Robert Guskind, founder of Gowanus Lounge, 1958-2009

Update 2010.01.03: Corrected all links to the old Gowanus Lounge domain to the new memorial domain.


Update 2009.03.20: A memorial is planned for April 4.
Update 2009.03.14: Finally wrote my memorial post.
Update 2009.03.11: The official, authorized, and epic obituary for Bob, written lovingly by his family and friends, was published online today. Please read In Memoriam, Robert Guskind on Gowanus Lounge.
Updates 2009.03.06:

  • It’s been all I can do just to keep up with the flood of online remembrances and other reports in response to Bob’s death. As of mid-day, there are over 60. Reading everyone’s posts brings back my own memories of Bob, which I hope to post over the weekend.
  • Changed the link for the Brooklyn Paper.

I just learned, from Windsor Terrace Alliance and Brownstoner, that Robert “Bob” Guskind, founder of Gowanus Lounge, was found dead in his home yesterday, March 4, 2009.

He was a colleague, and a friend. I’m stunned, and can’t write anything else right now. See Links below for others’ coverage of this terrible loss.

Robert Guskind, speaking at the second Brooklyn Blogfest in May 2007.
Robert Guskind, Gowanus Lounge


Robert Guskind speaking at the first Brooklyn Blogade, at Vox Pop in Flatbush, in June 2007.

Robert Guskind, Gowanus Lounge

Related content

My Flickr photos of Bob

Links

His work and words

His last video, 2009-03-01
Bob’s videos on YouTube
Bob’s Flickr photos
A Walk Around the Blog episode featuring Bob talking about development in Carroll Gardens
Bob on the Brian Lehrer show, WNYC, 2007-09-20
Reporter Roundtable and Brooklyn Review archival footage from Brooklyn Independent Television
Bob wrote 29 stories for Underground Voices Magazine

News reports

Brooklyn Paper, 2009-03-05 (The text of this article has been edited from its original content.)
Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 2009-03-05
New York Magazine (Warning: Intrusive advertising)
New York Post

Personal remembrances

One post per site. I’ve done my best to keep this list up-to-date. If I’ve overlooked your post, please let me know.

Bob and Miss Heather were good friends.
New York Sh*tty

In alphabetical order

  1. 1 Stop Over in Brooklyn
  2. 66 Square Feet
  3. The Albany Project
  4. Art in Brooklyn
  5. Atlantic Yards Report
  6. Bad Advice
  7. Bay Ridge Journal
  8. Bed-Stuy Banana
  9. Bed-Stuy Blog
  10. Best View in Brooklyn
  11. The Bowery Boys: New York City History
  12. BRIC Community Media
  13. Brooklyn 11211
  14. Brooklyn Born
  15. Brooklyn Heights Blog
  16. Brooklyn Junction
  17. Brooklyn Optimist
  18. Brooklyn Paper
  19. Brooklyn Ron
  20. Brooklyn Streets, Carroll Gardens
  21. Brooklynometry
  22. Brownstoner
  23. Bumpershine
  24. California Greening
  25. Carroll Gardens petition (scroll down past the petition itself)
  26. Clinton Hill Blog
  27. Cobble Hill Blog
  28. Crazy Stable
  29. Curbed (Bob worked at Curbed until this past January)
  30. Dalton Rooney (last paragraph)
  31. Deep in the Heart of Brooklyn
  32. Deluxa
  33. Destination Red Hook
  34. Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn
  35. Dope on the Slope
  36. Dumbo NYC
  37. Eat It (opening paragraph to a restaurant review)
  38. Englishman in New York
  39. Flatbush Gardener
  40. Flatbush Vegan
  41. Free Williamsburg
  42. Fort Greene-Clinton Hill, The Local, New York Times
  43. Glamorous Life of the Theatre
  44. Gothamist
  45. Green Brooklyn
  46. Gorilla Face
  47. Huffington Post
  48. I Love Franklin Ave.
  49. I’m not saying, I’m just sayin
  50. IMBY
  51. Keep Left NYC
  52. Kinetic Carnival
  53. Liberty on 10th Street
  54. Living the American Green
  55. lornagrl
  56. Lost City
  57. Lost in the Ozone
  58. McBrooklyn
  59. Make No Assumptions …
  60. mrjabba
  61. Nathan Kensinger Photography
  62. Neighborhood Threat
  63. Neighbors Allied for Good Growth (NAG)
  64. No Land Grab
  65. Not Another F*cking Blog
  66. The “Not-So-Rough” Guide
  67. Only the Blog Knows Brooklyn
  68. Pardon Me For Asking
  69. Pistols and Popcorn
  70. Plasticblog
  71. Pretty in the City
  72. Queens Cr*p
  73. Reclaimed Home
  74. Self-Absorbed Boomer
  75. Space at my moving pace
  76. Street Level
  77. Sunset-Park.com
  78. Triada Samaras Art
  79. Vanishing New York
  80. Washington Square Park

