Camouflaged With #METOO Legislation, Eminent Domain Acquisition Of Sites In Gowanus For C.S.O. Tank Easily Sails Through City Council

Councilman Steve Levin at yesterday's vote at City Council

Kevin Clarke of D.E.P. testifying in front of 

NYC Council's Subcommittee on Landmarks, Public Siting and Maritime Use meeting 3/12/18

Video courtesy of New York City Council

Always an engaged citizen and someone who likes to see things through, I took the time to attend
New York City Council's meeting yesterday afternoon.  On the agenda was a vote on an important Gowanus issue that I have written about on this site from the very beginning: an application by the New York City Department of Environmental Protection for the proposed site selection and acquisition of three privately owned properties at 242  Nevins Street, 270 Nevins Street, and 234 Butler Street "to facilitate the construction of the “Head End Facility” as part of the larger project to construct combined sewer overflow (“CSO”) control facilities to reduce the volume of untreated wastewater entering the Gowanus Canal."
This project is located in Council Member Stephen Levin’s district, who attended the meeting. His colleague, Councilmember Brad Lander, whose district covers a larger section of the Gowanus Canal, was absent.

This land acquisition at the head of the canal only accommodates an 8 million gallon CSO retention tank mandated by the Federal government as part of the Environmental Protection Agency's Superfund clean-up of the polluted waterway.  D.E.P. also has to construct a 4 million gallon tank in the middle portion of the canal, in Councilmember Brad Lander's district.

At a hearing of the City Council's  Subcommittee on Landmarks, Public Siting and Maritime Uses on March 12, 2018, D.E.P.'s Kevin Clarke testified that the cost for the entire 'program' that includes both tanks is estimated to reach $1.2 Billion.  That is more than twice the entire cost of the Superfund Clean-Up, which E.P.A. estimates at $500 million.
The estimated cost for the acquisition of the sites at the head of the canal is $90 million, according to Clarke, with an additional $400 million for the construction of the 8 million gallon tank.
(I am really, really not good at math, but that would mean that the smaller tank will cost $700 million? How is that possible?)
Please keep in mind that the EPA estimated the cost at $77 million for both tanks, suggesting that they be build on land already owned by the City to keep cost down.

Given what amounts to a "remarkably expensive endeavor" (Councilman Levin's words),
I had hoped for an animated discussion on the item from his fellow Councilmembers.
After all, it is not every day that the City proposes to spend such a huge amount of money in two Councilmen's districts.

Imagine my surprise when I realized yesterday that application # C 180065 PCK for the site acquisition at the head of the canal was bundled together with at least 25 other items, safely camouflaged with several items pertaining to the “Stop Sexual Harassment in NYC Act".

Now, I applaud all the Councilmembers who voted overwhelmingly to support the #MeToo movement and secure protection from sexual harassment, yet one wonders if they were even aware that they were also voting for such a huge ticket item.

On the other hand, I may just be naïve. After all, such items are regularly slipped into bills and votes in Washington and Albany.

Please don't misunderstand me. I support the construction of both C.S.O. retention tanks. The City has to stop using the Gowanus Canal as an open sewer.  But the City which has ignored the pleas of the community to stop dumping raw sewage into our canal for decades now seems to want to line these tanks in gold.

Indeed, with a massive re-zoning of the Gowanus corridor that would allow the construction of residential buildings in this once vibrant industrial neighborhood, one has to wonder if the City  is instead planning what one Gowanus resident recently called "the Taj Mahal of sewer treatment facilities" to accommodate developers and their planned condos instead of two simple tanks as mandated by the E.P.A.

Read more

A New Push By Local Politicians To Bring Back The B 71 Bus, Which Was Discontinued Seven Years Ago

Council Members Brad Lander, Assemblywoman Jo Anne Simon and Councilman Steve Levin

Back in 2010, the Metropolitan Transit Authority (M.T.A.) cut service to several local bus lines and eliminated the B71 bus completely. The B71 ran along Union Street and connected Carroll Gardens to the Park Slope neighborhood and its public institutions like Prospect Park, the Brooklyn Museum, the Children's Museum and the main Brooklyn Public Library at Grand Army Plaza.
The route was popular with older citizens, young families and area school children. To this day, its services are great missed.

