« Tuesday Events Planning Reveals More Deets About Dumbo Rezoning Plan »
March 4, 2008
Meeting on Toll Proposal: Agitate, Educate, Organize
South Brooklynites have a whole lot of questions about the 577 units of housing Toll Brothers wants to develop alongside the Gowanus Canal. And, if the overflow crowd that filled the community room in St. Mary’s Star of the Sea Residences last night was any indication, there’s a great deal of fear in the community that those questions won’t be answered before the city gives Toll the go-ahead to build their project. Among the concerns raised: That the development’s impact on already overcrowded schools and subway lines will be disastrous; that the compromised sewage system near the canal will be made even worse; that mom-and-pop business will be displaced; that the project shouldn’t be approved ahead of the wider rezoning Planning is brewing for the area; that the Environmental Impact Study will be a compilation of half-truths; and that the site’s toxic land might not be adequately cleaned up.
Representatives from the Toll Brothers were in attendance, and some of their comments were revelatory. To start, Toll VP David Von Spreckelsen told the crowd that the firm does not own the parcels in question (between the Gowanus Canal, Bond Street, Carroll Street and Second Street) outright—they’re in contract for them—and that they wouldn’t close on the purchases unless the city approves the rezoning. Von Spreckelsen also said that Toll would adequately clean up the property: “We wouldn’t be able to sell one condo at this site unless we properly remediated it.”
The gathering, which was organized by Friends of Bond Street, was ostensibly held in order to educate residents about City Planning’s public scoping hearing about the project next week, and speakers included CB6 District Manager Craig Hammerman (above left) and Queens City Councilman Tony Avella (right). While there was a great deal of talk about how residents can make their voices heard at the scoping meeting next week, there was also a lot of commentary from Avella in particular (the Council’s zoning/land-use chair and a mayoral candidate) about how the city stacks the deck in favor of developers at the expense of residents’ concerns. “Development projects will always be put on the front burner,” said Avella. “It has nothing to do with a project’s merit. It has to do with the mayor thinking that’s what the city needs. The real estate industry controls the agenda in this city.” There was also some chit-chat about a politician who wasn’t present at the meeting. “Where is our councilman,” asked one person. “His name is De Blasio. Where is he?”
More coverage of the meeting at Pardon Me For Asking and Found in Brooklyn.
Toll Brothers' Gargantuan Gowanus Plans Revealed [Brownstoner]
A Look at What Toll Bros. Wants to Redevelop [Brownstoner]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/4089
Comments
This development has as much chance of being built as a black man does of being president - oops...I mean as a snowballs chance in hell.
Seriously, it is hard enough to justify building condos in a "normal" location and even more difficult to finance it - now they want to build next door and atop a toxic waseland where raw sewage is pumped after it rains - yeah sure.
That being said I love how even the mention of developments beings out the NIMBYs and the anti-everything crowd. Please explain how more housing could be anything but good for mom and pop business (I assume we are referring to retail here). Frankly if "Mom and Pop" are against having a larger number of potential affluent customers, then "Mom and Pop" deserve to go out of business.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 9:42 AM
If the development DOES NOT happen, this is a prime 3-acre site for the next Atlantic Mall - has anyone called Target to let them know about this property? The zoning M1-1 allows retail. Then say goodby to Mom and Pop!
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 10:01 AM
This post sounds as if it were cut and pasted from an anti-AY thread. The armageddon-like comments and hysteria are the same.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 10:02 AM
Developer buys plot. Developer crams as many units as he can get away with on plot. Everyone else except the developer deals with pollution, congestion, rising utility rates, even more cars and even worse conditions on the subway and even more #$%ing people crammed into the F train, on those rare occasions when the $%#$ing thing shows up.
One of those mornings ;-)
Posted by: Johnny at March 4, 2008 10:13 AM
Actually, that's not true Johnny.
Developer buys plot. Developer buildings housing. If it is rental housing, the developer pays 18% to 22% of his gross income as property tax which supports the infrastructure and city services. The apartments are filled with tenants who pay city income tax for the school system. The tenants are sub-metered for utility usage and pay those costs directly. Pollution, I don't know what you mean. If the site is contaminated, the developer must mitigate. Otherwise, developers of multifamily housing in NYC actually reduce pollution on a national basis. The carbon footprint of a NYC apartment dweller is a fraction of what is typical in the US.
