Time for a Moratorium on the Moratorium Talk?
It is high time to demand concrete actions be taken to safeguard our neighborhood. CG CORD is calling for a BUILDING MORATORIUM effective immediately! In a remarkable show of grassroots derring-do, a group known as CORD has succeeded in getting thousands of Carroll Gardens residents to sign a petition demanding a moratorium on all new…
It is high time to demand concrete actions be taken to safeguard our neighborhood. CG CORD is calling for a BUILDING MORATORIUM effective immediately! In a remarkable show of grassroots derring-do, a group known as CORD has succeeded in getting thousands of Carroll Gardens residents to sign a petition demanding a moratorium on all new construction over 50 feet. The group’s accomplished this in a few short months by posting regular updates on community message boards; bringing its concerns to the fore of neighborhood meetings; sending out mass email updates (like the one quoted above); and rallying support so there are monuments to the CORD cause scattered throughout Carroll Gardens, most impressively at the Smith Street site where a developer intends to build a 70-foot building. But are the calls for a moratorium realistic, and is there any precedent for such an action? Not really, and no.
For starters, the Department of City Planning has already pledged to study Carroll Gardens with a mind to rezoning it. Even if there was the will within the department to consider a moratorium, such an effort would almost certainly drag out the rezoning process. Further, a building moratorium would require an environmental impact study followed by ULURP—basically the same things a rezoning would require, steps that can take a few years. The biggest difference—and hitch to CORD’s plan—is that there’s no precedent for a building moratorium. As far as anyone we’ve talked to could recall, there hasn’t been an instance of the city enacting a moratorium in recent memory, although there have been cases of communities calling for them (for example, on Staten Island).
Although it seems doubtful that a moratorium will come to pass, CORD’s done an impressive job of drawing attention to the fact that Carroll Gardens’ outdated, as-of-right zoning leaves the door open for developers to construct buildings that could disrupt the look and feel of the neighborhood. Councilman Bill de Blasio says he lobbied City Planning for two years to downzone Carroll Gardens but only got a commitment from the department to study downzoning this June, and he credits CORD’s activism with helping to change the department’s mind. Although he says that in an ideal world, “we could achieve a legal moratorium right now,” in the real world, “rezonings are the only way to achieve what the community is looking for.” The question now for CORD is whether it’s possible that a single-minded focus on a building moratorium could end up undermining their cause by sidetracking rezoning efforts. Because if that happens, no one wins—not CORD, not the city, and certainly not Carroll Gardens.
Calls for Reining in Development at Carroll Gardens Meeting [Brownstoner]
City Planning to Look at Carroll Gardens Downzoning [Brownstoner]
build it more than 70 feet. people need places to live.
brooklyn open space was historic too. thats gone. deal with it!
“but in the end they errect an ugly poorly-built piece of crap housing and only care about making a buck.”
Will you be willing to accept a nicely built building since you seem to be against poorly-built pieces of crap? Let me guess, no. Hypocrite.
Carroll Gardens is such a great area of NYC i think whatever it takes should be done. All of the streets from degraw st all the way down Henry st and Clinton st Including the place streets should be landmarked right away. This is historic NYC wake up people.
12:54 is right – across the BQE is a terrible place for high density since it is so far from mass transit, development there will likely lead to more cars, more congestion and more problems.
That is exactly why it is a shame that 360 Smith St will only be 70′. I think a 10 story building is more appropriate considering its location over a subway station.
This whole thing is NIMBY at its worst, the people leading this charge should be ashamed of themselves
When I refer to trash, I am talking about the things that people in Carroll Gardens, Cobble Hill, Park Slope etc. don’t want in their neighbrhood, such as more traffic, more buses, more trucks; such as waist transport centers, such as Ikea, such as tall builings. I, in fact love the kind of people you talk about. In fact, we have a lot of great young families, foreign immigrants, and artists living here already. The diversity of people in the Columbia Street Waterfront District is one of the reasons that I moved here in the first place. And the reason that young families move here is is because it offers excellent elementary schools which are already becoming overcrowded. I, in fact, love the waterfront and think it is a tragedy that a City Planning Commission that claims that one of its goals is to reclaim the waterfront thinks that it was good planning to give some our finest waterfront property to Ikea so that cruise ships can see the blues and yellows of Sweden along with the Statue of Liberty as they sail into New York Harbor. Ikea, who plans on clogging our streets with their diesel run trucks of furniture instead of the obvious alternative of shipping it right in to their front door. What I am against are crooked developers who pretend like they give a rats ass and are building all in the name of creating affordable housing for immigrants and young families and teachers and cute little bunny rabbits but in the end they errect an ugly poorly-built piece of crap housing and only care about making a buck. What I am against is poor city planning and taking a lovely neighborhood and destroying it. What I am against is Carroll Gardens and Cobble Hill thinking that they can toss what they don’t want on the other side of the BQE. Get it? And if you try, I promise you it will be a long hard fight.
Anon 10:40am, bravo!
Downzoning prevents the creation of habitation needed for newer residents. The artificial restriction of supply greatly increases the price of property. No wonder NIMBYs do not want new buildings, they want their property values to remanin high. They do not want to “share” their neighborhood with others just to make more money.
RE: 10:19
Why would NYC residents have any interest in pursuing a downzoning in CGs? I sounds like you guys are working only for your own interests. How is CG contributing to increasing the housing stock, creating jobs, improving the waterfront?
And who’s talking about ‘tossing trash’ on the other side of the BQE? Which people do you consider trash? Is it young families looking for there first home? Youngsters moving here from the mid-west and have their first job in the city? What about foreign immigrants looking for affordable housing – take your pick.
I’m no lawyer, but I imagine that a moratorium without public review, EIS, etc. would be shot down with the first law suit. Read up on the 5th amendment (and the 14th, and probably a few others).
It is possible, I suppose that the laws themselves could be rewritten in such a way as to impose a moratorium (or to cut off vesting) at the time of certification, not adoption, of a rezoning. But that’s a very different thing than someone “waving a wand” and imposing a moratorium.
No Carroll Gardens is not willing to accept a higher density along Columbia Street. Nor are the people who live in the Columbia Street waterfront district willing to accept higher density along Columbia Street. The sooner the City and developers chomping at the bit understand that Columbia Street is not a bargaining chip the better. Stop waisting your time trying to toss your trash on the other side of the BQE. Those days are over.