[goo.gl]

Flatbush Rezoning Proposal certified, enters public review process

Update 2009-07-29: Flatbush Rezoning Proposal approved by City Council
Update 2009-05-15: The City Planning Commission (CPC) hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, June 3 at their offices at 22 Reade Street in downtown Manhattan. Sign in at 10am to testify.
Update 2009-03-16: Flatbush Rezoning Proposal CB14 Public Hearing April 2
Update 2009-03-10: DCP-CB14 briefing on Inclusionary Housing provisions March 19


Earlier today the City Planning Commission certified the Flatbush Rezoning Proposal. It now enters the public review process that is ULURP: the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure. The proposal covers a huge area: 180 blocks, nearly the entire northern half of Community Board 14.

The proposal, developed over a three year period in close consultation with Community Board 14, community members, local elected officials and neighborhood civic associations, would protect the diversity of scale and character of the area’s Victorian homes, row houses and apartment buildings by updating zoning to reflect the existing built character. The comprehensive community-based proposal furthers the Bloomberg Administration’s sustainable planning goals by rezoning to protect one of the city’s special lower-density neighborhoods while also providing opportunities for modest growth and permanently affordable housing along wide corridors well served by mass transit.
DCP Press Release

Community efforts for rezoning go back more than the three years DCP has officially been involved. It was a topic of discussion at the first neighborhood association meeting we attended, more than four years ago.


In June 2008, I reported on four major goals for the rezoning, reflecting several of the community concerns that were expressed during Imagine Flatbush 2030. DCP’s press release goes into more detail on how the proposed zoning intends to meet these goals, and added a fifth goal (#2 in this list):

  1. Preserve the existing free-standing (detached) single- and two-family houses.
  2. Preserve Flatbush’s “unique row house neigborhoods.” Some of these rival those in better-known “brownstone Brooklyn” neighborhoods.
  3. Match new zoning to existing buildings as closely as possible without “under zoning”.
  4. Encourage creation of affordable housing through incentives.
  5. Create opportunities for commercial growth.

Proposed Zoning
Flatbush Rezoning Proposal: Proposed Zoning

Existing Zoning
DCP Flatbush Neighborhood Rezoning Existing Zoning

The “ULURP clock” starts with today’s announcement. Community Board review comes next under ULURP. CB14 will schedule a public hearing on the proposal before their formal decision. Review by the Borough President, City Planning Commission, and City Council will complete the process.

Detached Houses

[The proposal will] match new zoning to preserve the established built character of the neighborhood’s lower-density freestanding one- and two-family homes, including 80 blocks of the celebrated early-twentieth century Victorian homes [aka “Victorian Flatbush,” which some call “Ditmas Park”]. Lower density contextual zoning districts (R1-2, R3X and R4A) would replace the existing zoning that permits row houses and apartment buildings with zoning designations that would limit future development to detached housing.

“R” designates residential. The number indicates relative density: R4 is denser than R3. The suffix provides additional restrictions: R3X and R4A only allowed detached homes.

The neighborhoods most affected by this consideration are Caton Park, Beverley Square West and East, Ditmas Park West, and South Midwood. The current zoning for these neighborhoods include R3-1 and R3-2, R4 and R6. Where free-standing – ie: detached – homes still exist, the proposed zoning will be R3X or R4A. And in Prospect Park South, R1-2 zoning is extended west to protect homes that are outside the boundaries of the historic district.

