Lazy Or Just Careless? Brooklyn Community Board 6's District Office Fails To Post Meeting Minutes In A Timely Manner On Web Site And Why It Matters

Community Board 6  Chair Peter Fleming

Mike Racioppo District Manager of CB6

According to its web site, one of the functions of our Community Board 6  district office, located at 250 Baltic Street in Cobble Hill, is "maintains all the public records of the activities of the Community Board."

One would think that function would include posting the approved meeting minutes in a timely manner on its site. After all, there is a dedicated page to those minutes on the site and it would be the most logical place to make them accessible to the community.

However, that does not seem to be the case.

When I recently found myself looking for some CB6 information, I was surprised to find that the meeting minutes had not been updated for months.

For example,  the 2019 minutes for the Permits and Licenses Committee meeting only showed those for the monthly meetings in  January and February 2019. The ones for the Land Use/ Landmark Committee only included those for January, February and March 2019.

The other committees did not fare any better.

Even more curious, only minutes for the  January 8, February 13 and March 13 2019  general meetings of the Full Board appear on the web site. 

(The January 2019 meeting is mislabeled 2018)

There is almost no excuse for the fact that minutes for the year 2018 remain incomplete on the web site as well. (See photo above)

Almost every CB6 General and Committee meeting usually begin with the approval of the previous  meeting minutes.  So why aren't they posted on the site shortly afterwards? A delay of a month or two would be understandable, but not providing the community with timely minutes is unacceptable.

Curious as to what Community Board 6  by-laws state regarding minutes, we looked it up. They were last updated in 2009  and say that the "minutes shall be kept in the district office and forwarded to all public libraries within Community District #6 and shall be available to any person or organization requesting same."

We called the Carroll Gardens Library on Clinton Street, which would be the closest to the Community Board office to check. We were told that no CB6 committee or general minutes were kept there.

We are aware of the fact that Brooklyn CB6 was selected to participate in the Live-Streaming Program, through the City Council's Digital Inclusion and Literacy Initiative and that indeed, some meetings have been taped and are still  accessible on You Tube.

There are no links to the live-stream videos anywhere on the CB6 page. It is important to note that only general meetings have been videotaped, none of the committee meetings.

Considering that many important discussions and votes happen during those committee meetings, those minutes should have been posted. 

In our opinion, the approved meetings of ALL Brooklyn CB6 meetings should always be posted.

Why does this matter? CB6 represents the neighborhoods of Carroll Gardens, Cobble Hill, Columbia Waterfront, Gowanus, Park Slope and Red Hook.  There have been many issues being discussed in the past few months,  none more important than the massive proposed rezoning of the Gowanus Canal area, which will bring more than 20,000 new residents to the area and will undoubtedly affect many within the Community Board boundary.

Presentations on the rezoning have been given by city agencies and comments made by the public at the general and committee meetings.  In their advisory capacity, members of Community Board 6 will cast their vote to either approve or disapprove the plan. 

It is therefore important that a complete, timely meeting record and complete minutes be made available to the community. 

It is not too much to ask for. CB6 and its district office need to do better.

If you are wondering how quickly other community board web sites post meeting minutes here is a link to Community Board 6 in Manhattan. THAT board seems to be pretty up to date on that front. 

Read more

Less Than A Stellar Moment For Community Board 6 As Members Reject Own Land Use Committee's Recommendations And Votes To Conditionally Approve Lightstone Gowanus Project

Community Board 6 Board  October Meeting at Prospect Park Residence in Park Slope

Board Chairman Daniel Kumer

The Lightstone Group suits

Chairman of CB6's Land Use Committee

Board Member Lou Sones

Board members Debbie Scotto (with hand raised) and Judy Thompson

Last night's monthly meeting of Community Board 6 was a bizarre, badly organized affair that left many Gowanus/ Carroll Gardens residents scratching their heads and wondering about the board's integrity.

First, CB6 should have known that their monthly general meeting would be well attended. After all, on the agenda for the night was the Lightstone Group's  application for "minor modifications" to the previously approved land use actions at 363-365 Bond Street in Gowanus.
When the issue was discussed at CB6's Landmark/ Land Use Committee's public hearing on September 28th, 2012, the community had come out in force, filling an entire school auditorium and overwhelmingly spoke against it.

Yet, no provisions were made to accommodate a larger crowd. Before the meeting even started, the room set aside for the night at the Prospect Park Residence in Park Slope was filled to capacity and members of the community were stuck in the lobby, unable to go upstairs to attend.
(Perhaps if someone had asked some of the 10+ representatives of Lightstone to leave, there would have been room? Just saying...)

Board Chairperson Daniel Kumer was quick to tell everyone that no comments would be taken from the audience. He stated that there had been plenty of opportunity for the community to speak out at the Landmark/ Land Use Committee on September 28th and at a previous meeting in August.
"Most of the real work happens in the committees" he stated.

True enough. After listening to much opposition to the Lightstone project, the Committtee had passed a motion requested that New York City Planning Commission not move ahead with the Lightstone project and that it be tabled until a supplemental Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is performed.
In addition, the motion requested
*that the developer commit to the following:
* that 30 percent of the units be affordable
*that the over-all height of the building be reduced to eight stories as opposed to 12 stories.
*and that the Community Board Responsible Contractor Conditions (which include union labor) be followed.
The motion passed 14 to 3.

