« NYT: Limiting Mortgage Deduction Wise, Unlikely Brooklyn Bridge Park On Fast Track »

November 17, 2005

South Slope Officially Downsized

waterfront
South South Slopers are celebrating their victory yesterday, as the City Council (above) voted unanimously to approve the downzoning of South Park Slope and Greenwood Heights. The big question marks now are what happens to the two Isaac Katan 12-story buildings on 15th and 16th streets and the Robert Scarano "Minerva" building. Any guesses?
A New Era Has Begun [South South Slope]

Comments

Sucks to be a developer today, if your foundation isn't completed that is. After that appeal to the Board of Standards and Appeals falls flat, you better write out a fresh check to your architect for some new drawings/plans. Remember Issac, 50' you greedy. HA HA!! /snicker>

Posted by: Taste's So Sweeeet! at November 17, 2005 9:06 AM

The 15th street site (between 4th and 5th) had a lot of late night work going on this past week - including pouring cement into the foundation. This is despite a stop-work order posted.

I called the DOB - no resonse...

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 9:19 AM

how long before ROBERT SCARANO, the intimidator comes on here with one of his pithy philosophical ramblings?

Posted by: ltjbukem at November 17, 2005 9:24 AM

Congrats to all who helped make this happen and the support of brownstoner.com and other community groups.

The largest leap is over...now for those sites with the big "vested" question mark...just because we have been rezoned/downzoned this does not lift our efforts to see responsible development (now curbed by R6B and R5B), but more importantly legal and SAFE building practices from the top down: developer>architect>demo company>construction subs.

We are all still watching the current sites in our area (troubled or not), and hopefully welcoming a new neighbors who plan on developing in our community--responsibly.

Posted by: lostinbrooklyn at November 17, 2005 9:25 AM

i'm not celebrating, now my shitty eyesore of a house will remain when i could have built a nice looking condo. in what way is this a victory? on fourth avenue you can build up to 12 stories which will destroy all views of the statue of liberty. this is for some developers a home run. as the buildings go up on fourth avenue on second and fifth street does anybody going by think this is a victory? no it's a sellout, downsize my block and protect my asthetic at the cost of others. what should have been done is to enforce the current zoning regulations and to not allow loopholes like quality housing and false promises of yeshiva residences to inflate square footage claims. not everybody hurt by this is a developor, lost was my opportunity is to take my property and do what i wanted to do with it. this is just a knee jerk reaction given no thought at all voted on by city council members who are petrified to be against down zoning. you think congestion is bad in park slope now wait to these fourth avenue projects are done. all that glee and smugness on you phyrric victory will be wiped off your face when you see what these luxury housing projects destroy your quality of life.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 9:25 AM

BOO HOO 9:25 :(

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 9:28 AM

"i'm not celebrating, now my shitty eyesore of a house will remain when i could have built a nice looking condo."

Since I am fairly confident I know the person behind this anonymous post, one thing needs to be defined:

Under R6B YOU CAN BUILD WHAT YOU WANT. Again, for discussions sake to the poster, on the properties in the rezoned effort, zoning laws and DOB regs were abused. Plain and simple. Responsible development was not done. Plain and simple.

A land owner now can (and should if they desire) to build under the new zoning. Again, if I know this poster, you can build one or even two "Park Slope style" condo buildings, 50' tall, with I would thing 6-8 units in each. Seems like a lucrative deal to me, especially if you plan to live there.

Please stop being a shill for Scarano and realize you have lost nothing in this rezoning...unless you were planning on following suit with other developers in the area (not all) and create potentially illegal, out of context buildings. Is that what's at play here?

Please don't hide behind the upzoning of 4th Ave. I am not a huge proponent of it either, but it was part of a well thought out ULURP, plain and simple. But that's another discussion...

There really should be no sour grapes. But as always, I appreciate a good dialog on brownstoner.com

Posted by: lostinbrooklyn at November 17, 2005 9:37 AM

Wah wah wah. I should have started my project sooner. Issac K. must saying the same thing. Oi givalt (sp.) this is gonna cost me. $5mil for the site, a $15mil mortgage, $2-$3mil in demo/site prep/illegal foundation work, and now I may have to start over?!? My investors are gonna be pissed (we'll just have to pass this cost along to the next round of greater fools). Maybe I should have closed on the site a few months earlier instead of jerking the sellers around for nine months. If I can't get this built, I sure ain't paying Kielbassa $400,000 for his parking space on 16th St. And why were neighbors pitching a fit Tuesday night when I was trying to pour a few trucks worth of cement. So what If I was wiping my a$$ with that "Stop-work" order. Screw you 15th & 16th Streets. We will see who wins. You may have won this battle, but I will win the war. F-ME!