In the seven years that have passed, our local politicians have held rallies several times to push the M.T.A. to re-instate the bus route. This morning, Council Members Brad Lander, Steve Levin and Assemblywoman Jo Anne Simon once again gathered with constituents for a "Bring Back The B71 Bus" rally.

This time around, our politicians are pushing for an extended route that would pass through Red Hook and end in Manhattan.

According to a press release, the new B71+ route would:
● Connect seniors, students, families, NYCHA residents, and people with disabilities to schools, stores, and Brooklyn’s cultural institutions: Nine schools, three senior centers, multiple public housing developments, and Brooklyn’s best cultural institutions (Brooklyn Museum, BPL Central Branch, Prospect Park, Brooklyn Botanic Gardens, and the Brooklyn Children’s Museum) would be served by this new route. That means better access and increased mobility for residents of Red Hook, Columbia Waterfront, Carroll Gardens, Cobble Hill, Gowanus, Park Slope, Prospect Heights, and Crown Heights.

● Provide a new connection through Red Hook to Lower Manhattan: Red Hook is not served by any subway stop, and only by two local Brooklyn bus routes. A direct connection between Red Hook and Manhattan would make 90,000 more jobs accessible for Red Hook commuters within a one-hour transit zone. And everyone along the route would gain a convenient new commuting route to Lower Manhattan.

● Serve a growing population: Since the elimination of the B71, population around the route has grown by more than 10% -- much more than the increase for NYC or Brooklyn overall -- but no new transit capacity has been added. The potential rezoning of Gowanus would mean even more demand.

The plan also has the support of Congresswoman Velazquez, Council Member Laurie Cumbo,  Council Members Menchaca,  and community partners like the Eileen Dugan Senior Center, Gowanus Alliance, TWU Local 100, Transportation Alternatives, the Brooklyn Children’s Museum, the Fifth Avenue Committee, Gowanus Alliance, Park Slope Civic Council, Red Hook Initiative and many.

Why our elected officials think that there may be a chance now to re-instate the bus route after falling on deaf ears with the M.T.A. for the past seven years, is unclear.  The main push for this latest effort may have a lot to do with the proposed re-zoning of the Gowanus Corridor.  One of the big concerns voiced by the community during New York City Planning Department's  Gowanus Neighborhood Planning Study 'listening tour" was that the local subway stations were already overcrowded. Many felt that more residents in Gowanus would make a bad situation worse.
Since this proposed B 71 + route would go all the way to Manhattan, it would certainly accommodate some of the new residents in Gowanus.

Remember that  our politicians holding another "Bring Back The B 71 Bus"  rally and posing for a photo op is NOT the same as getting the bus back. We need to make sure that they continue to fight for it to make it happen.

To add your name to the  petition, please click here.

Read more

What Do We Think Of The Newly Installed LinkNYC Kiosks In Carroll Gardens?

Newly installed LinkNYC on Smith Street in front of Bar Great Harry

Just one block away, another one at Douglass and Smith

In front of Bird, also on Smith Street

Just a bit further down Smith Street, yet another.

And one of the newly installed ones on Court Street.

A map of all the LinkNYC kiosks recently installed in BoCoCa

During the summer, quite a few LinkNYC kiosks have been installed in and around Carroll Gardens.  It is all part of an initiative to replace New York City's old payphone infrastructure with state of the art public communications network.  Eventually, "at least 7,500 Link kiosks will be installed across all five boroughs over the next eight years," according to LinkNYC's web site.

