This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

Town Hall Meeting #2: April 16, 2013 — Brooklynian

Town Hall Meeting #2: April 16, 2013

whynot_31
whynot_31
edited November -1 in Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens

On March 23, Town Hall mtg #1 was held: http://www.brooklynian.com/forums/topic/community-meeting-march-23rd

The organizers have deemed it a success, and are now in the process of planning Town Hall Meeting #2:


Comments

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31

    Basically, there will be a lot of time devoted to the re-zoning proposal that is discussed here:

    http://www.brooklynian.com/forums/topic/crown-heights-west-zoning-fun

  • mr. met
    mr. met

    i'll be there!

  • markhor
    markhor

    me too! i know this is a community led forum, but if anyone needs research support from a city planner not working for the city, let me know!

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31

    Markhor-

    I've just sent the email of the organizer to your inbox. Email her and offer to help.

    To access it, look at the top of the screen, and you will see a link that looks like this:

    messages (1)

    See you there.

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31

    This flyer makes me suspect that some people will conclude that they can have much more influence over their surroundings than is actually realistic.

    The meeting should be interesting.

    Related conversation: http://www.brooklynian.com/forums/topic/live-in-crown-heights-north-youve-probably-been-landmarked?replies=7

  • chca
    chca

    Hi Markhor

    Thanks for your offer,

    can you email me directly if you are available to help

    Nina

    [email protected]

  • chca
    chca

    Hi All

    We are compiling a list of questions in advance of the meeting to get answered by City Planning.

    If you have questions PLEASE email them to us: [email protected] or you can post them here

    This will really help us to structure the meeting towards the community's concerns

    Remember, if you have a question, chances are someone else does too

    thanks

  • chrismcnally1234
    chrismcnally1234

    I have two questions. one, can we get a piece of paper at the meeting with concise definitions of those zoning terms? like a cheat sheet? N6, N7 are all over the place.

    Two. We should put parking minimums into the conversation. People think it's logical that a large building needs to supply parking so that the streets are not overwhelmed. However the opposite is true. When the city requires parking, then it encourages driving and drivers. Affordable housing is is greatly constrained when they have to build an expensive garage, or sacrifice land that could hold more units to just hold cars.

    It would be great if we could, being in a good transit location, reduce or eliminate parking minimuns and let the developers decide based on cost, to provide it or not.

  • eastbloc
    eastbloc

    I couldn't agree more about parking minimums. It's a misguided idea that lends itself more to undermining the character of the neighborhood than preserving it.

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31

    Powerful forces like REBNY have long been opposed to parking minimums.

    ...and often lose.

    That may be too big of a battle for a community association with a annual budget < $15k, and no staff members to attempt.

    Note: it is often people who already living in the neighborhood who want the NEW buildings to have parking, out of the belief that it will mitigate the competition from newbies re: existing on street parking that they feel is the property of long term residents.

    BTW, Bed Stuy residents are currently trying to get areas landmarked in response to the same presssures we are facing: http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2013/04/landmarks-votes-on-bed-stuy-historic-district-tomorrow/#disqus_thread

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31

    I attended this mtg last night.

    Did anyone else? What did you think?

  • tsarina
    tsarina

    i was there. i thought you looked lovely.

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31

    Thank you!

    Was it just me, or did you think that the pro-landmarking people did themselves a disservice by having only pro-landmarking people on the panel?

    Couldn't they have had just one person who had owned a vacant lot in an area that was landmarked, and then talked about its effect on its value because "contextual construction" is code for "use expensive materials to create a structure/beauty that buyers/renters might not be willing to pay a premium for"?

    I felt the audience was kind of insulted by such a person not being on the panel.

    ....I know this was a pro-landmarking presentation, but it still could have had the illusion of objectivity.

    I think the audience was thoughtful to degree that it could have been shown examples of "in fill" housing like this, that we would like.

    http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2013/04/harmonious-house-planned-for-27-cranberry-street/#disqus_thread

    Instead, we were just shown pictures of new housing that we are "not supposed to like", but actually might not mind.

  • chca
    chca

    Thanks to everyone who showed up and helped make the meeting a success.

    chrismcnally1234: thanks for the "cheat sheet" suggestion, we hope you found it helpful

    chrismcnally1234 & eastbloc: Zoning designations are established on a city-wide basis, variables like parking do not change community by community, therefore an R7A zone for example (which allows for inclusionary housing) comes with its set of parking requirements, that are not debatable on a case by case basis.  That discussion would need to take place with City Planning with respect to changing the relevant zoning codes across the board for the entire City.

    whynot_31: The point of the landmarking presentation was not to create an illusion of objectivity, it was to re-introduce the subject to the community and answer questions about the process. There seems to have been enough interest to keep the ball rolling so there should be plenty of time in future meetings to have the type of discussion you seem to be looking for.

    The example you chose of "in fill" housing is a good one; it seems to be in a historic district and perfectly makes the case for pursuing landmark designation.

    FYI: of the 75 slides shown, over 2/3rds portrayed the historic beauty of our neighborhood, the remaining 18 were either of vacant lots or examples of new housing that has been constructed in our community. As you mentioned, it was a thoughtful audience, perfectly capable of judging for themselves whether they liked or disliked what they saw.

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31

    Those who seek more info about the re-zoning that is being proposed can attend a public hearing run by CB8 on Thursday, May 9, 7 PM. Berean Missionary Baptist Church at 1635 Bergen St.

    Those who like the landmarks debate can read articles like this: http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2012/06/07/real_estate_bigs_ready_wrecking_ball_for_landmarks_laws.php

    http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20130201/OPINION/130209994

    http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2012/05/01/city_council_about_to_kneecap_landmarks_preservation.php

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

Categories