Posted by: B*tch, B*tch, B*tch at November 17, 2005 9:40 AM

The B*tch is a bit anti-semitic... Not all developers are evil, and certainly not all Jewish ones.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 9:43 AM

What needs to have happened to have been grandfathered? It seems to me that a foundation was at least mostly done on the 15th Street site prior to yesterday. (No idea whether it was done in violation of stop work orders.)

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 9:56 AM

Hey, b*tch -- it's "oy gevalt." To quote that great work of cinema, "Porky's": You're too stupid to even be a good bigot.

Posted by: linusvanpelt at November 17, 2005 10:26 AM

Can someone please explain the codes to me (a 16th street resident). What do C4-3A, R5B, R6B, and R8A mean?

Thanks

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 10:42 AM

scarano shill, thats funny, i wouldn't know him if he sat next to me on the bus. didn't i say that onstead of down zoning the city have closed the loopholes that scarano and company exploited. as for i have lost nothing you are wrong again. at 250 square foot profit i lose 0.43 of building rights. lets see 0.43 times 5000 square feet equals 2150 sq feet. that comes out to a loss of 537,500 dollars. yup that equals nothing. also i just want to say , I am not a developer. i'm just a person that owns one piece of property who lost his golden chance for early retirement. my shitty looking frame house will look shitty for years to come because although i can still build it makes no finacial sense to do so. and how well though out is to build completely out of context 12 story buildings on fourth avenue, wouldn't 6-8 stories have been enough? downzoning or no downzoning all you have to do is go by this and see it was a mistake. again i'm not against downzoning i just think this would have been better handled by closing loopholes and enforcing the prior regulations. and please don't out me if you know who i am, i know especially on this blog my view is not popular.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 10:49 AM

Mira!: Issac Katan, Shaya Boymelgreen, Elan Padeh, Slappy Ratner, Marty Cohen et al. Bigoted or not, there is a certain majority flavor in the development community and they don't really give a mielda about their worker's safety, your building's structural integrity, your health or safety. It's ALL about their (any developer's) bottom line...damn the torpedoes and the community. Buy a pol and get your way. The downzoning puts some hurt on the big money (where ever it's coming from). No?

Posted by: 16th St. Boriqua at November 17, 2005 10:57 AM

and for bitch , bitch, bitch . i'm not crying, i am just trying to make a point. what does everybody have to fall in place and agree on this. saying you may have lost this battle but not the war seems like a guy who was crying on the foundation that was being laid right down the block from his house. of couse he didn't care less about the stop work order its only a small fine compared what could be lost if that foundation wasn't laid. have a stop work order have some teeth and this wouldn't of happened. well too bad. was that rain yesterday of still your tears? boo hoo hoo

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 11:02 AM

Too bad they didn't make a similar zoning change when they rezoned 4th Avenue north of 15th Street. That affordable housing component really sweetens the deal. I had mentioned how silly it was to upzone an area without adding a provision for affordable housing when I was interviewed for an article in the Village Voice a few months ago. http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0527,moses,65568,5.htmlI wonder what it would take to get that affordable housing bonus added to the northern 4th Avenue blocks.

Posted by: Shahn Andersen at November 17, 2005 12:08 PM

Shahn: A suitcase full of bribes and a time machine.

Posted by: linusvanpelt at November 17, 2005 12:24 PM

If it's any consolation for the South Slope folks, the impact of the new 4th Avenue developments ("phyrric victory" 9:25am poster) will pale into insignificance compared to the Atlantic Yards development. Ever seen Starrett City? Atlantic Yards will be 20% larger.

Posted by: Anon at November 17, 2005 12:40 PM

Wow, there are some serious selfish NIMBYs on this thread! I guess people prefer sprawl, environmental degradation and less money for NYC schools, transit, etc. The Brooklyn housing shortage will get worse and I'll probably never be able to afford an apartment. Of course, the crazies supporting the downzoning don't care. They probably bought years ago!