The 9.5 ft tall kiosks offer the public "high-speed Wi-Fi, phone calls to anywhere in the U.S., device charging, a touch screen tablet for access to city services, maps and directions, and a 911 Emergency Call button."
The kiosk's side also feature two 55-inch high-definition displays, which will be used to display public service announcements and advertisement. The free service is paid for by the advertisement revenue. According to its web site: "LinkNYC’s advertising platform will also generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for New York City. The project is also expected to create 100 to 150 new full-time jobs in manufacturing, technology and advertising."

Obviously, the revenue is nothing to sneeze at, and the project is expected to create between 100 to 150 new full time jobs in technology, manufacturing and advertisement, according to the City.

The access to free wi-fi for those who can't afford it is also a huge benefit of this free service.

However, one wonders why it is necessary to have so many kiosks grouped together.

In our immediate area, 11 such stations have, or are ready to be activated along Court Street and Smith Street.  They are so concentrated, that there is actually one on almost every block from Sackett to Warren Street along Smith Street.

Doesn't that seem a bit excessive?

Despite the  benefits of the free services offered by LinkNYC, the system has already come under scrutiny  regarding the risks of data collection and access to personal information.

In several neighborhoods, local residents have complained that people congregate at the kiosks to drink and do drugs, as well as deal drugs.  Last year, the operators of the kiosks, CityBridge, L.L.C., had to shut down the browser capability on the kiosks, after some users started watching pornography right on the sidewalk.

“These kiosks are often monopolized by individuals creating personal spaces for themselves, engaging in activities that include playing loud explicit music, consuming drugs and alcohol, and the viewing of pornography," Councilman Corey Johnson, who represents Greenwich Village, Chelsea and part of Midtown, told the New York Times in 2016.

Just a few weeks ago, Greenpoint residents in Councilmember Steve Levin's district attended a Community Board 1 meeting on September 18th to report on the activities at one of the kiosks on Manhattan Avenue, which had "become an electronic concierge for a neighborhood 'drug den,' allowing people to schedule drug purchases and warn each other about approaching police," according to DNA Info.

At the meeting, members of the Community Board received dvds  featuring video clips documenting the criminal activity, littering and noise at this particular kiosk from one resident living right next to it.  They were also presented with a letter that states, in part:

"We face becoming unwilling witnesses to a drug deals, meet‐ups and other illegal activities. Activities we, as law‐abiding citizens understandably want no part of. We encounter individuals under the influence of narcotics or, even worse, those who are mentally and emotionally volatile (often due to withdrawal from narcotics). To say we are living in “terror” may be an overstatement, but there is an element of truth to it nonetheless."

Nothing of the sort has been reported here in our neighborhoods in relation with these Link NY kiosks, as far as we know.  We did want to start a conversation regarding their recent installation and want to hear from our neighbors:

How do you feel about them?  Have you used one yet?  Do you live near one?  How about their location and numbers? Too many? Not Enough?

Leave a comment.

Read more

EPA Gowanus Canal Superfund CAG Has Conversation With Councilmen Steve Levin And Brad Lander

Doug Sarno, facilitator for EPA Gowanus Canal Superfund CAG

Christos Tsiamis, EPA Remedial Project Manager for the Gowanus Canal

Councilman Stephen Levin, 33rd Council District

Christos Tsiamis and Stephen Levin

Councilman Brad Lander, 39th Council District

This past Tuesday evening, the Environmental Protection Agency's Gowanus Superfund Community Advisory Group (CAG) hosted Councilman Stephen Levin and Councilman Brad Lander for a conversation about the City's role now that the EPA’s Record of Decision (ROD) for the canal cleanup has been signed.

The EPA is swiftly moving forward with the design for the environmental remediation and has requested a decision from the City by July 2014 on the location of two mandated retention tanks for combined sewer overflow.

The CAG's discussion with both Council members centered on  the impact of development on the
banks of the canal, size and location of the retention tanks, hydrology of the area and the relationship between the EPA and the City.

Christos Tsiamis, Project Manager for the Gowanus Canal, Brian Carr, Legal Council, and Natalie Loney, Community Involvement  Coordinator for EPA Region 2, were also in attendance.

Since Levin and Lander attended Tuesday's general CAG meeting at different times, the conversation with each councilman focused on slightly different topics.