[TinyURL]

Related Content

Flatbush Rezoning Proposal scheduled for certification, 2009-02-28
New Flatbush Rezoning Proposal Gets It Right, 2008-10-07
Flatbush Rezoning Proposal will define the future of Victorian Flatbush, 2008-06-13

Links

PUBLIC REVIEW BEGINS ON CITY PLANNING PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE ZONING PROTECTIONS FOR NEARLY 200 BLOCKS OF FLATBUSH BROOKLYN, Press Release, DCP, 2009-03-02

Brooklyn Community Board 14

Uniform Land Use Review Procedure

“The Mystery of the Maple Syrup Mist”

That’s the title Mayor Bloomberg gave to the investigation into the recurring maple syrup smells that have been reported sporadically in New York City over the past few years. The City closed its investigation with the conclusion that the smell is caused by an ester escaping from the processing of fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum) seed by a New Jersey plant owned by Frutarom. The ester occurred in concentrations of only one part per billion or less, making identification difficult.

Fenugreek seeds. Source: Wikimedia Commons. Credit: Humbads


Trigonella foenum-graecum, Fenugreek, is in the Fabaceae, the Pea or Legume Family.
Botanical illustration: Fenugreek

Fenugreek seeds are a rich source of the polysaccharide galactomannan. They are also a source of saponins such as diosgenin, yamogenin, gitogenin, tigogenin, and neotigogens. Other bioactive constituents of fenugreek include mucilage, volatile oils, and alkaloids such as choline and trigonelline.

Fenugreek is frequently used in the production of flavoring for artificial maple syrups. The taste of toasted fenugreek, like cumin, is additionally based on substituted pyrazines. By itself, fenugreek has a somewhat bitter taste.
Fenugreek, Wikipedia

[bit.ly]

Links

Fenugreek
Press conference

New York City Department of Environmental Protection
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

N.J. Fenugreek Seeds, Source of Mysterious Syrup Odor, Michael Barbaro, New York Times, 2009.02.05
Maple Mystery Solved (It’s New Jersey’s Fault), Elizabeth Benjamin, New York Daily News, 2009.02.05

Bloomberg <3 Flatbush

Part of the front garden and porch of one of my neighbors, one of hundreds of properties threatened by inappropriate zoning in Victorian Flatbush in Brooklyn.
Front Garden, 320 Stratford Road

NYC Mayor Bloomberg delivered his state of the city this afternoon from Brooklyn College at Brooklyn Junction:

… here in Flatbush, we’ll re-zone the area not only to create more affordable housing but also to protect its distinct Victorian charm. Brooklyn may have lost the Dodgers, but we’ll make sure its neighborhoods never lose their character.
Prepared remarks [PDF]

Kinda jumped the gun on the much-anticipated Flatbush Rezoning Plan from Department of City Planning, which is not expected to be certified by the City Planning Commission until the beginning of February, kicking off the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) clock for the rezoning.

Related Content

New Flatbush Rezoning Proposal Gets It Right, 2008-10-07

Links

Bloomberg: Rezone Flatbush, Build Green, Disband LMDC, Observer, 2009-01-15
Bloomberg and the State of the City, City Room, NY Times, 2009-01-15

IDT Energy scammers back and active in Flatbush

Update 2010.01.03: Removed all links to the old Gowanus Lounge domain, which has since been appropriated by some parasitic commercial site.


Sent to the Flatbush Family Network (Yahoo Group):

Some guy just knocked on my door … and claimed to be from ConEd doing a routine check and he needed to see my bill. I said send it in the mail/ make the request in writing and he scampered off. Smells like a scam and I thought I’d send out a heads up.

It is a scam, and it has been widely reported in other Brooklyn neighborhoods.

The company behind this is IDT Energy. Just do a Google search on “IDT Energy Scam” and you’ll get an idea of the scale of what they’re up to.

They will claim to be from Con Ed or anything else that will get you to give them information. They will forge your signature. They are scum. They will lie, cheat, and ultimately steal from you.

What you can do:

1) NEVER give any information to someone showing up at your door. Not a bill, not an account number, nothing. They WILL switch your service without your knowledge or consent, a tactic called “slamming,” specifically ESCOS – Energy Service Companies – slamming.

2) To prevent your service from being switched, contact your provider – ConEd, National Grid, etc – and have them put a “block” on your account.

