga County Industrial DevelopmentAgency (OCIDA, Syracuse Industrial Development Agency (SIDA), New York State or theOnondaga Civic Development Corporation (OCDC) in the past? Below is a list of housing developments completed by the Applicant's affiliated entities # of # of Housing Completion Project Name Project Address Buildings Units Date Government Funding Programs Paddock's Landing 116 State Street, Phoenix, NY 13135 1 32 4/6/1983 USDA Rural Development 515 Village Center 456 Main Street, Phoenix, NY 13135 1 15 6/1/1984 USDA Rural Development 515 Bradley Associates 56 Davis Street, Phoenix, NY 13135 2 24 6/27/1986 USDA Rural Development 515 Christopher Court 22 Maplehurst, Phoenix, NY 13135 5 40 4/30/1992 USDA Rural Development 515 Patrick Court 32 Maplehurst, Phoenix, NY 13135 2 24 12/16/1993 USDA Rural Development 515 Austin Court 42 Maplehurst, Phoenix, NY 13135 2 24 6/6/1998 USDA Rural Development 515 and New York State Old Erie Place I 20 North Beaver Street, Jordan, NY 130 1 24 9/26/1986 USDA Rural Development 515 Old Erie Place II 20 North Beaver Street, Jordan, NY 130 1 24 12/19/1986 USDA Rural Development 515 Old Erie Place III 20 North Beaver Street, Jordan, NY 130 1 24 2/14/1994 USDA Rural Development 515 Old Erie Place IV 20 North Beaver Street, Jordan, NY 130 1 24 1/8/2002 USDA Rural Development 515 and New York State Wolcott Meadows I 6032 Alport Street, Wolcott, NY 14590 5 40 11/8/1988 USDA Rural Development 515 and New York State Wolcott Meadows II 6032 Alport Street, Wolcott, NY 14590 1 30 12/4/1994 USDA Rural Development 515 and New York State Union Free School 23 First Street, Camillus, NY 13031 1 27 12/10/1993 New York State Housing Trust Fund Minetto Senior Housing12 Schuyler Street, Oswego, NY 13126 1 39 1/9/2002 New York State Housing Trust Fund Page 86 of 111 Section II D: Project Narrative: A statement that the Project described in this application would not be undertaken but for the financial assistance provided by the Agency. The PILOT agreement from the IDA is necessary for the Project to move forward. The real estate tax burden projected in year one is over $107,000. An amount that is unsustainable without a drastic change to the rents making the project no longer affordable. A PILOT also provides comfort to the investors, lenders and the State of New York, who are unlikely to invest without a stable PILOT Payment. For the project to provide affordable rents targeting low and moderate income families and veterans a PILOT is critical. Page 87 of 111 E. Project Description Jordan Landing: • Overview of the Development Jordan Landing is a thoughtfully designed, infill new construction development located in the Village of Jordan, Onondaga County, NY. Situated on 7.84 acres of vacant land (parcels 006.1-01-03.1, 006.1-01-04.1, and 006.1-01-05) adjacent to the Erie Canal Trail, this project will bring 65 units of mixed-income housing across nine two-story buildings. It is a response to pressing regional housing needs, offering high-quality, energy-efficient homes for working families and individuals—30 of which will be integrated supportive units for homeless veterans and individuals with Serious Mental Illness (SMI). The project received zoning support from the Village of Jordan in early 2025 and has since secured site plan approval, along with $250,000 in capital funding from OCHIP. The development’s design promotes mixed-income housing through income averaging, with units spanning 30%, 50%, 60%, and 70% of Area Median Income (AMI). The breakdown includes 35 one-bedroom, 16 two-bedroom, and 14 three-bedroom units, distributed across both townhouse and multifamily buildings. The multifamily building includes shared amenities: a community room, fitness area, service offices, and laundry facilities—all accessible to every resident. Below is a breakdown of units by bedroom type and AMI: Bedroom Total 30% 50% 60% 70% Size Units AMI AMI AMI AMI 1 35 6 21 4 4 2 16 1 6 6 3 3 14 0 2 6 6 Total 65 7 29 16 13 % of Total 100% 11% 44.5% 24.5% 20% The total square footage of the project is 74,203. • Supportive Housing Component Eagle Star Housing, a nonprofit service provider founded in 2012, leads the supportive housing component. Their mission to serve veterans facing homelessness aligns closely with the state's priorities. They have secured an award for 30 ESSHI-supported units (15 for homeless veterans, 15 for individuals with SMI). Eagle Star will provide direct services on-site, including mental health support, case management, transportation, and resident programming. Services will be 1 Page 88 of 111 led by a highly qualified House Manager with a Master of Social Work and significant experience, ensuring the program meets the complex needs of the target population. This integrated approach not only helps vulnerable individuals remain stably housed but also contributes to reducing regional homelessness. Recent Point-in-Time data shows homelessness in the NY-505 region increased by over 25% in the last year alone, with Onondaga County now accounting for 64% of the area’s homeless population. • Design, Sustainability, and Community Integration Jordan Landing incorporates sustainable design and green building practices to meet New York State Homes and Community Renewal (HCR)’s 2025 sustainability guidelines. The project will meet Enterprise Green Communities 2020 Plus standards and conduct HVAC commissioning to ensure long-term energy efficiency. Each building is two stories and wood-frame construction. The buildings are sited to avoid any disturbance to nearby DEC and USACE-regulated wetlands, although minor grading in the 100- foot buffer will be permitted under a forthcoming NYSDEC permit. The surrounding landscape, including a nearby forested wetland and the Erie Canal Trail, will offer residents access to nature and recreation. A central playground, walkable sidewalks, and adjacent