Conversation with Councilman Steve Levin

 Th discussion between the CAG and Council member Levin, whose district covers the head of the canal, focused mostly  on the location of the EPA mandated retention tanks. 

"As many of you may know, I was supportive of the Superfund designation to begin with and I am very appreciative of EPA's stellar work and their collaborative effort,  their willingness to work with the CAG and the greater community on coming up with a plan that is thorough and looks to address all the outstanding issues once and for all,"  Levin told members of the CAG.

"I want to make sure that all aspects of contributing pollution to the Gowanus Canal are addressed thoroughly through this process, that the City is a partner and doesn't skirt its responsibility, and that all Potentially Responsible Partners [PRP] meet their liability."

Levin expressed his concern about the possibility of placing  one of the retention basins underneath the "Double D" pool at  Thomas Greene Park.  The pool is an important resource for his constituents, he noted.  "I would like to see other sites considered because I want to make sure that the pool stays a pool and that the park is not disrupted."

In the Record of Decision, the EPA has proposed this particular location for a retention tank because:
-the pool sits on a former Manufacturing Gas Site and the land underneath it may need to be remediated by National Grid, the named PRP.
-the largest outflow, which is responsible for much of the raw sewage into the canal, is at the head of the canal at Douglass Street, near the park.
-The park is one of the only open pieces of land in this densely populated area.
-the land is already owned by New York City.

Remediation, Levin conceded, should dictate the final decision: "I want to make sure that all pollution is addressed.  That includes all CSOs.  If that means retention tanks are needed, I defer to the wise judgement of the EPA."

If one of the retention basins must be placed at this location, Levin wants to make sure the community has a locked in, up front agreement that the public amenity will be replaced or repaid in kind. "I don't want to be in the position that six years from now, retention tanks are in, the pool is dug up, and no one is going to pay for a new one. I am not saying who should pay for it, National Grid or the City.  I am just saying, someone needs to pay for it."

Christos Tsiamis of Region 2 clarified that the City is responsible for the retention tanks. "That's in the Record of Decision.  We have given the City the flexibility to suggest alternate locations. We have had a walk-through with the City to suggest other sites that we had in mind. No new sites were brought up to us by the City.  We will have another meeting with them in a week to two. So the process continues."

As far as the pollution underneath the Double D Pool, Tsiamis explained: "90 % of the contamination is  on the western half of the park, the part where the pool is.  The feasibility study by the State has not come out yet.  [When it does] we will comment on it because it is tied up with our cleanup.  The fact is, work will be done, remediation will take place on that site."

Asked how the community can make sure that the de Blasio administration will work more cooperatively with the EPA than the previous administration,  Levin suggested that the Superfund process is now well on its way.  "I would argue in general that it is better to go along with the process than go kicking and screaming.  Besides being a better principle, it's also more cost effective than fighting everything.  We want to get this done in a timely fashion, in a way in which we can feel confident that we are leaving a clean Gowanus Canal for future generations of New Yorkers.  The best way of doing that is through co-operation instead of fighting it."

And with a smile, he added, "the Feds always win."

Conversation with Brad Lander

Councilman Brad Lander's, whose 39th Council district includes the largest swath of Gowanus, told the CAG that the recent appointment of Emily Lloyd as NYC Department Of Environmental Protection's Commissioner will hopefully mark the beginning of a real collaboration between the City and the EPA.  "I think the world of Emily Lloyd. She cares deeply about the environment, is really thoughtful about working with different sets of people, and she knows a lot about how government and communities work. I think that bodes well for having a conversation with her about what the next steps will be," he said.

Lander acknowledged that the work that has been done by the EPA so far has made it possible to have a conversation about the future of the Gowanus Canal area in the first place.  He recently co-sponored 'Bridging Gowanus', a collaborative plan that represents the goals that people have for the community. 