3) If you’re comfortable, challenge the person showing up at your door. Ask for identification, name, phone number, take a picture with your cell phone, and share the information. Note that some of these folks have been aggressive and hostile, so simply closing and locking the door in their face is always a valid option. If they are aggressive, abusive, hostile, or violent, call 911.

4) You can try filing complaints, but so far this has not stopped the practice, nor brought meaningful charges or fines against anyone involved.

More tips available on this flyer [PDF] from Concerned Citizens of Greenwood Heights.

Additional Reports

I won’t be trying to record every one, but a couple more came in after I posted this, including some reports of aggressive behavior.

A 20ish girl showed up at my door [in a multi-unit residential building] I looked through the peephole and saw she was carrying a knapsack & a clipboard. I informed her through the door(without opening i) that I would be giving Con Edison a call right then to inquire if they had been sending people to my area that particular day; also asked her if she had an I,D. badge she could slip under my door to prove her identity. Without a word, she walked away, and then had the audacity to knock on my next door neighbors door ! Their 2 dogs began barking, I was still watching through the peephole, she hastened off, did not even wait for the elevator, just took the stairs. BTW, this happened a bit after 6 PM [2008.01.15] as well.

A guy came to my house yesterday [2008.01.14] and persistently kept ringing the bell after I told him I was not interested. He seemed to think I should let a stranger into my house and pull out my Con Ed and Gas bills and share this info with him. I asked him (without opening the door) to leave me a card and I would call Con Ed and ask about it, and he kept referring to the ID around his neck as though that should be enough. I sent him on his way, and tried calling Con Ed, but elected not to stay on the phone for the 15 minutes the recording told me I would be waiting. I had not seen any of these notices as yet, and so was unaware of any scam going on. He said that if I pulled out my bill I would see a notice about him coming by to check this. I don’t ever recall Con Ed having any interest in my Gas bill, which was my first clue that something was awry. The sales guy was very pushy. Needless to say when I checked my last bill there was nothing about this on it. Strangely, he had my name on a piece of paper with a Con Ed letter head that looked like a bill, and to a less suspicious home owner would certainly look like he was endorsed by Con Ed.

Links

IDT Back In Brooklyn, Working Their Door To Door Scamming Magic, Consumerist, 2009-01-05
Update on IDT Energy Scam, Brownstoner, 2008-10-20
Energy/Utility Scam Artists Working All Over South Brooklyn (link defunct), Gowanus Lounge, 2008-10-20

New Flatbush Rezoning Proposal Gets It Right

Update, 2009-07-29: Flatbush Rezoning Proposal approved by City Council


477 Westminster Road, Ditmas Park West, one of hundreds of homes that will receive more protection with DCP’s revised draft
447 Westminster Road, Ditmas Park West

NYC’s Department of City Planning (DCP) provided the first view of their revised draft of the Flatbush Rezoning Proposal to Brooklyn’s Community Board 14 (CB14) on September 3, and more recently to the CB14 Executive Committee on September 18. I wasn’t able to sit in on any of the meetings, but I’ve spoken with folks who’ve seen the new proposal first hand.

The revised draft is covered in Flatbush Life, including a photo of the redrafted map:

After a presentation to the executive committee of Community Board 14 – which greeted the plan warmly – the Department of City Planning (DCP) is moving forward to certify the proposal, which will launch the formal approval process for the rezoning.

During the meeting, which was held in the board office, 810 East 16th Street, DCP received accolades from board members and area residents for reworking the plan to take into account neighborhood concerns.

Flatbush rezoning moving forward

I wrote a detailed report about the earlier draft that DCP presented to CB14 and at a public hearing back in June. From everything I’ve heard and seen about this second draft, they got it right. In general, lots that are 50×100 feet will get the R3X designation, while lots that are 40×100 will get R4A. This is a more tailored approach than the broad brush of R4A that was painted over Ditmas Park West and South Midwood in the first draft. (See my original post for complete details on these zoning designations.)

They really listened to the concerns of residents, went back and re-drafted to address them. The free-standing homes responsible for the physical character of this area of Flatbush will be protected. All of Flatbush will be protected against unlimited height residential development. There are new opportunities for commercial development, and incentives for affordable housing. It’s hard to find something to critique in this draft.