public spaces further enhance the community-oriented design. • Location and Market Fit Jordan Landing is well-positioned within commuting distance of several regional employment hubs, including the forthcoming Micron Facility in Clay (30 minutes away), Downtown Syracuse (30 minutes), and Auburn (20 minutes). Though public transit is limited, Eagle Star will provide transportation services for supportive housing residents, and Onondaga County’s Dial-a-Ride program offers transit options for seniors and people with disabilities. Market conditions strongly support the development. Adjacent affordable housing—developed and managed by Rock PMC—remains fully occupied with long waiting lists. A recent market study found a favorable 10.44% capture rate and underscored stable rents and minimal vacancy in both market-rate and affordable housing sectors. With a rising population of people experiencing homelessness, especially veterans and individuals with SMI, Jordan Landing is a timely and much-needed intervention. • Site, Zoning, and Environmental Considerations The Project Site was made up of three parcels: # 006.1-01-03.1, 006.1-01-04.1, and 006.1-01- 05.0. At the August 20th Planning Board Meeting the Board passed a resolution consolidating these lots into one parcel which is expected to retain the 006.1-01-03.1 SBL number and has been confirmed to be addressed as 577 Peru Road. The Village of Jordan Planning Board 2 Page 89 of 111 granted final site plan approval in August 2025. The land is free of environmental hazards, and any work near the wetlands will proceed under proper permitting. Financing sources include: • 9% State and Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits • NYS Supportive Housing Opportunity Program Funds • $250,000 from OCHIP • Equity from Key Bank (tax credit investor and lender) • Deferred Developer Fee from Project Developers Timeline and Readiness Jordan Landing is development-ready. Key milestones are as follows: • March 2026 – HCR Awards • August 2026 – Financial closing and construction start • March 2028 – Construction completion and lease-up begins • September 2028 – Full occupancy • December 2028 – Permanent closing The only outstanding municipal item is a building permit, expected within 4–6 weeks of application. The NYSDEC permit process for minor grading in the buffer zone will be underway in fall 2025, with approvals anticipated within five months. 3 Page 90 of 111 Section II: H) Local Approvals Attached please find a letter from the Village of Jordan outlining the approvals received as well as the SEQR. Please note that the total acreage of the property is 7.84 and the total square footage of the buildings is 74,203. Attached is a survey, site plans and building plans. Page 91 of 111 Page 92 of 111 Page 93 of 111 Agency Use Only [If applicable] Full Environmental Assessment Form Project : Part 2 - Identification of Potential Project Impacts Date : Part 2 is to be completed by the lead agency. Part 2 is designed to help the lead agency inventory all potential resources that could be affected by a proposed project or action. We recognize that the lead agency=s reviewer(s) will not necessarily be environmental professionals. So, the questions are designed to walk a reviewer through the assessment process by providing a series of questions that can be answered using the information found in Part 1. To further assist the lead agency in completing Part 2, the form identifies the most relevant questions in Part 1 that will provide the information needed to answer the Part 2 question. When Part 2 is completed, the lead agency will have identified the relevant environmental areas that may be impacted by the proposed activity. If the lead agency is a state agency and the action is in any Coastal Area, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. Tips for completing Part 2: • Review all of the information provided in Part 1. • Review any application, maps, supporting materials and the Full EAF Workbook. • Answer each of the 18 questions in Part 2. • If you answer “Yes” to a numbered question, please complete all the questions that follow in that section. • If you answer “No” to a numbered question, move on to the next numbered question. • Check appropriate column to indicate the anticipated size of the impact. • Proposed projects that would exceed a numeric threshold contained in a question should result in the reviewing agency checking the box “Moderate to large impact may occur.” • The reviewer is not expected to be an expert in environmental analysis. • If you are not sure or undecided about the size of an impact, it may help to review the sub-questions for the general question and consult the workbook. • When answering a question consider all components of the proposed activity, that is, the Awhole action@. • Consider the possibility for long-term and cumulative impacts as well as direct impacts. • Answer the question in a reasonable manner considering the scale and context of the project. 1. Impact on Land Proposed action may involve construction on, or physical alteration of, † NO † YES ✔ the land surface of the proposed site. (See Part 1. D.1) If “Yes”, answer questions a - j. If “No”, move on to Section 2. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may involve construction on land where depth to water table is E2d 9 ✔ 9 less than 3 feet. b. The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 15% or greater. E2f 9 ✔ 9 c. The proposed action may involve construction on land where bedrock is exposed, or E2a 9 ✔ 9 generally within 5 feet of existing ground surface. d. The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tons D2a 9 ✔ 9 of natural material. e. The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year D1e 9 ✔ 9 or in multiple phases. f. The proposed action may result in increased erosion, whether from physical D2e, D2q 9 ✔ 9 disturbance or vegetation removal (including from treatment by herbicides). g. The proposed action is, or may be, located within a Coastal Erosion hazard area. B1i 9 ✔ 9 h. Other impacts: _______________________________________________________ 9 9 ___________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 10 Page 94 of 111 2. Impact on Geological Features The proposed action may result in the modification or destruction of, or inhibit access to, any unique or unusual land forms on the site (e.g., cliffs, dunes, † NO ✔ † YES minerals, fossils, caves). (See Part 1. E.2.g) If “Yes”, answer questions a - c. If “No”, move on to Section 3. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. Identify the specific land form(s) attached: ________________________________ E2g 9 9 ___________________________________________________________________ b. The proposed action may affect or is adjacent to a geological feature listed as a E3c 9 9 registered National Natural Landmark. Specific feature: _____________________________________________________ c. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 ___________________________________________________________________ 3. Impacts on Surface Water The proposed action may affect one or more wetlands or other surface water ✔ † NO † YES bodies (e.g., streams, rivers, ponds or lakes). (See Part 1. D.2, E.2.h) If “Yes”, answer questions a - l. If “No”, move on to Section 4. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may create a new water body. D2b, D1h 9 9 b. The proposed action may result in an increase or decrease of over 10% or more than a D2b 9 9 10 acre increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water. c. The proposed action may involve dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material D2a 9 9 from a wetland or water body. d. The proposed action may involve construction within or adjoining a freshwater or E2h 9 9 tidal wetland, or in the bed or banks of any other water body. e. The proposed action may create turbidity in a waterbody, either from upland erosion, D2a, D2h 9 9 runoff or by disturbing bottom sediments. f. The proposed action may include construction of one or more intake(s) for withdrawal D2c 9 9 of water from surface water. g. The proposed action may include construction of one or more outfall(s) for discharge D2d 9 9 of wastewater to surface water(s). h. The proposed action may cause soil erosion, or otherwise create a source of D2e 9 9 stormwater discharge that may lead to siltation or other degradation of receiving water bodies. i. The proposed action may affect the water quality of any water bodies within or E2h 9 9 downstream of the site of the proposed action. j. The proposed action may involve the application of pesticides or herbicides in or D2q, E2h 9 9 around any water body. k. The proposed action may require the construction of new, or expansion of existing, D1a, D2d 9 9 wastewater treatment facilities. Page 2 of 10 Page 95 of 111 l. Other impacts: _______________________________________________________ 9 9 ___________________________________________________________________ 4. Impact on groundwater The proposed action may result in new or additional use of ground water, or ✔ † NO † YES may have the potential to introduce contaminants to ground water or an aquifer. (See Part 1. D.2.a, D.2.c, D.2.d, D.2.p, D.2.q, D.2.t) If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, move on to Section 5. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may require new water supply wells, or create additional demand D2c 9 9 on supplies from existing water supply wells. b. Water supply demand from the proposed action may exceed safe and sustainable D2c 9 9 withdrawal capacity rate of the local supply or aquifer. Cite Source: ________________________________________________________ c. The proposed action may allow or result in residential uses in areas without water and D1a, D2c 9 9 sewer services. d. The proposed action may include or require wastewater discharged to groundwater. D2d, E2l 9 9 e. The proposed action may result in the construction of water supply wells in locations D2c, E1f, 9 9 where groundwater is, or is suspected to be, contaminated. E1g, E1h f. The proposed action may require the bulk storage of petroleum or chemical products D2p, E2l 9 9 over ground water or an aquifer. g. The proposed action may involve the commercial application of pesticides within 100 E2h, D2q, 9 9 feet of potable drinking water or irrigation sources. E2l, D2c h. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ 5. Impact on Flooding The proposed action may result in development on lands subject to flooding. † NO ✔ † YES (See Part 1. E.2) If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, move on to Section 6. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may result in development in a designated floodway. E2i 9 9 b. The proposed action may result in development within a 100 year floodplain. E2j 9 9 c. The proposed action may result in development within a 500 year floodplain. E2k 9 9 d. The proposed action may result in, or require, modification of existing drainage D2b, D2e 9 9 patterns. e. The proposed action may change flood water flows that contribute to flooding. D2b, E2i, 9 9 E2j, E2k f. If there is a dam located on the site of the proposed action, is the dam in need of repair, E1e 9 9 or upgrade? Page 3 of 10 Page 96 of 111 g. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 ___________________________________________________________________ 6. Impacts on Air The proposed action may include a state regulated air emission source. † ✔ NO † YES (See Part 1. D.2.f., D.2.h, D.2.g) If “Yes”, answer questions a - f. If “No”, move on to Section 7. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. If the proposed action requires federal or state air emission permits, the action may also emit one or more greenhouse gases at or above the following levels: i. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide (CO2) D2g 9 9 ii. More than 3.5 tons/year of nitrous oxide (N2O) D2g 9 9 iii. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon equivalent of perfluorocarbons (PFCs) D2g 9 9 iv. More than .045 tons/year of sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) D2g 9 9 D2g 9 9 v. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide equivalent of hydrochloroflourocarbons (HFCs) emissions vi. 43 tons/year or more of methane D2h 9 9 b. The proposed action may generate 10 tons/year or more of any one designated D2g 9 9 hazardous air pollutant, or 25 tons/year or more of any combination of such hazardous air pollutants. c. The proposed action may require a state air registration, or may produce an emissions D2f, D2g 9 9 rate of total contaminants that may exceed 5 lbs. per hour, or may include a heat source capable of producing more than 10 million BTU=s per hour. d. The proposed action may reach 50% of any of the thresholds in “a” through “c”, D2g 9 9 above. e. The proposed action may result in the combustion or thermal treatment of more than 1 D2s 9 9 ton of refuse per hour. f. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ 7. Impact on Plants and Animals The proposed action may result in a loss of flora or fauna. (See Part 1. E.2. m.-q.) † NO ✔ † YES If “Yes”, answer questions a - j. If “No”, move on to Section 8. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may cause reduction in population or loss of individuals of any E2o 9 9 threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. b. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by E2o 9 9 any rare, threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the federal government. c. The proposed action may cause reduction in population, or loss of individuals, of any E2p 9 9 species of special concern or conservation need, as listed by New York State or the Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site. d. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by E2p 9 9 any species of special concern and conservation need, as listed by New York State or the Federal government. Page 4 of 10 Page 97 of 111 e. The proposed action may diminish the capacity of a registered National Natural E3c 9 9 Landmark to support the biological community it was established to protect. f. The proposed action may result in the removal of, or ground disturbance in, any E2n 9 9 portion of a designated significant natural community. Source: ____________________________________________________________ g. The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging, or E2m 9 9 over-wintering habitat for the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. h. The proposed action requires the conversion of more than 10 acres of forest, 9 9 E1b grassland or any other regionally or locally important habitat. Habitat type & information source: ______________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ i. Proposed action (commercial, industrial or recreational projects, only) involves use of D2q 9 9 herbicides or pesticides. j. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ 8. Impact on Agricultural Resources The proposed action may impact agricultural resources. (See Part 1. E.3.a. and b.) ✔ † NO † YES If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, move on to Section 9. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may impact soil classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the E2c, E3b 9 9 NYS Land Classification System. b. The proposed action may sever, cross or otherwise limit access to agricultural land E1a, Elb 9 9 (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc). c. The proposed action may result in the excavation or compaction of the soil profile of E3b 9 9 active agricultural land. d. The proposed action may irreversibly convert agricultural land to non-agricultural E1b, E3a 9 9 uses, either more than 2.5 acres if located in an Agricultural District, or more than 10 acres if not within an Agricultural District. e. The proposed action may disrupt or prevent installation of an agricultural land El a, E1b 9 9 management system. f. The proposed action may result, directly or indirectly, in increased development C2c, C3, 9 9 potential or pressure on farmland. D2c, D2d g. The proposed project is not consistent with the adopted municipal Farmland C2c 9 9 Protection Plan. h. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________ 9 9 Page 5 of 10 Page 98 of 111 9. Impact on Aesthetic Resources The land use of the proposed action are obviously different from, or are in ✔ † NO † YES sharp contrast to, current land use patterns between the proposed project and a scenic or aesthetic resource. (Part 1. E.1.a, E.1.b, E.3.h.) If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, go to Section 10. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. Proposed action may be visible from any officially designated federal, state, or local E3h 9 9 scenic or aesthetic resource. b. The proposed action may result in the obstruction, elimination or significant E3h, C2b 9 9 screening of one or more officially designated scenic views. c. The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points: E3h i. Seasonally (e.g., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons) 9 9 ii. Year round 9 9 d. The situation or activity in which viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed E3h action is: E2q, i. Routine travel by residents, including travel to and from work 9 9 ii. Recreational or tourism based activities E1c 9 9 e. The proposed action may cause a diminishment of the public enjoyment and E3h 9 9 appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource. f. There are similar projects visible within the following distance of the proposed D1a, E1a, 9 9 project: D1f, D1g 0-1/2 mile ½ -3 mile 3-5 mile 5+ mile g. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ 10. Impact on Historic and Archeological Resources The proposed action may occur in or adjacent to a historic or archaeological † NO ✔ † YES resource. (Part 1. E.3.e, f. and g.) If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 11. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous to, any buildings, archaeological site or district which is listed on the National or E3e 9 9 State Register of Historical Places, or that has been determined by the Commissioner of the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the State Register of Historic Places. b. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous E3f 9 9 to, an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory. c. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous E3g 9 9 to, an archaeological site not included on the NY SHPO inventory. Source: ____________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 10 Page 99 of 111 d. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ If any of the above (a-d) are answered “Moderate to large impact may e. occur”, continue with the following questions to help support conclusions in Part 3: i. The proposed action may result in the destruction or alteration of all or part E3e, E3g, 9 9 of the site or property. E3f ii. The proposed action may result in the alteration of the property’s setting or E3e, E3f, 9 9 integrity. E3g, E1a, E1b iii. The proposed action may result in the introduction of visual elements which E3e, E3f, 9 9 are out of character with the site or property, or may alter its setting. E3g, E3h, C2, C3 11. Impact on Open Space and Recreation The proposed action may result in a loss of recreational opportunities or a † NO ✔ † YES reduction of an open space resource as designated in any adopted municipal open space plan. (See Part 1. C.2.c, E.1.c., E.2.q.) If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 12. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may result in an impairment of natural functions, or “ecosystem D2e, E1b 9 9 services”, provided by an undeveloped area, including but not limited to stormwater E2h, storage, nutrient cycling, wildlife habitat. E2m, E2o, E2n, E2p b. The proposed action may result in the loss of a current or future recreational resource. C2a, E1c, 9 9 C2c, E2q c. The proposed action may eliminate open space or recreational resource in an area C2a, C2c 9 9 with few such resources. E1c, E2q d. The proposed action may result in loss of an area now used informally by the C2c, E1c 9 9 community as an open space resource. e. Other impacts: _____________________________________________________ 9 9 _________________________________________________________________ 12. Impact on Critical Environmental Areas The proposed action may be located within or adjacent to a critical † NO ✔ † YES environmental area (CEA). (See Part 1. E.3.d) If “Yes”, answer questions a - c. If “No”, go to Section 13. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quantity of the resource or E3d 9 9 characteristic which was the basis for designation of the CEA. b. The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quality of the resource or E3d 9 9 characteristic which was the basis for designation of the CEA. c. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 10 Page 100 of 111 13. Impact on Transportation The proposed action may result in a change to existing transportation systems. ✔ † NO † YES (See Part 1. D.2.j) If “Yes”, answer questions a - f. If “No”, go to Section 14. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. D2j 9 9 b. The proposed action may result in the construction of paved parking area for 500 or D2j 9 9 more vehicles. c. The proposed action will degrade existing transit access. D2j 9 9 d. The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations. D2j 9 9 e. The proposed action may alter the present pattern of movement of people or goods. D2j 9 9 f. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ 14. Impact on Energy The proposed action may cause an increase in the use of any form of energy. † NO ✔ † YES (See Part 1. D.2.k) If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 15. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action will require a new, or an upgrade to an existing, substation. D2k 9 9 b. The proposed action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission D1f, 9 9 or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two-family residences or to serve a D1q, D2k commercial or industrial use. c. The proposed action may utilize more than 2,500 MWhrs per year of electricity. D2k 9 9 d. The proposed action may involve heating and/or cooling of more than 100,000 square D1g 9 9 feet of building area when completed. e. Other Impacts: ________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ 15. Impact on Noise, Odor, and Light The proposed action may result in an increase in noise, odors, or outdoor lighting. † NO ✔ † YES (See Part 1. D.2.m., n., and o.) If “Yes”, answer questions a - f. If “No”, go to Section 16. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by local D2m 9 9 regulation. b. The proposed action may result in blasting within 1,500 feet of any residence, D2m, E1d 9 9 hospital, school, licensed day care center, or nursing home. c. The proposed action may result in routine odors for more than one hour per day. D2o 9 9 Page 8 of 10 Page 101 of 111 d. The proposed action may result in light shining onto adjoining properties. D2n 9 9 e. The proposed action may result in lighting creating sky-glow brighter than existing D2n, E1a 9 9 area conditions. f. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ 16. Impact on Human Health The proposed action may have an impact on human health from exposure ✔ † NO † YES to new or existing sources of contaminants. (See Part 1.D.2.q., E.1. d. f. g. and h.) If “Yes”, answer questions a - m. If “No”, go to Section 17. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may cccur occur a. The proposed action is located within 1500 feet of a school, hospital, licensed day E1d 9 9 care center, group home, nursing home or retirement community. b. The site of the proposed action is currently undergoing remediation. E1g, E1h 9 9 c. There is a completed emergency spill remediation, or a completed environmental site E1g, E1h 9 9 remediation on, or adjacent to, the site of the proposed action. d. The site of the action is subject to an institutional control limiting the use of the E1g, E1h 9 9 property (e.g., easement or deed restriction). e. The proposed action may affect institutional control measures that were put in place E1g, E1h 9 9 to ensure that the site remains protective of the environment and human health. f. The proposed action has adequate control measures in place to ensure that future D2t 9 9 generation, treatment and/or disposal of hazardous wastes will be protective of the environment and human health. g. The proposed action involves construction or modification of a solid waste D2q, E1f 9 9 management facility. h. The proposed action may result in the unearthing of solid or hazardous waste. D2q, E1f 9 9 i. The proposed action may result in an increase in the rate of disposal, or processing, of D2r, D2s 9 9 solid waste. j. The proposed action may result in excavation or other disturbance within 2000 feet of E1f, E1g 9 9 a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. E1h k. The proposed action may result in the migration of explosive gases from a landfill E1f, E1g 9 9 site to adjacent off site structures. l. The proposed action may result in the release of contaminated leachate from the D2s, E1f, 9 9 project site. D2r m. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 10 Page 102 of 111 17. Consistency with Community Plans The proposed action is not consistent with adopted land use plans. † NO ✔ † YES (See Part 1. C.1, C.2. and C.3.) If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, go to Section 18. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action’s land use components may be different from, or in sharp C2, C3, D1a 9 9 contrast to, current surrounding land use pattern(s). E1a, E1b b. The proposed action will cause the permanent population of the city, town or village C2 9 9 in which the project is located to grow by more than 5%. c. The proposed action is inconsistent with local land use plans or zoning regulations. C2, C2, C3 9 9 d. The proposed action is inconsistent with any County plans, or other regional land use C2, C2 9 9 plans. e. The proposed action may cause a change in the density of development that is not C3, D1c, 9 9 supported by existing infrastructure or is distant from existing infrastructure. D1d, D1f, D1d, Elb f. The proposed action is located in an area characterized by low density development C4, D2c, D2d 9 9 that will require new or expanded public infrastructure. D2j g. The proposed action may induce secondary development impacts (e.g., residential or C2a 9 9 commercial development not included in the proposed action) h. Other: _____________________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ 18. Consistency with Community Character The proposed project is inconsistent with the existing community character. † NO ✔ † YES (See Part 1. C.2, C.3, D.2, E.3) If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, proceed to Part 3. Relevant No, or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a. The proposed action may replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures, or areas E3e, E3f, E3g 9 9 of historic importance to the community. b. The proposed action may create a demand for additional community services (e.g. C4 9 9 schools, police and fire) c. The proposed action may displace affordable or low-income housing in an area where C2, C3, D1f 9 9 there is a shortage of such housing. D1g, E1a d. The proposed action may interfere with the use or enjoyment of officially recognized C2, E3 9 9 or designated public resources. e. The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural scale and C2, C3 9 9 character. f. Proposed action is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape. C2, C3 9 9 E1a, E1b E2g, E2h g. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________ 9 9 __________________________________________________________________ PRINT FULL FORM Page 10 of 10 Page 103 of 111 Page 104 of 111 KEPLINGER FREEMAN ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & LAND PLANNING 6320 FLY ROAD, SUITE 109 EAST SYRACUSE, NEW YORK 13057 PHONE: (315) 445-7980 PB SUBMISSION 6/4/2025 NOT FOR 0 125 250 375 CONSTRUCTION SCALE IN FEET REV DATE : DRAWN DESCRIPTION : No : BY : 1 6/4/25 JPR MISC. REVISIONS 2 7/2/25 JPR BUS PARKING AREA ALL DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT, AND SHALL BE USED ONLY ON THE JOB DESIGNATED. COPYRIGHT C THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AT THE SITE AND PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IN WRITING OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. JOB NO: 25014 DATE: 05/07/2025 DRAWN BY: JPR CHECKED BY: EGK SCALE: AS SHOWN PROJECT NORTH DIRECTION OF A LICENSED ARCHITECT. ANY SUCH ALTERATIONS SHALL BE NOTED, SEALED, AND SIGNED BY THE ALTERING ARCHITECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF PART 69.5(b). PART 69.5(b) OF THE TITLE VIII EDUCATION LAW OF NEW YORK PROHIBITS ANY AND ALL ALTERATIONS TO THIS DRAWING OR DOCUMENT BY ANY PERSON, UNLESS ACTING UNDER THE HOLMES KING KALLQUIST 575 North Salina Street, Syracuse, NY 13208 Fax: (315) 476 - 5420 & Associates, Architects, LLP www.hkkarchitects.com 577 PERU ROAD, JORDAN, NEW YORK JORDAN LANDING NEW CONSTRUCTION Ph: (315) 476 - 8371 PHOTO BOARD Page 105 of 111 L9.1 