Posted by: Alex at November 17, 2005 12:47 PM

16th St. Boriqua,
What difference does their religious identity make - I mean I notice that the 'majority' of the robberies in 78pct are committed by hispanics and blacks; - would the race of these people be a factor? I guess based upon your theories I should not buy new construction from the Jews and not walk on the street near blacks or hispanics

Posted by: David at November 17, 2005 12:49 PM

Posted by: Alex at November 17, 2005 12:50 PM

to anonymous 10:42, the 'R6B', 'C4-3A' designations refer to the underlying zoning for a particular area - you really need to have a look at the NYC zoning resolution and maps to understand (available for free via the city's website). Basically, 'R' designations refer to residential areas, 'C' designations refer to commercial areas, and 'M' designations refer to manufacturing areas. The zoning resolution controls the use of a particular property, and the height and bulk that buildings on a particular property might have.

To all the zoning mavens lurking out there, I realize that this is something of an oversimplification, so please don't climb down my throat about it.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 12:54 PM

Alex, I am the 1st to scream NIMBY but these zoning changes generally make sense from an urban development perspective; one lane streets (w/ street parking) arent really appropriate for high rise construction and given the >5 story housing already exisiting it really isnt wrong to prevent 12 story buildings on these blocks - that being said 4th Ave with 6 lanes and subway lines/stations IS approriate for high rise developments and the zoning should reflect this.
Development with taller buildings (which retain the street wall) closest to main auto and mass transit arteries; with progresively lower density as you move away from these "centers" is the ideal way to build an efficient, pedestrian friendly urban enviroment.

Posted by: David at November 17, 2005 1:05 PM

isn't this condemnation without compenstation?

i lost 800+ sq ft. the downzoning diminished my property value and killed my plans to build a modest extension. will my property taxes get lowered? right.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 1:12 PM

Shahn,

If one truly wanted to promote affordable housing, he must first quit being a hypocrite regarding his stance on that which props up the price of homes in the first place -- zoning.

Bureaucrat mechanizations like Mitchell-Lama and other "affordable housing" schemes are poor substitutes for free market housing. One cannot honestly believe that R.E. developers are out there to only sell expensive housing- their goal is obviously is to make money, but that can be accomplished by putting out the product that the majority can afford.

What stymies that effort mostly are zoning laws, and yes, affordable housing provisions. Zoning leads to artificial scarcity. You don't have to be an econ. major to understand the laws of supply and demand, and so it's stupid, yes stupid to restrict the supply of living space if you want to ensure afforable products.

Imagine if gas stations were restricted to how much gasoline they can provision based on their location, would one be suprised to see a shortage of gas accompanied with higher costs?

Any government attempt there after to provide "affordable gas" would be a laughable venture, after all you can't restrict the supply of a good and then expect it to magically appear on the market place because you made a small gesture of so-called incentives.

Posted by: iceberg at November 17, 2005 1:14 PM

Iceberg, the comparison w/ gas is misplaced, b/c ultimatley Govt is responsible for the infrastructure that supports housing (police, sanitation, fire, schools, roads, transit, etc...) as well as the citizens quality of life - therefore Govt needs zoning to ensure that development takes place in a manner that allows for the reasonable distribution of those services, not to mention overall quality of life.
A developer who doesnt have to figure in these macro issues will (appropriatly) develop to maximize his ROI - this may very well conflict with Governments macro responsibility therefore zoning must be used to establish a workable framework.
I certainly would agree that Govt intervention (not zoning) in the marketplace, in the name of affordabiliy has been one of the major contributors to the lack of affordability in NYC - but (intelligent) zoning is absolutly essential to ensure a workable, liveable city.

Posted by: David at November 17, 2005 1:29 PM

i sense one of those massive zoning blowouts about to take place, with the minions of Ayn Rand racing to the barricades

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 2:09 PM

The height of new construction doesn't bother me nearly as much as how uggggggly most of it is.

Posted by: Anon at November 17, 2005 2:16 PM

I grew up in one of three Greenbelt Towns in America, Greendale, Wisconsin to be specific. Those first homes built in the late 1930's during the Great Depression where nothing more than unadorned cinderblocks on cement slabs. Built as starter homes for new families, they are the heart of the Village of Greendale. Over the years, homes have been built surrounding these "Originals" with greater square footage and increasingly more expensive price tags. In recent years, million $ Mc Mansion style homes have been built. These "Originals" have been protected for all these years against additions, extra stories, built on garages, and aluminum siding salesmen. They still remain a viable Starter Home for young families and senior citizens on fixed incomes. They are also, in their simple dignity, the source of a great renaissance for the Village as people come from all over the U.S. to understand a part of our history when things were not as abundant as they are now.