Related Posts

Flatbush Rezoning Proposal will define the future of Victorian Flatbush, 2008-06-13

Links

Flatbush rezoning moving forward, Flatbush Life, 2008-09-28
Rezonings for Flatbush, Canarsie Move Forward, Campaign for Community-Based Planning, 2008-10-06
Flatbush Rezoning Moving Forward, Ditmas Park Blog, 2008-10-07

Invasive Species in NYC highlighted in Gotham Gazette

Today’s Gotham Gazette highlights the issue of invasive species in New York City as their “Issue of the Week”:

Grounding their roots, literally, in our soil, invasive species come from far and wide, via barge or souvenir-stuffed suitcases, in what horticulturists and biologists across the city call a serious threat to our habitat. Deceiving to the common eye, these foreign born pests and plants raise significant challenges for the city’s Department of Parks and Recreation: monitoring, controlling and even eradicating top the list.

For centuries, New York has been inundated by foreign-born plants and wildlife. Even creatures we now consider common — like our subway or sewer rat — are invasive species. We may have adapted to some of them — whether we wanted to or not — but other more contemporary wildlife pose a serious threat to the sanctity of our natural flora and fauna, say city scientists.
Invasion New York, Gotham Gazette, August 11, 2008

The article provides a broad overview of some of the most damaging, or visible, invasive species present in New York City. I especially commend Gotham Gazette for taking on what I call Brooklyn’s most charismatic invasive species, the Monk Parakeet, Myiopsitta monachus:

The birds have attracted the ire of Con Edison and other electric companies for building huge nest for their colonies on light poles. In Connecticut, a power company, United Illuminated, is seeking permission to kill the birds, while in Florida researchers have proposed mixing contraceptives in with bird seed to limit the parrot population.

The article itself doesn’t use the scientific names of the species mentioned in the article. They are, however, provided for many of them with an accompanying feature, the Know Your Invasive Critters “trading cards.”

Related Posts

My posts on Parrots, including my 2006 letter to the NY Times.
Invasives

Links

Gotham Gazette, August 11, 2008:

NYC Sewer-Stormwater Settlement

New York City will pay $5,000,000 to settle violations from delays in upgrades to sewer and stormwater systems. Three of the four sites to benefit directly from the settlement are in or adjacent to Brooklyn: Gowanus Canal, Coney Island Creek, and Jamaica Bay.

New York City has agreed to pay a $1 million fine and fund $4 million worth of environmental-benefit projects to settle violations related to delays in making sewer-system and stormwater-system upgrades to prevent overflows into waterways. The violations stem from the city’s failure to make improvements in accordance with a schedule outlined in a 2005 consent order. Under this settlement, the city has agreed to a new timeline for completing those construction projects and will make further upgrades to both its sewer and stormwater systems.
Settlement Paves Way for Sewer/Stormwater Upgrades and Green Infrastructure in NYC, July 2008, Environment DEC

The issue centered around New York City’s obligation to improve mechanical structures, foundations, substructures, pumping stations and other infrastructure-related systems. The projects are designed to improve the capacity of the city’s wastewater and stormwater systems. During heavy rainfall in New York City and other municipalities, runoff can exceed the capacity of the sewer system, triggering what’s known as “combined sewer overflows.” [Just as attractive as it sounds.] Infrastructure upgrades can diminish the chances of overflows.

The environmental benefit projects will be concentrated in the Bronx River, Flushing Bay, Coney Island Creek and Gowanus Canal watersheds and will assess the use of various green infrastructure to be installed for sewer-overflow and stormwater abatement. Some of the types of projects that will be considered include enhanced tree pits with underground water storage, rain gardens, green roofs, bio-retention basins and swales, porous pavement and blue roofs. Collectively, these projects are intended to reduce the volume of stormwater that enters the sewer system, thereby limiting overflows. These projects, administered through the state Environmental Facilities Corp., will include extensive community input and involvement.

Flatbush Rezoning Proposal will define the future of Victorian Flatbush

Update, 2009-07-29: Flatbush Rezoning Proposal approved by City Council
Update, 2009-03-02: DCP certified the proposal.


