In the last two weeks, postings on the Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association List Server have needlessly confused and mis-interpreted the Zoning Text Amendment that has just been approved by Community Board 6, Borough President Marty Markowitz's office and which will be voted on by the Department of City Planning next week.
Carroll Gardens resident and Architect John Hatheway, who thoroughly understands New York City Zoning laws and has been volunteering countless hours of his time to close the Wide- Street loophole, has written an amazing step by step clarification. Here it is:
Judith Thompson posts some reasons why she thinks the Zoning Text amendment will be bad for Carroll Gardens. Unfortunately she misinterprets zoning laws and market forces and thereby invalidates most of her arguments. Let's take her points one by one:
1) Instead of closing a loophole the amendment will encourage high-rise development similar to what has occurred in Williamsburg, Greenpoint and Sunset Park.The high-rise development she cites is located in an "MX-8" Special Mixed Use District in the case of Wmsburg and Greenpoint. This area was rezoned in 2006 to promote higher, denser development to encourage continued mixed manufacturing, commercial and residential uses. To get technical, where MX-8 is mapped in conjunction with an R6 district buildings are permitted to be 110 feet high! Other areas permit greater height. In Sunset Park and parts of Park Slope, the high-rise development is in an area that was recently changed from R6 to R8A zoning, which now permits buildings 120 feet high and with a 6.02 FAR. The high-rise development that Judith cites has occurred in RE-ZONED districts where the city wanted to encourage high-rise development. THAT IS NOT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN CARROLL GARDENS. THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL REMAIN AN R6 DISTRICT UNDER THIS TEXT AMENDMENT.
2) "A developer would now be encouraged by the text amendment to build high rise towers in order to obtain the 2.43 FAR instead of the 2.2 FAR."The 2.43 FAR Judith refers to is available under "height-factor" zoning, but is only attainable with a 13 story building. Building a 13-story building on a standard lot, or even a pair of lots, is virtually impossible with elevator and emergency stair requirements. And it is certainly not attainable by someone who wants to renovate and add on to their house. (On larger plots of land like the old ILA site and the Luquer Street site that has a new building being erected, tall buildings are possible, but no such large lots exist in the areas affected by this text amendment. To get technical, height factor zoning works on a sliding scale, as follows (for our R6 district): 4 stories = 1.85 FAR; 5 st = 2.02 FAR; 6 st = 2.14; 7 st = 2.23 (the same as Quality Housing gives on a narrow street); 8 st = 2.30 FAR, and so on. Open space requirements increase as a building gets taller, so floors get smaller and less efficient.If developers were encouraged to build tall on narrow streets, they'd already being doing it on the other streets in Carroll Gardens, and nothing will change there under this text amendment.
3) "The text amendment takes away homeowner rights to make small expansions while at the same time creating an inducement for big developers like Rattner, Toll Brothers and Related to build high rise towers."Until 1987, when the Quality Housing Program was enacted, home owners only had height-factor zoning to calculate whether they could add on to their house. Under the Quality Housing Program, even on narrow streets, home owners still get to build more than they could have prior to 1987. The reason developers are only building on the Place blocks in Carroll Gardens is because they are currently labeled "wide" streets and get an even greater floor area bonus. BUT the result is the out-of-scale, non-contextual development we see on 2nd and 3rd Places, in particular. THE CURRENT "WIDE" STREET DESIGNATION IS THE INDUCEMENT FOR BIG DEVELOPERS! This is why CGNA and City Planning have proposed this text amendment.
4) "The higher 3.0 FAR reward is what induced Claret to decide to build Quality Housing at the International Long Shoremen site. There is no overall height limitation for Height Factor buildings. If the 3.0 FAR reward were not available to Claret, they could have built a 20 story tower on such a large footprint."First, Long Island College Hospital deserves credit for selecting a developer that was committed to developing the site under Quality Housing provisions. They had higher offers from people that intended to build high-rise developments.Second, since Court Street is truly a wide street, the 3.0 FAR is entirely appropriate as envisioned by the city planners when Quality Housing was adopted. And it worked as the planners might have hoped, in encouraging a more contextually appropriate building. Judith is right that IF A LARGE SITE IS ASSEMBLED a tall building could be erected, BUT that exact same option is available to them today.Third, 100 Luquer Street is being developed under height-factor zoning, NOT Quality Housing, even though it is located on a wide street (Hamilton Avenue.) The building will be 11 stories tall and is being built upon vacant land, a very different condition from the Place blocks.
In conclusion, the Zoning Text amendment is only likely to affect the actions of large developers, and it will have the effect of discouraging them from developing in ways that are not respectful of our neighborhood. Despite her protestations, it seems that Judith is more concerned about keeping the unintended benefits for big developers than she is about preserving the character of our neighborhood.
Respectfully,
John Hatheway Architect
Related Posts:
Marty Markowitz Says Yes To Carroll Gardens' Wide Street Text Amendment
C.B.6 Approves Carroll Gardens Zoning Text Amendment
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
.JPG)
No comments:
Post a Comment