From: Daniel Convissor
To: Denise Scaglione <dscaglione@sleepyhollowny.org>,
    Jared Rodriguez <jrodriguez@sleepyhollowny.org>,
    Ken Wray <kgwray@gmail.com>,
    Rachelle Gebler <rgebler@sleepyhollowny.org>,
    Sam Gonzalez <sgonzalez@sleepyhollowny.org>,
    Sandra Spiro <sspiro@sleepyhollowny.org>,
    Tom Andruss <tandruss@sleepyhollowny.org>
Cc: Anthony Giaccio <agiaccio@sleepyhollowny.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 15:52:39 -0400
Subject: incorporating route 9 feedback

Dear Trustees:

A quick fact check...

During the 7/6 Trustee Work Session discussion regarding the Route 9
Active Transportation Project, the Mayor said that he was troubled with
the Route 9 Plan because he "worked with the committee over the years
and our feedback hasn't been incorporated."

During the plan's development, the Mayor specifically took a hands off
approach and said he "does not want to water down the study" and that
the Steering Committee and consultants should come up with a proposal
and then the Village will take it under advisement.

Below is an email chain documenting such.

Sincerely,

--Dan


----- Forwarded message from Ken Wray <kgwray@gmail.com> -----

Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:41:48 -0400
To: Daniel Convissor <danielc@panix.com>
Cc: David Hodgson <d.hodgson@syncroservices.com>, Anthony Giaccio
	<agiaccio@sleepyhollowny.org>
Subject: Re: route 9 sleepy hollow followup
From: Ken Wray <kgwray@gmail.com>

Yes, correct, just wanted to make sure The Village's position  was clear.


On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:08 AM Daniel Convissor <danielc@panix.com> wrote:

> Hi Ken:
>
> This email gave me a feeling you were upset.  Email can be tough
> to interpret intentions and intonation.
>
> My intention was to say the Village isn't supporting, or rejecting, which
> particular designs go into the report.  The Village will then take the
> report's output and figure out what to do with it.
>
> I believe that's the upshot of our conversation in May and what I said
> in the email, below.  Perhaps my wording in context of the email I was
> replying to wasn't clear enough?
>
> Sorry if I created any misunderstandings.  Also sorry for not replying
> sooner, so many deadlines.
>
> See you,
>
> --Dan
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 05:12:50PM -0400, Ken Wray wrote:
>
> > To be clear, the BikeTarrytown design is not "supported" by the Village
> of
> > Sleepy Hollow. Being willing to read/review and consider its proposals
> is a
> > very different thing than support.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 21, 2018, 4:19 PM Daniel Convissor <danielc@panix.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Txell:
> > >
> > > We thank the team for digging in to our proposal.
> > >
> > > I sat down with Mayor Wray (cc'ed here) on 5/11 to go over the Steering
> > > Committee's recommendations.  The Mayor's position is the Village "does
> > > not want to water down the study."  The study and it's Steering
> > > Committee have opinions and should express them.  The Village will take
> > > the study's suggestions under advisement.
> > >
> > > See you,
> > >
> > > --Dan
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 09:08:10PM +0000, Font, Meritxell wrote:
> > > > Dan
> > > >
> > > > We had our traffic engineer review both plans for red flags, and
> > > > they would be comfortable including either, understanding the
> > > > details of traffic signal modifications still need to be worked
> > > > out for both.  So, if you would please confirm that the
> > > > BikeTarrytown design has been reviewed and supported by the
> > > > village via email copying Anthony Giaccio we will include it in
> > > > the plan.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your patience with this.
> > > >
> > > > Txell
> > > >
> > > > Meritxell Font
> > > > Principal
> > > > Nelson\Nygaard

----- End forwarded message -----