David Parish, DCP, describing the proposed rezoning for South Midwood
David Parish describing the proposed rezoning for South Midwood

Last night I attended Brooklyn Community Board 14’s (CB14) preliminary public hearing on the NYC Department of City Planning’s (DCP) rezoning proposal for the northern half of CB14, ie: Flatbush. I didn’t take a head count, but roughly 100 people turned out to attend the hearing in Public School 249’s uncooled auditorium. CB14 chair Alvin Berk informally explained the context and ground rules for the meeting, then officially called the hearing to order at 7:23. After the school guard kicked us out – gently, but firmly – after 9:30pm, conversations continued onto the school plaza and sidewalks. I didn’t get home until well after 10pm last night.


Some highlights:

  • One of the four major goals of the proposal is to preserve the existing free-standing single- and two-family homes that characterize the area. On this point, support seemed unanimous, although the terms detached, semi-detached, and attached were new to some in the room and is the cause of some confusion.
  • Not only Ditmas Park West, but South Midwood would be rezoned to R4A. This was the most troublesome part of the proposal at last night’s hearing; nearly all who spoke during the public comments section of the meeting (including me) opposed this particular zoning designation, for reasons explained below.
  • While current zoning puts many of these homes and streets at risk from development, the proposed rezoning may endanger even more.
  • Zoning is a blunt instrument. Currently available zoning designations are insufficient, or at least too coarse, to reflect and respect the existing housing stock in these neighborhoods.

My report will necessarily be incomplete. This was the first time I’ve ever attended a public hearing, so I had only a general idea of what to expect. I had not seen the details of the proposal prior to the meeting. My main purpose in attending the meeting was to learn more details. Unfortunately, there was no opportunity to study the large, detailed exhibits that DCP brought with them. There was only the presentation, and I was writing furiously to try to capture details as they were presented. I also had an opportunity to speak during the public comments section of the meeting. After I spoke, I was out of the room for a few minutes while I (unsuccessfully) sought water. I missed a few speakers during my absence.

The study area

The study area encompasses nearly all of the northern half of CB14. Here’s a detailed map of the study area provided by DCP.

Boundaries of the Study Area
DCP Flatbush Neighborhood Rezoning Study Area

This map of the existing zoning districts was also provided by DCP. To view the map more clearly, follow the link from the map to its Flickr page (just click the image), then select All Sizes > Original.

Existing Zoning
DCP Flatbush Neighborhood Rezoning Existing Zoning

Nearly all of the study area is zoned for residential use. The few commercial-only districts are at the edges. The C4-3 district at the southeast corner of the area is Brooklyn Junction, the intersection of Flatbush and Nostrand Avenues. The largest commercial area is the C4-2 district on the eastern boundary of the study area. This is bounded roughly by Flatbush and Bedford Avenues on the west and east, and Church Avenue and Cortelyou Road on the north and south. Important commercial/retail landmarks in this district include Sears and the Kings Theater.

Loew’s Kings Theater, Flatbush Avenue, just north of Beverly Road
Loew's Kings Theater, Flatbush Avenue

Most of the commercial space is provided as commercial overlays, shown with hatch marks on the map. You can see these along Nostrand and Flatbush Avenues, Church Avenue, Coney Island Avenue, Cortelyou Road, and Newkirk and Foster Avenues. The overlay that spans Newkirk and Foster Avenues at the Newkirk Avenue subway station is Newkirk Plaza.

589-597 Coney Island Avenue
589 (left), 591, 593, 595 and 597 Coney Island Avenue

Cortelyou Road, south side, looking west from Westminster Road
Cortelyou Road, south side, looking west from Westminster Road

Newkirk Plaza, looking south from Newkirk Avenue toward Foster Avenue. The subway cut is on the right of the photo.
Newkirk Plaza

Within the study area, there’s a wide range of density in residential districts, from R1-2 to R7-1. R1 through R5 are lower-density districts. R6 and R7 are medium-density. There’s also a wide range of housing types.

There are three landmarked historic districts typified by free-standing homes. You can easily locate these on the map by the R1-2 districts. From north to south, they are Prospect Park South, Ditmas Park, and the recently approved Fiske Terrace-Midwood Park. Midwood Park is the southernmost R1-2 area, and Fiske Terrace is the R2 area just south of that. Both R1-2 and R2 allow only single-family detached houses.

Our detached houses are not limited to the landmarked areas. The majority are not landmarked, occupying residential zones ranging from R2 to R6. Those in R6 zones – including those in my neighborhood of Beverley Square West – are at greatest risk.