"We started from the point that we wanted to develop as much consensus as we can.  Step one was to create a set of common values.  From the feed back, there is very substantial, even overwhelming consensus around that set of values. Step two was to break down into small working groups and start to develop some set of ideas that advance those values.  The third step is probably going to be the most challenging.  That's the one where we talk about ideas around which there is less consensus, and where people think about the tradeoffs between density and development, where, and if and how it should take place, how big it should be and what it should be,  the goals and value that people set, the risks of harm, and the risks of inaction."

According to Lander, the final 'Bridging Gowanus' document will be used to have a dialog with NY City Planning  "about where we go in the future.  One of the reason why I believe it is in our shared interest to develop consensus around land use is to minimize the individual actions that take place."

Members of the CAG asked that there be more cross-fertilization between members of the CAG and those involved with"Bridging Gowanus.  Lander promised to encourage more dialog.

Speaking about future development along the Gowanus Canal, Brian Carr of EPA reminded everyone that the Agency specifically wrote into its Record Of Decision that new buildings on the uplands need to capture a certain amount of sewage related contamination from going into the canal, and that we need to make sure that the remedy is effective over time. 

"We expect that the City's regulation on how new construction takes place, for which we have a certain amount of discretion for approval, will become much more mandatory.  They need to do that to make sure that they don't outsize whatever tanks get built.  There is no point in building a tank and then exceeding its capacity a month later.  That is built into the remedy and we would consider this an institutional control", he explained.

Carr concluded:  "For better or worse,  what happens along the canal comes through us to some extent."

1928 photo of the former MGP site at Douglass Street, where Thomas Greene Park is now

Below, the Double D Pool at Douglass Street.

Read more

Local Councilmen To Attend Tuesday's General Meeting Of The EPA Gowanus Superfund CAG

 

The Gowanus Canal last week after a sewer overflow event 

The Environmental Protection Agency's Gowanus Canal's Community Advisory Committee (CAG) will be holding its monthly meeting this Tuesday, February 25th, 2014 at 6:30 at Mary Star of The Sea Senior Apartments, 41 1st Street, Brooklyn.
In attendance will be 39th District Council Member Brad Lander, and 33th District Council Member Steve Levin.

Council Member Carlos Menchaca of the 38th District has also been invited.
The topics of discussion with the council members will be:

*the location of the two retention tanks for combined sewer overflow that are defined in the EPA Record Of Decision.
*the impact of upland development on the canal, such as the size of retention tanks and type of remediation for property along the canal in relation to new development,
*cross-fertilization between the CAG and the “Bridging Gowanus” planning sessions

Representatives of EPA Region 2 will also be in attendance.

The CAG meetings are open to the public.

Read more

IMPORTANT MEETING TONIGHT: Have A Say On The Future Of The Gowanus Neighborhood At Public Meeting

***TONIGHT***

Your involvement and participation are needed.

Please make every effort to attend this important meeting

Bridging Gowanus

Monday December 9th, 2013

from 6:30 to 8:30 pm

at PS 372 – The Children’s School at 512 Carroll Street.

"First in a series of public meetings to develop a neighborhood framework for the infrastructure and land uses needed for a safe, vibrant and sustainable Gowanus."

Recently, I wrote about a series of 'Gowanus Planning' kick-off meetings that had been held jointly by State Senator Velmanette Montgomery, Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez, State Assemblywoman Joan Millman, Councilmember Steven Levin and Councilmember Lander.
Pratt Center for Community Development (not to be confused with the Pratt Institute) has been hired by the elected officials as the facilitator and consultant in charge of running the planning process.
According to an overview prepared by Pratt, the goal is to:
*Develop the outlines of a comprehensive, community‐based infrastructure and land‐use plan for a safe, vibrant, and sustainable Gowanus area
*Bring community stakeholders together to build as much consensus as we can around a long‐term vision for the Gowanus Canal area
*Shape the next NYC mayoral administration’s thinking about the Gowanus Canal
*Create a space for honest conversation about different viewpoints.