Yeah, the F train sucks. I'm sorry you have to take it. The subway system will never get better until 1) the city has more money and 2) the huge underclass becomes a smaller proportion of the population so voters can shift city funds to more productive uses like maintaining and expanding the transportation infrastructure.
Supporting developments like this is the only way your precious F train will ever get overhauled. There is not enough money or political will currently.
Posted by: Polemicist at March 4, 2008 10:18 AM
Guy picks up Girl, Girl gets drunk, Guy f's girl, Guy doesnt pull out - 9mo later everyone (except maybe guy and possibly girl) has to deal with pollution, congestion, consumption, transportation and NEED FOR HOUSING for the resulting offspring.
People need places to live - it isnt the developers "fault" - even though (probably b/c he is rich) you want to blame him.
And don't lie - you always post the same silliness - it isnt just b/c of 'this morning.'
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 10:19 AM
I really hope this project happens - damn these community activists and their resistence to everything. Of course it's important to clean up toxic waste - but do you really think Toll bros could market apts that have th rumor of toxicity floating around them??? It would be GREAT for PS 32 - tipping point tipped over to middle class families, but still a great diversity of kids from all backgrounds.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 10:30 AM
If there weren't a need for housing then they wouldn't build it. Duh.
Look how long Gowanus went without anybody wanting to build a luxury condo there. It's not some random decision.
NYC is not as bad as Los Angeles. They will let anybody build anything anywhere. It's insane. The quality of life there has hugely diminished over the last 10 years. It's hard to believe the gridlock could have become worse but it did. The place is packed with people. You go nowhere and buy nothing without encountering a slow moving line of people 4 or more deep. I saw some recent stat that said L.A. is now more densely populated than NYC. I believe it. Parts of Brooklyn are downright rural compared to L.A.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 12:26 PM
Yeah, there are some anti-everything types. But this particular development should be watched and the community should be kept informed because we are dealing with serious issues, not the least of which is the toxic clean-up. If a developer can really clean up this site, I personally believe that development is a positive overall. That said, it is not unreasonable to look at what the impact will be on sewers, transportation, schools, etc.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 12:45 PM
12:26 - You are complaining about lines 4 people deep? Go to the Rite Aide on Smith and President where the lines can be 20 people deep.
At least LA has nice weather and Gelsens. It's the people that suck and one of the main reasons I stay in Brooklyn. I grew up in NB/CdM so I know what I am talking about. Isn't LA getting a subway system?
Get yourself a Thomas (sp) road map and use the side streets instead of the freeway.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 12:49 PM
power sub station, garbage barge transport station, truck parking, overflow sewer treatment plant, large parking facility for our large suv and maybe i can have a second car just for fun, large big box store, large self storage farm built to the max and painted bright yellow (they can even deliver to it from NYC via water taxi).
Is the canal a support structure for the rest of the city or can it finally step out on its own and grow up.
New housing, waterfron access, cleaner water, CSO resolution, ps32 overhaul, smith and 9th street jewel created by great architect, multiple boat houses and get down areas, a few great bike and pedestrian bridges, a canal festival every year.
It is possible, it has been done in worse areas by cities with less money and less incentive.
Please stop thinking small, stop being a can't do, rally together and work together to force the hands of the city to follow the developers lead in funding for the upgrades the area needs.
Or just keep fighting. Fight with each other. Fight becuase you want to be the newest poltician, or best community group. Fight the change until the end. You do not get beautiful results this way becuase the people in power are too afraid to think big. They are too afraid of putting money where it is not appreciated. This is happening. This has been happening. The "leaders" are not working together and are not bringing everyone together. It is not in their political best interest.
Please press reset! Please work together! Please stop with the nonsense.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 12:54 PM
The nonsense is as follows:
People who want to dismiss all protests, concerns by just calling this nay-saying.
Have YOU gone to all the DEP/DEC meetings to hear what is going on with the water, its toxicity, the fact that is is a FLOODplain, the fact that the banks of the gowanus are toxic brownfields!!!
Maybe if you had, you would be seeing things from a little more klnowledgeable perspective.
I pretty much weed comments, and I can see who is likely financially tied to developers and their lobbying.
Thank GOD Buddy Scotto is now recognized for what he is, and no longer considered the voice for the community.
The community spoke up last night - and it was AWESOME!
The other nonsense is people saying we need affordable housing and these developers are going to bring it (as they push all the other rents up - by Mr. Scotto's own admission last night). That's crap, and shame on you for trying to flush that one down our throats.