Summary of the Proposal

The proposal is still only a draft, so all the specifics are still subject to change before the formal proposal, which kicks off the ULURP process. There are four major goals for the rezoning:

  1. Preserve the existing free-standing (detached) single- and two-family houses.
  2. Match new zoning to existing buildings as closely as possible without “under zoning”.
  3. Encourage creation of affordable housing through incentives.
  4. Create opportunities for commercial growth.

In rezoning projects, one of the things DCP looks at is “non-compliance”: does existing development on a site comply with what’s allowed by its zoning designation? Non-compliant and under-zoned describe the same situation: the former applies to the house, the latter to the zoning of the property. Non-compliant does not necessarily mean illegal. The conditions may have pre-dated the zoning; in a neighborhood of homes over 100 years old, they likely do. To understand non-compliance, we need to know the current zoning designation and what it permits.

Case Study: Beverley Square West

Beverley Square West is bounded by Beverly and Cortelyou Roads on the north and south, and the B/Q subway cut and Coney Island Avenue on the east and west. The homes here are detached, single- and two-family homes with peaked roofs, most of which were built in the late 1890s and early 1900s. Most of the lots are 50 feet wide by 100 feet deep.

308 Stratford Road, Beverley Square West
308 Stratford Road

This map shows the outlines of buildings on all properties in the area. The detached homes stand in contrast to row houses along the southern side of Cortelyou Road and the eastern side of Coney Island Avenue.

Single- and Two-Family Homes and existing Structures, Beverley Square West

Most of the area is zoned R3-2, with R6 zoned along the western and southern boundaries.

Existing Zoning, Beverley Square West
Existing Zoning, Beverley Square West

Neither R3-2 nor R6 match the existing character of the neighborhood. R3-2 allows not only detached homes but semi-detached homes – side-by-side – as well as fully attached homes, ie: rowhouses. R3-2 specifies a minimum lot width of 40 feet for detached houses, but only 18 feet for semi-detached or attached.

The base floor-to-area ratio (FAR) for R3-2 is .5, or 50%. A typical lot is 50′ wide by 100′ deep, for a total lot area of 5,000 square feet. 50% of that is 2,500 square feet, the maximum permitted floor area for a building with a flat roof. R3-2 also carries an attic allowance, which encourages preservation and development of homes with peaked roofs, of .1, for a total FAR of .6. Since the typical lot area here is 5,000 square feet, 50 x 100, and 60% of that is 3,000 square feet, a house with 3,000 square feet or less is compliant with the .6 FAR. Our house, for example, is 2,750 square feet, as it’s been since it was converted from a single-family to a two-family home in the 1930s, during the Great Depression of that era.

R6 is a medium-density designation and allows for much denser development, typified by this new condo building recently completed at the corner of Stratford and Cortelyou Roads.

1103 Cortelyou Road

The R6 districts are at greatest risk from being torn down for new development. In Ditmas Park West, several homes have already been lost to teardown. To achieve the first goal of the rezoning project, preservation of the existing detached homes, the new zoning must allow only detached houses. Zones which permit only such housing are R3A, R3-X, R4A, and R5A. To preserve the scale of the neighborhoods, the new zoning must come close to the existing FAR of the homes already built. Both R3A and R3-X share the .6 FAR of R3-2. R3-X has the larger minimum lot width, at 35 feet. Of currently available zoning designations, R3-X comes closest to what’s already in place in Beverley Square West. In fact, the current draft of DCP’s zoning study proposes R3-X for both Beverley Square West and East.

Case Study: South Midwood

A house in South Midwood
House in South Midwood

Many of those attending the meeting seemed to be from South Midwood, one of the many neighborhoods that comprise the “Victorian Flatbush” part of Flatbush. The current and proposed zoning for this neighborhood provides a good case study for what’s at stake: the risks to the area from current, inappropriate zoning; the strategies DCP employs when trying to select new zoning most likely to be approved; and the issues with the new designation DCP selected. Also, it’s the only section of the presentation for which I got some usable photographs.

This neighborhood was developed at the turn of the 20th Century, before zoning existed. When the current zoning was established in 1961 (more or less), over 45 years ago, there was little consideration for what was already in place, and whether or not the new zones fit the existing context.