The first such meeting had been convened this past August. On the list of invited stakeholders were representatives from local organizations and neighborhood associations. Those same stakeholders met again in October for a series of small group interviews.
Pratt Center compiled the information from these interviews and will present the findings at the first in a series of public meetings to be held on Monday December 9th, 2013.

The end result of these meetings, according to a press release "will be a community supported blueprint for an environmentally safe, vibrant, and sustainable Gowanus to inform de Blasio Administration."

Personally, I remain very skeptical of this entire 'Gowanus planning' process and doubt that at its conclusion, the community will be able to truly influence the outcome.
Mayor-elect Bill De Blasio, who once served as our Councilman, not only supported the Toll Brothers Gowanus spot-rezoning back in '08, he fought hard to drive away the EPA when the agency proposed to list the Gowanus as a Superfund. I have no doubt that he is itching to hand over the Gowanus corridor to developers.

However, as I wrote previously, I do believe that the community needs to take the planning process back. We owe it to ourselves and to all who will come after us to take our seat at the table, and to push for a true, transparent, democratic process. We need to tell our politicians that before any new development is envisioned, we need to first find out what the Gowanus can sustain. We need to first invest in infrastructure to strengthen the businesses and the residential areas that are already there, and we need to demand new tools in City Planning's tool box.
As a community, we need to remind our politicians that before moving ahead with any re-zoning, we need a health study to gage the effects of exposure to the environmental hazards in Gowanus. Secondly, we need a hydrological study to evaluate the effect of new development in this flood prone area.
Most importantly, we need assurances from Mayor-elect De Balsio that the City Of New York will pay and follow through on the EPA-mandated retention basins that will help reduce the Combined Sewer Overflows and improve water quality in the canal. Without these studies and without the retention basins, planning more housing in Gowanus seemed "recklessly premature."

Whether you live or work in Gowanus, Carroll Gardens, Boerum Hill, or Park Slope, whatever your vision for the future, we will all be affected by how the Gowanus corridor will be re-zoned.
Please stay involved. You can visit BridgingGowanus.org for upcoming meeting announcements and information about the process.



Read more

Your Participation Is Needed: Have A Say On The Future Of The Gowanus Neighborhood At Public Meeting On December 9th

Your involvement and participation are needed. 
Please make every effort to attend this important meeting.

Bridging Gowanus

Monday December 9th, 2013 

from 6:30 to 8:30 pm 

at PS 372 – The Children’s School at 512 Carroll Street. 

"First in a series of public meetings to develop a neighborhood framework for the infrastructure and land uses needed for a safe, vibrant and sustainable Gowanus." 

Recently, I wrote about a series of 'Gowanus Planning' kick-off meetings that had been held jointly by State Senator Velmanette Montgomery, Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez, State Assemblywoman Joan Millman, Councilmember Steven Levin and Councilmember Lander.

Pratt Center for Community Development (not to be confused with the Pratt Institute) has been hired by the elected officials as the facilitator and consultant in charge of running the planning process.
According to an overview prepared by Pratt, the goal is to:
*Develop the outlines of a comprehensive, community‐based infrastructure and land‐use plan for a safe, vibrant, and sustainable Gowanus area
*Bring community stakeholders together to build as much consensus as we can around a long‐term vision for the Gowanus Canal area
*Shape the next NYC mayoral administration’s thinking about the Gowanus Canal
*Create a space for honest conversation about different viewpoints.

The first such meeting had been convened this past August. On the list of invited stakeholders were representatives from local organizations and neighborhood associations. Those same stakeholders met again in October for a series of small group interviews.

Pratt Center compiled the information from these interviews and will present the findings at the first in a series of public meetings to be held on Monday December 9th, 2013.

The end result of these meetings, according to a press release "will be a community supported blueprint for an environmentally safe, vibrant, and sustainable Gowanus to inform de Blasio Administration."

Personally, I remain very skeptical of this entire 'Gowanus planning' process and doubt that at its conclusion, the community will be able to truly influence the outcome.
Mayor-elect Bill De Blasio, who once served as our Councilman, not only supported the Toll Brothers Gowanus spot-rezoning back in '08, he fought hard to drive away the EPA when the agency proposed to list the Gowanus as a Superfund. I have no doubt that he is itching to hand over the Gowanus corridor to developers.