The simple homes of Greenwood Heights are important for the same reason. People have been given a chance to own affordable homes, and raise a family and be a part of a neighborhood community for generations. A community where developers are not interested in building affordable homes, just luxury condos.

South Slope and G.H. community has allowed many new developments to be built on its side streets. It wasn't until 7,9, even 12 story projects were being proposed that its citizens began organizing and protesting what it feared would become the norm. There is some truth to the statement that if only the Dept. of Buildings had enforced its policies maybe we wouldn't have such monstrosities as 266 22nd Street towering above the other homes on the block. Like most cancers many people don't pay attention to the warning signs until it's to late. Who can't see the value in protecting one's own light and air? This down zoning will protect our neighborhood while still allowing for new growth. The people who saw the warning signs early and took action saved the life of this community.

Posted by: 16th streeter at November 17, 2005 2:29 PM

16th Streeter,

I'm not in favor of untrammeled development, and, living farther up in the Slope, the zoning issue is not much of my business. But I don't see the reasoning for saying the downzoning is important for preserving affordable housing. The small houses in Greenwood Heights, like those in the Slope, have been getting less "affordable" all the time. I have no idea whether building the 12-story monsters would have brought any more affordable housing to the area or not. But I can't see how the downzoning will make those old houses any cheaper. If anything, it will drive up their value, since housing stock in the area will be limited, and the light in backyards, etc., will be preserved.

I'm usre there are lots of good reasons for the downzoning but I don't see how affordable houses can possibly be one of them.

Posted by: linusvanpelt at November 17, 2005 3:20 PM

Yeah, this is total bullshit.

I live in the South Slope and I was praising a future where the ghetto trash would sell their wretched homes and move to Florida. Now, they will stay forever.

I'm also a renter who will probably never be able to afford to buy a house in the neighborhood. I wanted to buy into one of the midrises that would be going up on Fourth Avenue. But now, I'm stuck.

I tell you, the City Council is filled with fools. Why do I continue to live in this ridiculous city.

Posted by: Eryximachus at November 17, 2005 3:35 PM

Take leave of NYC Excreetus. It's overrated and rents are cheaper in the flyover states where you will be more comfortable with your white sheet crowd. Try to avoid the double-wides in tornado alley though. Shalom.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 3:55 PM

NYC is always about the next best thing. All you cry babies who didn't buy in the early 90's now feel like you are priced out of the market. Brooklyn's suddenly hot and you ar not. I am a super with a high-school education and I own my home. The people who are buying in the Slope are people who are leaving the city, selling their tiny one bedrooms coops/condos for a cool million + and buying a big brownstone for the same price. I'm not moving and am planning to procreate at an alarming rate. Move to a red state Yuppie scum

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 4:08 PM

I don't get Eryx**'s rambling at all. Downzoning is going to keep people from selling (drive prices up) and moving to Florida but they would leave in droves (and drive down prices) if highrises were gonna be built because they would ruin the area? Hard logic to follow.
Don't worry - put money in bank and save and prices will come down.

And folks - so-called affordable housing has become less affordable/much more expensive everywhere - not just in your little neighborhood, borough, or city. Its everywhere in the metro area as well as plenty of other metro areas. And upzoning or downzoning south slope isn't going to move the prices in that area compared to whole metro.
And Iceberg - move to Texas already. Every person in his/her right mind believes in zoning - its just what should be the zoning should be is the disagreement.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 4:24 PM

The current popping of the real estate bubble will slow development waaaaay more than the downzoning.

Posted by: Anon at November 17, 2005 5:54 PM

What's up with the fact that bldgs that have ALREADY been built got stop work orders after this DCP zoning change was passed? This makes no sense at all. In case people in the south slope aren't aware there's a serious housing shortage in this city. and that's making it hard for people to continue to live here. that means teachers, doctors, nurses, everybody who didn't buy ages ago and every young person you see on the street is going to end up living where and for what cost exactly? But I digress. Just think developer's who are operating safely and fairly under the previous and current DCP and DOB guidelines should stop being harrassed by residents in this community. Fair is fair.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 9:08 PM

Well said, Anonymous@09:08 PM!!