8/28/2025 5:40:47 PM C:\Users\clounsbery\Documents\revit files\R25_25014_Jordan Landing_central_20250821_clounsbery.rvt BUILD Page 106 of 111 ING - 1A BUILDING - 2A BUILDING - 2B BUILDING - 4A BUILDING - 3A BUILDING - 1B BUILDING - 1C BUILDING - 1D BUILDING - 1E SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" CAMPUS PLAN NO.: REV. NEW CONSTRUCTION: BUILDING 4A DATE: JORDAN LANDING PROJECT NORTH 577 PERU ROAD, JORDAN, NY BY: DRAWN HOLMES KING KALLQUIST DRAWN BY: & Associates, Architects, LLP JOB NO: 25014 DATE: 05/06/2025 575 North Salina Street, Syracuse, NY 13208 HCR REVIEW DESCRIPTION: SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" AT THE SITE AND PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE G1.0 Author Ph: (315) 476 - 8371 Fax: (315) 476 - 5420 ALL DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE CAMPUS PLAN ARCHITECT IN WRITING OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT AND SHALL BE USED ONLY ON THE JOB DESIGNATED. COPYRIGHT C www.hkkarchitects.com BUILDING 4A PART 69.5(b) OF THE TITLE VIII EDUCATION LAW OF NEW YORK PROHIBITS ANY AND ALL ALTERATIONS TO THIS DRAWING OR DOCUMENT BY ANY PERSON, UNLESS ACTING UNDER THE DIRECTION OF A LICENSED ARCHITECT. ANY SUCH ALTERATIONS SHALL BE NOTED, SEALED, AND SIGNED BY THE ALTERING ARCHITECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF PART 69.5( b). Section VII: For Housing Projects Only 1. Describe the reasons why the Agency’s financial assistance is necessary. Describe how the project would be impacted if these benefits were not provided. {Section II (D) A Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) agreement is critical to the financial feasibility and long-term stability of Jordan Landing. The project’s operating budget demonstrates that real estate taxes represent one of the largest ongoing expenses, beginning at $107,000 in Year 1 and escalating annually by 2%. Even with modest tax growth, total operating costs exceed $580,000 in the first year, producing an income-to-expense ratio of only 1.04—barely above the minimum threshold for sustainable operations. This narrow margin leaves limited flexibility to address increases in utilities, insurance, and maintenance costs, which have risen sharply across the affordable housing sector. Without a PILOT agreement to moderate property tax levels, the project’s annual debt coverage ratio would fall below the 1.15–1.20 range required by lenders and investors, making permanent financing unattainable. The result would be a project that cannot move forward in its intended form— jeopardizing 65 new units of affordable and supportive housing in a community that has demonstrated significant unmet demand and 100% occupancy in comparable properties. A PILOT is not simply a financial convenience; it is a core component of the project’s capital and operating strategy. The development’s rents are restricted to serve households between 30% and 70% of Area Median Income, with 30 of the 65 units dedicated to supportive housing for homeless veterans and individuals with serious mental illness. These deeply affordable units produce lower operating revenue but are essential to addressing regional housing and homelessness priorities. A full property tax burden—calculated at market valuation rather than restricted-income valuation—would consume scarce operating funds that must otherwise support resident services, maintenance, and long-term reserve contributions. A structured PILOT provides a predictable and sustainable tax framework that balances community benefit with fiscal responsibility. It ensures that Jordan Landing contributes to local tax revenues at a reasonable rate while preserving sufficient cash flow to operate safely, maintain quality, and deliver ongoing supportive services. With a PILOT, the project can maintain a Debt Coverage Ratio of approximately 1.17 and modest but stable annual cash flow of around $34,000, ensuring financial viability without rent increases or service reductions. Without this PILOT, the project would likely face a cascading series of consequences: higher rents that undermine affordability targets, reduction or elimination of supportive units, or deferral of critical maintenance. Each of these outcomes would erode the long-term community value that the project is designed to deliver. By granting a PILOT, the Agency directly supports the creation of new, high-quality affordable housing that aligns with Plan Onondaga’s priorities—revitalizing village centers, expanding housing choice, and serving vulnerable populations—while ensuring that the project remains financially sound for decades 1 Page 107 of 111 to come. The PILOT is therefore not only beneficial but indispensable to realizing the full social, economic, and policy benefits of Jordan Landing. 2. Describe how the proposed housing project fulfills an unmet need in the community. Please provide a market study documenting a need for the proposed project. Jordan Landing directly responds to a well-documented shortage of affordable and supportive housing in Onondaga County and the Central New York region. The preliminary market study prepared for this project demonstrates a capture rate of only 10.44%, confirming that there is more than sufficient demand to absorb the proposed 65 mixed-income units. In nearby comparable developments, including the sponsor’s 90-unit Old Erie Place community, occupancy remains at 100% with a substantial waiting list, underscoring the lack of available, high-quality affordable housing options for working families and individuals in the area. The demand for supportive housing is equally urgent. The 2024 Point-in-Time Count documents a sharp rise in homelessness in Onondaga County—from 598 individuals in 2023 to 760 in 2024, with similar increases among veterans and people with serious mental illness. Jordan Landing’s 30 ESSHI- funded supportive