However, as I wrote previously, I do believe that the community needs to take the planning process back. We owe it to ourselves and to all who will come after us to take our seat at the table, and to push for a true, transparent, democratic process. We need to tell our politicians that before any new development is envisioned, we need to first find out what the Gowanus can sustain. We need to first invest in infrastructure to strengthen the businesses and the residential areas that are already there, and we need to demand new tools in City Planning's tool box.
As a community, we need to remind our politicians that before moving ahead with any re-zoning, we need a health study to gage the effects of exposure to the environmental hazards in Gowanus. Secondly, we need a hydrological study to evaluate the effect of new development in this flood prone area.
Most importantly, we need assurances from Mayor-elect De Balsio that the City Of New York will pay and follow through on the EPA-mandated retention basins that will help reduce the Combined Sewer Overflows and improve water quality in the canal. Without these studies and without the retention basins, planning more housing in Gowanus seemed "recklessly premature."

Whether you live or work in Gowanus, Carroll Gardens, Boerum Hill, or Park Slope, whatever your vision for the future, we will all be affected by how the Gowanus corridor will be re-zoned.

Please stay involved.   You can visit BridgingGowanus.org for upcoming meeting announcements and information about the process. 

Read more

Lightstone Group's Plans And Drawings For Gowanus Project Approved By City Planning, But Developer Still Needs Waterfront Certificate

NYC Department Of City Planning Hearing for Lightstone Group's Gowanus development  

Commissioner Betty Chen, Commissioner Michelle De La Uz, and Amanda Burden,  Chair of the NYC Department Of City Planning

Commissioner Michelle De La Uz and City Planning Chair Amanda Burden

(De La Uz is the executive director of the 5th Ave. Committee. During the Lightstone discussion, she recused herself, since the developer has contracted with the 5th Avenue Committee to manage the affordable units included in the project.)

 Amanda Burden,  Chair of the City Planning Commission

Purnima Kapur, City Planning Brooklyn Director

Aline Fader, representing NYC DCP Brooklyn Office, presents Lightstone's newest plan

Aline Fader and colleague present Lightstone Groups's as-of-right project

Just a few days ago, it was announced that Lightstone Group is proceeding with its 500,000 square feet mixed-use housing development on the shores of the Gowanus Canal at 363-365 Bond Street as an as-of-right development and has abandoned the minor modification which it had previously requested of NYC's Department of City Planning (DCP).

During DCP's review session on Monday afternoon, representatives of the Brooklyn DCP office explained that Lightstone, apparently wanting to avoid the risk of legal action,  has withdrawn its minor modification application and has decided to pursue the as-of-right development under zoning granted in 2009.
This project had come in front of the commission once before in September 2012 as a 'minor modification' of the original 2009 special permit project previously granted to Toll Brothers.

This as-of-right development is nevertheless subject to City Planning Commission approval because the 2009 special permit project was made subject to a restrictive declaration that was attached to the plans and drawings.

One of the purposes of the restrictive process was to help insure that the key urban design principals of the special permit project, which ensures that the taller portions of the development should be on the canal side and the lower portions should be along Bond Street, would be respected.

The second restriction has to do with Waterfront Zoning Regulations, which did not apply to the Gowanus Canal at the time of the original approval in early 2009.  However, later the same year, the City Council made the canal subject to the zoning regulations and water front open space will now be required in connection with the as-of-right project under those provisions.

The original 2009 project provide public open space along the canal that was designed "in the spirit of" the Waterfront Regulations. It did not strictly adhere to them.  Lightstone has modified the drawings to allow the requited waterfront public access area to be included, resulting "in a net increase of open space on the Southern block, where the building is being pushed back by approximately 20 feet."