Posted by: BREUKELEN at November 17, 2005 9:52 PM

To to anonymous 10:42 with the question on what the zoning designation letters and numbers mean, you can go to the City Planning website for this rezoning to see descriptions of each of just the districts for SPS. No need to decipher the entirety of the city's zoning map or text. The url is http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/southparkslope/index.shtml

Posted by: onceupon at November 17, 2005 10:10 PM

The thing I find most disturbing about this discussion is the total lack of respect by the anti-development for people who disagree with them.

I want more development. I know some disagree with me. I think the South-Slope, Brooklyn and NYC in general would be better off with more housing. I think that we would be better off if these ugly little houses were torn down and replaced with 5 story brick rowhouses. I know many people disagree, but that doesn't make me wrong or that I am a shill for some architect or developer.

You anti-development folks are going too far. You have devalued my property and others. In achieving your dream you have ruined other people’s dreams.

Posted by: More Housing Now at November 17, 2005 10:27 PM

There are 70+ new housing units a block from my house that will not be affected by the down zoning. How is that anti development? There are 30 more planned that will be built within the next year or so. Thats 100 new residences just in one block. How much more housing will be necessary? Why do you want to buy a house in South Slope Brooklyn anyway? I would like to own a house in San Francisco but I can't. If you had the insight to buy one of those shitty little wood frame houses even 5 years ago you could have sold it last year to a developer and made a great profit.As for affordable living, many of these homes rent apartments to people at very fair rates. Both of my tenants have saved enough money to buy their own places. I don't need to charge so much because i have a low mortgage. Tear down my house and there goes an affordable apartment, replaced by 6 condos for $700,000. If you can afford to pay that you certainly don't need anyone's pity.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 17, 2005 11:24 PM

to 10:27 pm thanks for supporting me. the last poster thinks you are me, the one who complained at my lost oppurtunity and shitty frame house. for the record, i have made over 600,000 on my purchase of my shitty frame house. i have also lost out on another 500,000 on profit due to downzoning. i have lived in the south slope over 5 years and believe or not i like it bettet then center slope. and for the record if you can get 4.2 million dollard for your house and chose to rent out an apartment for a 1000 dollars a month you either love working or are not to smart.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 18, 2005 12:42 AM

sorry for all the typos.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 18, 2005 12:49 AM

The problem with all of this new development is that to pay for the high costs of construction, all of the housing has to be market rate condos. Zoning is a part of the problem, Iceberg, but the root of the problem is the lack of a free market for housing in NYC. The market is artificially inflated by the lack of inventory that rent stabilization creates. There is no equitable way to abolish rent stabilization this late in the game other than the phase-out that is happening now with high rent destabilization. Zoning bonuses for affordable housing are the only way to shoehorn subsidized housing into new developments without serious federal or state subsidies. Unfortunately, the only people who seem to get real subsidies are the Ratners of the world. I'll bet I could build 10,000 units of affordable housing with $1.6 billion in subsidies.

Posted by: Shahn Andersen at November 18, 2005 1:06 AM

Boy, and I said I like a good dialog/debate. Keep it up folks. This thread has got to be one of longest I have seen...whether you are pro or not. To the person I may have confused for someone else, my apologies, since he may have now posted. "Let's agree to disagree," but I still feel you can build what you want, reasonably, responsibly and make a profit. Perhaps not the $500K you were looking for, but an return of $600K so far (I f I have your quote correct) is pretty damn good in my book.

My 2 cents, shared or not.

Let's keep up this healthy debate, but I would like to say folks should have some balls and not always sign "Anonymous," though it is their right to do so. I just like to have nick-names to respond to...and hell, write to off-line if need be, shared opinions or not.

Again, this has been an interesting read.

Posted by: lostinbrooklyn at November 18, 2005 9:09 AM

Ok - Mr. I've lost 500K because of downzoning...
explain how. What did you pay for property and when. What's the shitbox worth today as is according to you (please give us sq ft and condition )
and what is FAR after downzoning and what was it before.
And how are you figuring the 500K reduction?

Posted by: Anonymous at November 18, 2005 10:47 AM

I am an owner in G-heights. I came into the neighborhood 2 years ago, as an alt to PS, I knew the neighborhood was up incoming. Construction and renovations were visible; I had visualized that that those frame houses in decay will be gone in the near future. Now, what developer would ever risk coming to our neighborhood. We have stifled the growth and transformation of the nabe. I sympathize with some streets that have too much growth. But the rest of nabe needs a jenny Jones makeover and better variety of businesses. The other nabes that rezoned had a fair amount of distinctive housing prior to rezoning.