The same committee's motion was now in front of the full board.  It is customary for the board to follow  the  committee's recommendation, but after discussion, the motion failed to pass with 27 members voting against.  (Strangely, some members, like Lou Sones, who had voted for the motion a week before, now voted against it.  What was up with that?)

A second motion was made by board member Debbie Scotto. It stated:
Community Board 6 was to neither approve, nor disapprove the application, but to ask City Planning to renew its commitment to a rezoning study and a full EIS for the entire Gowanus Corridor.  In addition, the Board insists that any developer agree to CB6's Responsible Contractor Policy.
It failed 19 to 18.

The following motion was then made by Bob Levine and voted on by the Board:
The Community Board conditionally approves the minor modifications provided that the developer follows CB6's Responsible Contractor Policy and that City Planning starts a full scale study involving the rezoning of the Gowanus Corridor.

The non-binding recommendation passed with 27 yes votes.
 (There were 4 abstentions and 4 no votes.

It was less than a stellar moment for CB6.  Local Gowanus residents who had taken the time to understand the issue,  to attend two prior CB6 meetings on the matter and had  testified in front of the Landmark/Landuse committee were disgusted by the board's refusal to consider the recommendation of its own committee.
"What a shameful performance," someone mentioned on the way out of the meeting.





Read more

From Condo To Rental: The Lightstone Group Presents Its Gowanus Project To Community Board 6

363-365 Bond Street 

CB6 Landmark/Land Use Committee meeting last night

Committee Chair Peter Fleming

Lightstone Representative 

Steven Lenard and Aline Fader representing New York City Planning

David Von Spreckelsen, senior vice president at Toll Brothers

After seven weeks in France, the last place I wanted to be last night was at the Community Board 6 Landmark/ Land Use Committee meeting, but The Lightstone Group was presenting its plans for 363-365 Bond Street on the shores of the Gowanus Canal. And well, it was too important to miss.

As many of you probably know by now, Lightstone is reviving the former Toll Brothers project. Back in 2009, after a Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP) that was set in motion by Toll Brothers, the property was successfully spot re-zoned from manufacturing to special mixed-use by the City of New York despite the protests of many members of the community who pleaded with city officials to first clean the Gowanus Canal thoroughly before rezoning the area.

Shortly afterwards, however, the Environmental Protection Agency came to the community to inform residents of the toxicity of the Canal and declared is a Superfund Site.
It did not take long for Toll Brothers to abandon its plans, stating that the Superfund designation made it impossible to go forward with the 447 unit condo project.

If Toll Brothers got cold feet, the Lightstone Group is ready to charge ahead with a 700-unit rental building. The developer came in front of CB6's Land Use Committee last night as a "courtesy" since the "relative minor alterations" apparently do not need a new ULURP nor a new Impact Statement.
CB6 Land Use Chair Peter Fleming was quick to tell board members and residents that this was an 'informal presentation' by Lightstone. "They are looking for input from the community, so try to be productive with your comments."

 Lightsone's project looks very much like what Toll Brothers had proposed. The "minor modification" are reflected in the massing to allow affordable apartments to be distributed throughout the buildings and 'to accommodate the addition of the NYC waterfront Sponge Park at the end of 2nd Street."
However, the new plan will "reflect the current economic conditions and real estate market." It is a mixed-use, all-rental development with fully integrated affordable and market components.
There will be 560 market rate apartments, 140 affordable apartments. There will be two small retail spaces on Bond Street, community spaces on the Canal and on 1st Street as well as open space along the Canal. There will also be parking for 316 cars.
The buildings will range in height from 6 stories to 12 stories, with the higher buildings on the canal front.
The affordable component will be affordable in perpetuity and will be managed by the Fifth Avenue Committee.

It did not take long for CB6 members and local residents to address the environmental issues affecting this particular site during the question-and-answer period. According to Ethan Geto, Lightsone's public relations person, "the EPA has responded positively to the development project" and "supports remediation of the site by Lighthouse" because the proposed steel pile along the bulkhead, storm sewers and other site work will reduce pollution in the canal.

Steven Miller, Committee member and EPA Gowanus Canal Community Advisory Group (CAG) member urged Lighthouse to set up a meeting with members of the CAG and representatives of the EPA "as soon as possible".

The community also reminded Lighthouse representatives that the Gowanus area used to be marshland and that it is prone to flooding. In addition, the sewer infrastructure is totally inadequate. "I have had 5 feet of raw sewage in my basement, "Richard Beanman , who lives on Carroll Street at the corner of Bond Street, stated. "I welcome you to come to my house when it rains. Before you build. Not after."
Another resident added: "You are increasing the sewer load by 700 units in the area."

It is interesting to note that Lighthouse has retained the services of both Lee Weintraub of Lee Weintraub Landscape Architecture and of AKRF a leading environmental, planning and engineering consulting firm. Both had previously worked on the Toll Brothers Project.

It was also strange to see David Von Spreckelsen, senior vice president at Toll Brothers, in the audience. Longtime resident Celia Cacase asked directly if Toll Brothers still had any involvement with the project.  A Lighthouse representative was quick to deny. "Toll is neither directly involved or indirectly involved."

Also, when asked if Lighthouse had already purchased the site or had an option to buy, their representative said that because of confidentiality, he could not answer the question, but that 'an option to buy would not be a misrepresentation."

Read more