580-carroll-original-%2B-hardship-072009.jpg
Tomorrow the Board of Standards and Appeals is having a hearing on the case of 580 Carroll Street in Park Slope, where a developer is seeking a variance to erect three townhouses in addition to the rest of his Enrique Norten-designed project. Less than a month ago, a CB6 committee gave the thumbs down to the developer’s request, and pols like Councilmember Bill de Blasio and Assemblywoman Joan Millman have spoken out against the variance. The developer is trying to get the variance based on a “hardship” claim involving cost overruns on the site; he says that unless he builds three townhouses fronting Carroll Street (as opposed to the original plan pictured above, also reviled by many in the community, involving substantial garden space but much less density) he stands to lose a lot of money. Opponents to the variance have collected 130 signatures against it from residents between 4th and 5th avenues on Carroll Street and Garfield Place (which the project also fronts) and neighborhood ringleader Johnny Werbe has sent a strongly worded letter to the BSA that says, in part, the following: “A return on their investment, unwisely made, jeopardized by poor judgment, leadership and planning, and put at risk, not so much by the inherent conditions, as by sloppy work, disorganization and arrogance cannot be a reasonable proposition…Variances, if permitted, would make the property, the block, the neighborhood too dense.” Before the BSA hearing tomorrow there will be a press conference organized by de Blasio’s office outside the site tonight at 7 p.m.
CB6 Doesn’t Buy Carroll Street Hardship Claim [Brownstoner]
580 Carroll Developer Trying to Supersize Norten Project [Brownstoner]
Development Watch: 580 Carroll Street [Brownstoner] GMAP
Enrique Norten-Designed Project in Park Slope Revealed [Brownstoner]
Four Developments Coming to One Stretch of Carroll [Brownstoner]


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. “I don’t know much about this situation, but the “hardship” rendering looks much, much better”

    As a resident of Carroll at 5th, I agree and would not sign. Having the townhouses actually makes the project more integrated with the street and hides the ugly back building.

    as for ‘too much density’…give me a break…with 3 townhouses extra, what 25 people?

  2. hardship looks better, but still sh.t for a bklyn street.

    now they’re optimistically showing more people on the street there. though if youre a guy (in rendering) wearing cargo shorts with a tee and vest, you’ve got other difficulties you’re dealing with.

  3. I don’t know much about this situation, but the “hardship” rendering looks much, much better.

    “he says that unless he builds three townhouses fronting Carroll Street, he stands to lose a lot of money.”

    Wow…that IS a hardship!

  4. I don’t think the hardship rendering replaces the Miami Vice building. It replaces the garden. The Miami Vice building would still be there, over on Garfield, but you couldn’t see it from Carroll anymore because the view would be blocked by the new hardhip townhouse row depicted in the second rendering. Neither rendering shows the development in context in any event.

    As I understand it, they pooled all the development rights for the Carroll and Garfield sites onto the Garfield side, and now want a hardship exemption to develop the Carroll side as if they weren’t already building the allowed Carroll Street density over on Garfield.