Posted by: G-heights res at November 18, 2005 11:20 AM

I also came to Greenwood Hts. 2 years ago, bought and gut reno'd (though still going on) a small frame house aged, but with good bones). The character of the 'hood, the neighbors and the cultural mix drew us to the neighborhood. Proximity to the slope was nice as well, but not a deciding factor as much as price.

We too assumed change was in the air, gentrification from the Slope as it moves further south, hopefully some new stores, restaurants, etc., but adding to the "mix" of this colorful neighborhood.

Unfortunately the evolution that came was rampant, uncaring to the community and completely out of scale to the houses, people and general character of the place we decided to settle in.

Our hope is that the rezoning will encourage responsible development (whether it's new development or rehab of an older home, most of which pre-date 1900), bring in new neighbors that add to that "mix" without driving out local residents as we have seen to date. Believe me, developers will still come to this neighborhood, perhaps not in the droves from the past 2 years, but just because we're rezoned doesn't mean it's not profitable to develop here, where by a development company or some of the private conversions some home owners are planning in the area.

Change is good and essential to the fabric of this community, I just feel several hundred new units of housing it a huge brunt to bear on current the community...time will tell.

Posted by: lostinbrooklyn at November 18, 2005 1:27 PM

Loved your coverage of South Slope zoning. Who knows what will happen with Minerva -- we couldn't find out by deadline whether Scarano got the foundation done by the deadline. (Check out the story at http://www.brooklynpapers.com). By the way, what do you guys think of Radusky? I'm considering doing a story on him.

Thanks

GERSH KUNTZMAN
Editor (new)
The Brooklyn Papers
718 834 9350 X119

Posted by: Gersh Kuntzman at November 18, 2005 5:04 PM

To the Bklyn Papers - please please do all of Brooklyn a favor with a story on Radusky. His company is in a different league entirely than the Scarano's of the world. They've just taken a few pages from him on creatively using the zoning.

Posted by: anon at November 18, 2005 6:06 PM

It has been brought to our attention that 182 15th st was not vested.
Thank You and please lets keep it that way.
At the same time we've been told that 162 16th st. was neither vested or not. It seems that thier are some questions as to whether to vest it or not. There should be no question. The job has been done illegally from the get go. Every building, OSHA, environmental, and labor law has been intentionally violated by the Developer/Vulture {Issac Katan), Architect/Liar (Radufsky), and every one involved with it. These illegalities have been well documented.
They have made, life, a living hell for the residence of the block and surrounding streets.
It is important to note that, as stated in the NY Post 2 weeks ago, The 2nd highest death rate in NYC in the last year was as a result of construction accidents. Most of these deaths have occurred on illegal jobs that are run very much like 162 16th street. Their have also been many serious injuries some documented and many undocumented that happen on a daily basis on these illegal jobs. If you ask me these deaths should be reclassified as premeditated murder; Since the perpetrators of these crimes know exactley what they are doing.
To vest this or any other questionable job run in this manner would be a direct slap in the face of all those who have died or been injured so that these billionaires could have their way. Not to mention all the tax payers who will ultimately have to shoulder the burden of supporting these poor people and there families as well as the billionaires who flout the laws designed to protect us.

Posted by: annonymous at November 18, 2005 7:58 PM

My hope, regardless of the back & forth in this particular thread, folks understand one thing: while the South Park Slope/Greenwood Hts. wanted to be rezoned, with contextual buildings matching the neighborhood, we also wanted SAFE and RESPONSIBLE development sites. Most of them were not safe nor responsible, and like the poster above states, made our lives a living hell, war zone, battle field...you pick the analogy.

Pro-new housing or not, pissed off or grateful for the rezoning, NO ONE should have to live through the abuse of our communities, homes, streets, residents and the workers on these sites that was perpetrated this past year.

In our neighborhood nor all of Bklyn.

Enough said, please continue this healthy debate. More later.

