Friday, May 16, 2008

C.B.6 Approves Carroll Gardens Zoning Text Amendment

oo


I was unable to attend the important Community Board 6 meeting, but Mr. Pardon Me did, so just this once, I am handing over the blog to him. Below is his report on the Carroll Gardens Zoning Text Amendment vote:
Thursday night's Community Board Six general meeting was held in the 2nd floor courtroom at Brooklyn Borough Hall. There was a larger turnout than usual due to two issues. The future of the Union Hall bar on Union street in Park Slope hung in the balance as did the possibility of some small measure of over-development protection for Carroll Gardens.

First, our Borough President delivered this years Robert Acito youth acknowledgment awards. Next came the landmarks committee applications which were all easily approved with no discussion. Then came the main attraction for the evenings entertainment: The NYC Planning proposal for a zoning text amendment which would remove the wide street designation from the deep garden blocks in Carroll Gardens. This was a simple measure which will treat the garden blocks the same as all the other streets in Carroll Gardens. These streets are the most vulnerable to development because they have been inadvertently treated as wide streets (like Court Street and Atlantic Avenue) since the Quality Housing Program created the concept of "wide" streets back in 1987. This should have been a no-brainer for all of the people who agree that Carroll Gardens needs to be protected since it is the least protected brownstone neighborhood and is therefore being targeted by developers who see the historic row houses and low scale neighborhood quality of life as nothing more than a medium in which to grow their profits. A few people (who all proclaimed their interest in and support for preserving the community) managed to complicate the situation by raising a multitude of objections which were not relevant to the amendment being considered. Their protestations demonstrated either ignorance of the very simple proposal or a duplicitous attempt to derail it, or most likely; both. Due to the red herrings they proffered, many on the board were confused over the issue so the discussion and vote took about an hour and a half before being approved by a vote of 20 to 7 with 7 abstentions.


The community board, you should remember, is a group of public servants who all certainly recognize and share the concern about out of scale development and individually support the idea that we should preserve this unique community. You should also consider that this amendment was produced and presented by NYC Planning after repeated suggestions and pleading by the members of the Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association and C.O.R.D. It is supported by every neighborhood group and all of our elected officials and represents a very small start toward the protection of Carroll Gardens. This is apparently not enough reason for a few who seek to protect the neighborhood by doing nothing.


Glenn Kelly



Related reading:

Carroll Gardens Urges Marty Markowitz To Be "Narrow Minded"!

All You Ever Wanted To Know About The Carroll Gardens Zoning Text Amendment



For Home Page, click Pardon Me For Asking

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

nice reporting and thank you. Though, I do not understand the last sentence. Please explain.

the wood said...

I am confused too. I am a member of another community board. I am not nor are a majority of my fellow board members public servants(we are not paid city or any government mployee) by a large. Some of us are but what we are is community minded and sit as selected by the Boro President or local city council member

Kelly said...

Hello Anon,
Here is what my husband meant by the last sentence:
The Carroll Gardens community has limited tools to fight over-development. Concerned residents can sign petitions, appeal to their elected officials or appeal to the city to rezone or landmark the neighborhood.

There are some people, including some board members, who say that they want to protect the neighborhood but object to how it is being done.
Rather than to help achieve the common goal, they are derailing the process.

Kelly said...

Hi Wood!

Pardon me for asking, but aren't board members serving the public good? They are not elected officials, but they are hopefully representing the people in their community, no?

Or do their loyalties lie with the Borough President or Councilman who selected them for the board?

I always wondered.....