units (15 for veterans and 15 for individuals living with mental illness) directly target these vulnerable populations, pairing stable housing with comprehensive on-site services. Additionally, the project is strategically located approximately 30 minutes from the Micron facility, positioning it to serve the expanding workforce associated with this transformative regional investment. As Micron and its suppliers bring thousands of new jobs to Central New York, the need for attainable, workforce-appropriate housing will intensify. Jordan Landing fills this gap by offering energy-efficient, affordable units in a walkable village setting close to jobs, transit, schools, and amenities—meeting both existing and emerging housing needs across income levels. In short, Jordan Landing fulfills multiple layers of unmet community need: it increases the affordable and supportive housing supply in a constrained market, advances the region’s capacity to accommodate workforce growth, and provides a stable, service-enriched environment for those most at risk of homelessness. 3. Describe how the proposed project aligns with the Plan Onondaga County comprehensive plan. (Plan Onondaga) Jordan Landing is fully aligned with the priorities and guiding principles of Plan Onondaga, which emphasizes sustainable growth, housing choice, community revitalization, and equitable access to opportunity. The project exemplifies smart growth and infill development by utilizing vacant land within the Village of Jordan—an established, infrastructure-served area—rather than extending development into greenfield sites. By leveraging existing water, sewer, and transportation infrastructure, the 2 Page 108 of 111 development supports the Plan’s goal of focusing investment where services already exist, preserving rural character while strengthening village centers. The Plan calls for expanded housing options that meet the needs of a diverse population, including seniors, families, veterans, and individuals with disabilities. Jordan Landing fulfills this by delivering a mix of income levels and household types, combining affordable workforce units with 30 supportive apartments for individuals and veterans in need of stability. This integrated approach promotes inclusion and community cohesion, key themes within Plan Onondaga’s housing and human services strategies. Furthermore, the project advances the Plan’s economic development and community renewal goals by ensuring that new and existing workers—particularly those tied to regional employers such as Micron—can find quality housing within commuting distance. The development’s location along the Erie Canalway Trail and its walkable access to schools, shops, and civic amenities also reinforce Plan Onondaga’s vision for connected, livable communities that prioritize health, accessibility, and quality of life. In essence, Jordan Landing translates Plan Onondaga’s priorities from policy to action: creating inclusive, sustainable, and locally integrated housing that strengthens the social and economic fabric of Onondaga County. 4. Is the Project considered infill in a populated area? If yes, please explain. Jordan Landing is unequivocally an infill development within a populated area. The eight-acre site is located within the Village of Jordan and is directly adjacent to existing multifamily housing, including the 90-unit Old Erie Place community. It is surrounded by established residential neighborhoods, schools, a library, shops, and the Erie Canal Trail—all within a short walk. The Village proactively rezoned the parcel from R-A (single-family residential) to R-C (multi-family residential) to accommodate the project, demonstrating strong local support and recognition of the site’s appropriateness for higher-density infill housing. Existing municipal water and sewer infrastructure serve the property, minimizing environmental impact and ensuring efficient land use. By reactivating a vacant parcel at the edge of an existing residential corridor, Jordan Landing strengthens the village’s housing base, supports local businesses, and enhances walkability and connectivity. Rather than contributing to suburban sprawl, it reinvests in the heart of an established community—an approach that embodies both the spirit and intent of New York State’s Smart Growth and community revitalization principles. 5. Is there additional infrastructure necessary to service the project? If yes, please explain. No the water, sewer and electric infrastructure exists on site. 3 Page 109 of 111 6. Is the project a part of a larger mixed-use development? If yes, please describe. No. The Project is a standalone housing development. 4 Page 110 of 111 BARCLAY DAMON"' Kevin R. McAuliffe Partner December 29.2025 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL robertpetrovich(&,ongov.net Mr. Robert M. Petrovich Executive Director Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency 335 Montgomery Street, Floor 2M Syracuse, New York 13202 Re: TTM Technologies, Inc. — Sales Tax Exemption Extension Request. Dear Bob: I write to respectfully request an extension of the sales tax exemption period to June 30, 2026. The completion of construction of the new facility and payment for taxable items has not yet been completed. I would also like to request to appear on the January 8 agenda as the current ST-60 expires as of December 31, 2025. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Kevin R. McAuliffe KRM:amc cc: Nathaniel Stevens (via electronic mail natestevens@ongov.net) Alexis Rodriguez (via electronic mail alexisrodriguez@ongov.net) Christopher Andreucci (via electronic mail candreucci@harrisbeachmurtha.com) Barclay Damon Tower - 125 East Jefferson Street - Syracuse, New York 13202 barclaydamon.com KMcAuliffe@barclaydamon.com Direct: (315) 425-2875 Fax: (315) 425-8593 Also Admitted in: North Carolina 32991830.1 Page 111 of 111