Posted by: lostinbrooklyn at November 18, 2005 8:53 PM

Want to do a story on Henry Radusky and Bricolage Designs? We all know that he has used the faculty housing bonus to get additional FAR for many different developers all over Brooklyn. He knows how to play the game. What I want to know is how did all these religious institutions, who buy the way never occupied many of these buildings, profit from this scam? What happened to the yeshiva on 22nd street and on 15th street? What happened with the Spencer Street Condos? The developers provided signed leases by these religious institutions in order to get the permits. You can find copies in the files at DoB. Did they all suddenly change their mind? Answer that question and you will understand Bricolage.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 18, 2005 11:57 PM

Somebody is definitely profiting from these shit boxes, but it is not the Community, the people who are deceived in to buying them and least of all the poor shmucks who are working on them. The problem is that the Katans of the world have hidden the money trail very well. If the powers that be DOB, OSHA, DEP, Dept. of Labor, IRS would just do there job we could find that money trail and put these Vultures in jail, where they belong. Instead these so called "powers that be' , find it much easier to go after small tax payers. Why? Because when a hardworking man or woman breaks the rules (as it were) it is most likely the result of some mistake or happenstance thus there is no deception or attempt to hide it. They are exposed immediately and don't have the thought process or financial resources to hide the infraction or fight the system. The Vultures whole thought process not to mention finances are dedicated to working the system and screwing everyone and anyone.
It is a truly sad situation when you have one of these Vultures paying 400,00 dollars for a parking spot but less than 10 dollars an hour, with no health care or other benefits to his workforce {Who, by the way, he sends vans to pick them up off the street corners}

Posted by: Anaon at November 19, 2005 6:38 AM

Just as bad as the Vultures, are the System and our elected officials who, together, don't stop the abuse but encourage it

Posted by: Trouble at November 19, 2005 7:05 AM

Did Bricolage design the Spencer St. condos? Even if so, they weren't responsible for the zoning scam surrounding them -- that was the developers -- 3M Construction or something like that, based in Williamsburg.

Posted by: babs at November 19, 2005 11:07 AM

What's the abuse of our community that some people speak of? Construction is not abuse. The same noise, dust, trucks would exist no matter who was building.

Regarding the esthetics of some of these buildings -- 1. zoning laws can easily deal with that and 2. there are a lot of ugly ass buildings that have been in the area for a long time.

If all you were concerned about was the height of buildings you could have done that without lowering the FAR.

By lowering the FAR you hurt the neighborhood, hurt Brooklyn and hurt NYC. We need more housing, not less.

Posted by: mhn at November 21, 2005 9:51 AM

I am ALSO an owner in G-heights. I came into the neighborhood 2 years ago, after 16 years of renting in Prospect Hts and Windsor Terrace. I ALSO knew the neighborhood was up coming. But, the Construction and renovations that I was excited about were the folks who were sprucing up their two story frame homes, NOT building 8 story ugly shitboxes that were towering over their neighbors, casting a shadow of doom on 3 different gardens, and HURTING my properties value, not helping it. I had visualized that that those frame houses in decay would be RENOVATED and beautifed (Like the two on 20th St. just off of 5th Ave. that were about to cave-in). Now, I am elated that the only developers that would risk coming to our neighborhood are those that will be happy to build properties that might actually improve the character of the neighborhood. Just because you tear down a $500k frame house to build condos, doesn't mean that the 'working class' will move in - esp. when that $500k frame house becomes 6 $700k condos. The new zoning will contribute greatly to the growth and transformation of the nabe, as we will have families moving in, NOT investors. Of course, with interest rates going up - growth may slow down nationwide - but I am happy to have finally been able to purchase a home, and happy to be in Greenwood Heights... and I am ecstatic that my little two story frame house and it's garden may not have to live in the shadow of the evil empire after all...

Posted by: GrnwdHtsPatrolman at November 21, 2005 6:00 PM

Can anyone confirm what the south slope FAR was rezoned to (from 2.43 to ?) I hear its 2.2, 2.25, 2.0, etc but I haven't been able to find a source for clarification..thanks

Posted by: JD at April 8, 2006 3:41 PM

clomid pregnancy http://www.noonhost.com/clomidsideeffec/clomid pregnancy http://www.gogetforum.com/clomid/clomid.html

Posted by: clomid twins at June 30, 2006 6:39 AM

« NYT: Limiting Mortgage Deduction Wise, Unlikely Brooklyn Bridge Park On Fast Track »

November 17, 2005

South Slope Officially Downsized

Comments

Post a comment

Get Brownstoner on your Mobile Phone

Latest Restaurant Additions