To address FEMA's recently released Advisory Base Flood Elevations and  changes to the Building Code,  the site will be raised by 2 feet at First Street. Lightstone will elevate the ground floor of the building approximately 1.1 foot and make the street level parking garage a "bath tub structure".

At yesterday's DCP session, Lightstone sought approval for the plans and drawings for the as-of right project.
The Planning Commission votes unanimously to grant the approval.

However, at a later date, the applicant will need to seek a Waterfront Certificate from Chair Amanda Burden in regards to the design of the waterfront open space. The certificate will specify the design of the open space and certify that it meets the zoning requirements. The applicant is expected to file the application later this year.

"And at that point, and only at that point, will the developer be able to begin construction. So it's really a two-step process" a representative of the Brooklyn DCP office was quick to point out during the presentation.




Read more

Important Update And Meeting Regarding Lightstone's Proposed Gowanus Project

Old rendering of Lightstone Development next to the Gowanus Canal (credit: Lightstone Group)

New Rendering Of Lightstone Development
(Via Councilman Lander's office)

New elevation drawings for Lightstone Project. Click here for enlarged view

(Via Councilman Lander's office)

New FEMA Advisory Base Flood Elevations for Gowanus

Lightstone Development site, Canal at Carroll Street during Sandy (photo credit: Margaret Maugenest)

Second Street at canal during storm (photo credit: Triada Samaras)

Sandy flooding at First Street near Canal (photo credit: Carl Teitelbaum)

***Important Information For All Carroll Gardens/Gowanus Residents***

NYC Department Of City Planning Hearing On Lightstone Project 

363-365 Bond Street; Restrictive declaration approval to existing plan

Tomorrow, Monday March 18

at 1 pm

Spector Hall, 22 Reade Street, New York, New York

There is some very important information that was circulated late last week on Lightstone Group's proposed large-scale Gowanus development at 363-365 Bond Street, between Carroll Street and 2nd Street.
According to Councilman Brad Lander's office, which informed several Gowanus residents on Thursday evening, Lightstone is proceeding with the project "as of right" and has abandoned the minor modification which they had previously requested of NYC's Department of City Planning (DCP).

In 2012, hoping to piggy-back on the former Toll Brothers project at the same site, Lightstone had sought DCP's approval for variations in the base height of the project, building heights and footprints of portions of the buildings, relocation of parking entrances, changes to the location and design of the open space, and changes to the number of residential units from 447 to 700.  DCP considered these changes "minor" modification's, which are subject to review and approval only by the Commission, rather than 'major' modifications that require the initiation of a new ULURP.

DCP was going to rule on this matter in November 2012, but the hearing never took place because of Hurricane Sandy. The community was told that DCP and its Brooklyn office were first waiting for the release of Federal Emergency Management Agency's new post-Sandy "Advisory Base Flood Elevations (ABFE)", which indicate significant expansion of the flood plains.
The ABFEs for the Gowanus area were published very recently.

Perhaps concerned about new flood regulations in Zone A and of legal challenges, Lightstone has re-configured the proposed 700-unit development so that it can move forward according to the site's existing zoning. To address the fact that the land sits squarely in FEMA's flood zone A and to comply with new waterfront development rules, Lightstone has pulled away slightly from the water and increased the grade at First Street.

City Planning has placed the Lightstone item back on its calendar for tomorrow, Monday March 18, at 1 pm, Spector Hall, 22 Reade Street, New York, New York. (It's the 9th agenda item).  The meeting is open, but no comments will be accepted from the public.
All important information can be found here: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/luproc/reviewsession.pdf?r=031813

I urge everyone to attend. This project will most likely serve as the blueprint for the over-all rezoning for the Gowanus Canal and will create repercussions for neighboring residents.  The plan to raise the entire site will most likely increase flooding in nearby properties.  

Councilman Brad Lander, who has previously asked Lightstone to withdraw its application, issued the following comment on Friday:  “In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, I continue to believe it is a mistake to move forward with dense, high-rise, residential development without a comprehensive plan for infrastructure and land use regulations that Gowanus needs.” 

Read more