Ditmas Park West and South Midwood, the areas to be rezoned R4A, have a mix of zoning, the majority of which is R3-2. As explained above, R3-2 allows a FAR of .6: .5 base, plus an attic allowance of .1. R4A allows a .9 FAR: .75 base, plus a .15 attic allowance. The R4A FAR of .9 is an increase of 50% over what’s permitted today. It’s this large increase in FAR that raises concerns for residents in these two neighborhoods, who are concerned it will open the door for expansion and enlargement of existing homes, or new development, out-of-scale with the existing homes.

South Midwood, Current Zoning
South Midwood, Current Zoning

South Midwood, Proposed Zoning
South Midwood, proposed rezoning

Another house in South Midwood
A house in South Midwood

DCP’s rationale for proposing R4A over R3-X comes back to the issue of under-zoning. They look at the existing buildings to see whether or not they are compliant with the current zoning. When rezoning, they try to assign a new designation in which 75-80% of existing structures would be compliant. This numeric goal arises from practical and political considerations: they want to minimize objections to the rezoning proposal from property owners concerned that their options for expanding or enlarging their homes are being restricted.

However, the situation here is different. By DCP’s calculations, only 51% of existing homes in South Midwood are compliant with the FAR of their current zoning, mostly .6 FAR in the R3-2 district. But the homeowners here are not complaining about lack of expansion options. They are concerned for the future character of their neighborhood caused by an increase in FAR of 50%.

This is one reason why I referred to zoning as a “blunt instrument” at the beginning. There’s no zoning designation which permits only detached houses with a FAR between .6 and .9. To reach their goal of 75-80% compliance – a threshold determined by political efficacy, not a legal mandate – DCP has to leap to the next available FAR of .9 in R4A. But this leap has generated opposition which the threshold was intended to avoid. An intermediate total FAR, of .75 say, which would be an increase of only 25% instead of 50%, would be a better fit and would not receive the same level of opposition. Barring creation of a new zoning designation, residents speaking at Thursday’s meeting called for a new designation of R3X, maintaining the status quo, instead of R4A, which would open up the neighborhood to out-of-scale development.

Related Posts

Flatbush Rezoning Proposal, May 23, 2008
Preserving Livable Streets: DCP’s Yards Text Amendment, November 7, 2007
Victorian Flatbush at risk from inappropriate zoning, October 23, 2007
State of Flatbush/Midwood, October 5, 2007
Landscape and Politics in Brooklyn’s City Council District 40, February 14
NASA Earth Observatory Maps NYC’s Heat Island, Block by Block, August 1, 2006

Important DCP Links

Residence District Zoning Explained
Table comparing R1 through R3 (PDF)
Table comparing R4 through R5 (PDF)
DCP Zoning Glossary

Other Links

South Midwood Residents Association
Brooklyn Community District 14 Profile (PDF)

May 28: Public forum on the Flatbush Community Garden

Future site of the (potential) Flatbush Community Garden
Future Site of Flatbush Community Garden

Since last November, when the vision for a community garden in Flatbush was first made public, a lot of meeting, brainstorming and planning has been going on behind the scenes. Yesterday, Sustainable Flatbush made the formal announcement for a public forum next Wednesday evening at P.S. 217:

Are you someone who loves all things green?
Have you always wanted to grow your own flowers, fruits, vegetables and herbs?
Here is your opportunity!
We have a potential space for a Flatbush Community Garden!

Come to a meeting to learn more!

WHEN: Wednesday, May 28, 2008, 6:00 – 8:00PM
WHERE: P.S. 217 Cafeteria, 1100 Newkirk Avenue, at Coney Island Avenue

Unfortunately, I won’t be able to make it. My Pest Management class at BBG started last Wednesday.

Food, drinks, and child care will be provided.
Get involved and grow!

For more information, contact:
Susan Siegel at: 718-282-5595
Anne Pope at: anne [at] sustainable flatbush {dot} org

Sponsored by Sustainable Flatbush (Fiscal Sponsor Flatbush Development Corporation)

Related content

The Future Home of the Ex-Lax Gardens, November 1, 2007
My photos of the site

Links

Flatbush Community Garden Meeting, Sustainable Flatbush
Flatbush Development Corporation