I love when last night, Toll Bros reps asked us if we wanted to see the canal cleaned up - like they were going to do it. Google them and see what kind of record they have for working with the environment.
Build, and the canal will then get cleaned up - yep, that's Buddy Scotto's line, too.
No one's buying it.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 2:23 PM
Thank GOD for 2:23.
Buddy is speaking out of both sides of his mouth. He is a proponent of the down zoning in CG but supportive of large scale development on the canal. Irks me to no end that federal tax dollars are going to the GCCDC.
The position our local electeds have taken is one of build, build, build and the sewage, flood, school overcrowding, transportation, and other infrastructure will take care of themselves once all these new housing units are occupied and others are in office.
Maybe Tony Avella can be our surrogate council man since ours doesn't seem to want to hear what we have to say because our initials aren't BS.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 2:42 PM
That is such crap. The Real Estate Board offers money to EVERY SINGLE candidate for Mayor and Bloomberg was the only one to reject it. Everyone else accepts the money. If anything, this is one Mayor that the Real Estate Board does not control. If they did control him he would not have raised property taxes when the city needed the extra revenue after 9/11. Avella is a tool.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 3:00 PM
Please, 12:49. I lived in L.A. for nearly a decade. I know full f-ing well how to get around L.A.
L.A. congestion sucks. I saw it get worse and worse and worse year after year. Even the biggest fans of L.A. don't defend that city to the degree you do. You're just missing sunshine, can't blame you. But it's just not that great there. Plus half the houses on the market in L.A. are in foreclosure. It feels very depressed there right now.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 4:21 PM
2:23 - spoken like a 21st century NIMBY - if we don't agree with you then we must be 'paid off'.
Personally I dont believe that Toll will clean up the canal either, but then again, I don't think Toll will ever build housing at this location. But that isnt the issue, the issue is that people like you will say anything to keep things as YOU BELIEVE they should be, no matter the effect.
1st of all whether Toll will clean up the canal or not is immaterial - as long as the canal "zone" is zoned for and largly industrial it DEFINITELY will not be cleaned up (not saying that it shouldn't remain industrial) - So Toll is right in saying that if (someone) doesn't plan the area for residential, the canal will remain as-is (sorry I know in your utopia you will refuse to believe that)
2nd while Toll may not be building affordable housing here (or in Gowanus at all) the laws of supply and demand still apply - as we now see in Florida, California, Las Vegas (and maybe here very soon) - the more supply you have the less pressure on upward prices you have and with enough building, prices can even FALL.
Finally canal or no canal - how could an increase in residential housing be a negative for ANY retail business.
I know, I know - I don;t agree with you - so I just must be being paid off by the RE "interests"
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 4:24 PM
Yeah, you're a shill 4:24!
I know someone who works for Ratner who types just like you do! I know it's you!
Posted by: Polemicist at March 4, 2008 4:51 PM
4:21 - I am not defending LA nor would I ever. I got out as soon as I could and won't ever back unless I have to - like a family funeral and even that is questionable even when it is close family. I miss Gelsens but maybe the Whole Foods will come.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 5:02 PM
To: March 4, 2008 4:24 PM
The Columbia University Gowanus Study projects have put forth solid ideas with a great range of possibilities. These projects get at the potential here, including possibility of the industrial-zoned land along the canal to serve as a site for an innovative progressive industry of soil and water remediation; an industries that could take on cleaning the adjoining lands and the canal itself. There is substantial merit to some of these ideas, some of which have been put into practice in other parts of the world.
Those in this discussion with the most limited vision for developing the canal are those who see it as a place for such out-of-scale residential developments as Toll has put forth or a big box retail store.
The community seemed to agree, in unison, during the "City Planning Planning Meetings" that the Gowanus should be a mixed use area; yet every plan being put forth is pretty much exclusively a residential development project including the plan for our publicly owned land.
The needs for housing can be met on more appropriate terrain. This site has land and water amenities that have nothing to do with the needs for residential units of housing. Can't we envision making better use of these resources.
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 7:42 PM
4:24 - shame on Columbia for misleading you! I too saw the innovative designs and concluded the students had no idea about the cost of brownfield cleanup!
Assume remediation of 3 acres at $1,000/sf=$120mm. Construct 600,000 sf of housing at $400/sf= $240mm. Assume 317 market rate units sell for $1mm each and 130 "affordable" units sell for $400,000 each you generate a $9mm profit!
Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 9:36 PM
to 9:36 you seem to miss the whole idea.
(Or it it "shame on you" for your misleading here)
Some of the Columbia proposals were to build the industry that would do the cleanup--there is no pre-cleanup cost involved. The soil remediation would be the work of the new industry. Your cost structures have nothing to do with this idea. You don't have to pay all that money to haul the contaminated soil away and destroy it if you aren't hauling it away to contaminate some other place to do soil cleanup. (Do you see any dollar-savings in this idea yet?)
And as for Public Place, KeySpan is paying for that pretense of a cleanup, there are no development cleanup costs there anyway. And why couldn't KeySpan cleanup funds go to funding a soil remediation industry on the canal if it leads to a better and more through cleanup of the lands?
The the "containment" plans the housing developers have proposed is no "cleanup", only an attempt to seal the contamination from public contact. The contiminanents will still be there when those seals brake down.
Posted by: guest at March 5, 2008 11:43 AM
Encapsulation and monitoring is preferred by many environmentalists as a desired means of remediation over removal and disposal of the waste. Even after "washing" there may be contaminated byproduct that will need to be transported and encapsulated in landfil.
You would expend millions to test, permit, excavate and processing the contamination. More than 2ft of soil can not be cleaned without excavation - ask Columbia - this is where you've been misled. (2ft of topsoil may be cleaned thru bio-remediation)
To recover the cost of a full site cleanup, developers would likely need 3-4 times the amount of housing proposed by HPD for Public Place. The community may not react positively to 40-sty buildings but be sure to ask Toll to evaluate that at the scoping hearing.
See BNL's 10 year effort on sediment washing and Biogenesis soil washing. You'll also need more than three acres - here's a +$42mm demonstration program for comparison.
Posted by: guest at March 5, 2008 1:51 PM
But the community doesn't need to recover costs of cleaning Public Place site. That must be payed for by KeySpan.
So what are are you takling about at 1:51PM?
Just what public costs need recovering? Please lay that out for the community as we set off down the road HPD has set? What are these hidded costs? You seem to know something about them. Tell us.
Posted by: guest at March 5, 2008 2:28 PM
Once again - you've been mis-informed 2:28PM
Keyspan and NYC attorneys did not enter into an agreement for an unlimited sum of funds. NYC was responsible for a potion of the site contamination following acquisition.
There is a finite amount of cleanup costs that will be reimbursed. Cleanup beyond that number will be the burden of taxpayers.
Posted by: guest at March 5, 2008 3:22 PM
So let's begin the discussion on how much this is going to cost our tax payers.
Posted by: guest at March 5, 2008 4:01 PM
4:01, For Public Place ...
Option One:
Leave a contaminated, blighted waterfront property vacant = $0 cost to taxpayers with $0 profit (an attitude of the past and potentially future 60 years). Continue the middle-class exodus from CG to NJ for family (affordable) housing, contributing to suburban sprawl and harming the environment.
Option Two:
Develop with 50% affordable housing, 50% market housing, retail, community facilities, etc. = $20mm cost to City but $500,000 annual tax revenue = profit to City in 40 years.
Option Three:
Allow 40-sty buildings = profit to City in 4 years.
It's up to Bill de Blasio to decide what's best for us. Unfortunately, he doesn't believe his district has issues - that link on his site doesn't work!
He'll get advice from Hammerman and CB6, who has DONE NOTHING for Gowanus as District Manager for the past 18 years despite community calls for help.
Instead, Hammerman and CB6 downzoned the already-protected, mostly landmarked or built-up areas of Park Slope and upzoned 4th Ave. to facilitate the bad architecture under construction today.
Posted by: guest at March 5, 2008 6:11 PM
>>
seems that with such an expensive cleanup propossition (and the impact of dense-high-rise housing is indeed another expensive proposition for it's overall community impact) current planning is a very wrong-headed direction for developing these sites. Maybe a less expensive cleanup process with different uses are in order here, given the huge costs that the public will be expected to take on under the present proposals.
Posted by: guest at March 6, 2008 12:15 PM
Hey Neighbors! --
I just wanted to let all you guys know that there is a Poll on http://friendsofbond.blogspot.com/ where you can voice your opinion about the developments. Please go and vote!! -
thanks!
--friends of bond
Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 10:42 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.