Flatbush Rezoning Proposal will define the future of Victorian Flatbush

Posted on 2008-06-13 by admin

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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:

Preserve the existing free-standing (detached) single- and two-family houses.
Match new zoning to existing buildings as closely as possible without “under zoning”.
Encourage creation of affordable housing through incentives.
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

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.

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

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.

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

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, Proposed Zoning

Another 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.

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

Aphid control

Posted on 2008-06-10 by admin

Updated 2008.06.10: Expanded section on biological controls. Added more references.

An aphid viewed through a microscope, taken the first night of my IPM class at BBG

Why are aphids so hard to control? Here’s one answer:

Most species of aphids overwinter in the egg stage. The eggs hatch in the spring to produce a generation of females. These female aphids give birth to living young. Generally the first young aphids are wingless and when a colony becomes too crowded winged forms may be produced. The winged forms migrate to new host plants and begin colonies. Enormous populations are built up from these overlapping generations all summer long.
– Aphids Factsheet, Insect Diagnostic Laboratory, Cornell University

So, to sum up:

Overwintered eggs hatch females.
Females give birth to live young (first instar), up to 70 at once.
They have multiple generations during the year.
The population responds to overgrazing by flying to new locations. They can fly several miles on the wind.
They start all over again the next year.

To this I can add that, the earlier you catch and deal with them, the less effort it will be. A week can make a huge difference. But more on techniques below.

This post is actually a homework assignment for my Pest Management class at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden. I had a choice of three insect pests – spider mites, aphids, and hard scale insects – to answer the question:

What makes [your pest here] so difficult to control?

I chose aphids because a neighbor wrote recently about her problem with aphids on her cilantro and an encounter with a vicious ladybug. She complained that her ladybugs always flew away. I suggested lacewings as an alternative predator, and additional plantings to attract, and keep, “beneficial” insects.

Managing Aphids

Understanding a pest’s life cycle and monitoring for it are important aspects to managing it. I’ll highlight a few categories of techniques for controlling aphids: horticultural, physical, biological, and chemical. I’ll address biological controls last, and spend most of the time on that topic.

Since eggs overwinter, horticultural practices such as removing dead plant material before aphids hatch in the spring is a first step. Clearly, this will be most effective when it’s done before the first aphids emerge. Another important horticultural strategy is to plan and plant diversity in the garden. More on this in the section about biological controls, below.

Physical controls can be effective, especially earlier in the spring when populations are still relatively small. This could include washing them off with a stream of water, removing infested parts of the plant, and, for the non-squeamish, squishing them and picking them off by hand. Some sources even suggest mulching with foil to repel aphids and other pests.

Chemical controls really are a last resort. Insecticides poison both the target and its predators. It’s generally not a good strategy to poison the things that eat the things you’re trying to control. For aphids, insecticidal soap can be used to target just the affected areas of the plant.

Biological controls

My preference is for biological controls. There are many naturally occurring predators and diseases of aphids, including:

lady beetles (lady “bugs” are really beetles, not bugs)
lacewings
predatory midges
flower fly larvae
pirate beetles
Braconid wasps
parasitic fungi

Given this list of natural enemies, it’s no wonder aphids have evolved a strategy of rapid, massive reproduction. One can even see the value of having some aphids in the garden, since they’re important food sources for so many other insects!

In the past, I’ve introduced both ladybugs and lacewings to my gardens. These days, I try instead to keep a balance of plants in my gardens, including plants that provide alternative food sources or refuge for insect predators. There are plenty of natural predators around, even in city gardens. There are also fungal diseases that occur naturally, but are not commercially available, which attack aphids.

Learn to recognize and conserve insects that prey on or parasitize pests. Small wasps, for example, parasitize aphids, leaving bloated gold to bronze “mummies.” Immature lady beetles and lacewings, which look like tiny alligators, also frequent gardens. Other “beneficials” include spiders, predatory mites, predatory bugs, predatory flies, and ground beetles.
– Managing Insect Pests in Vegetable Gardens, Home Gardening Resources, Cornell Univers

Biological controls are not a panacea. For example, most of the commercially available ladybugs are species not native to North America. They are commercially available because they are amenable to raising in the large numbers needed for economic viability, not necessarily because they are the best choices. These can become pests in their own right when they swarm and overwinter in homes to emerge in the Spring.

In addition, native species have become scarce, even endangered. Two years ago, New York state changed its official insect from one ladybug species to another because the original species had become extinct in the state. This reduction in population coincides with the spread of non-native species in the wild.

The New York State insect is essentially no more. Once among the most common ladybugs in the eastern United States, the nine-spotted lady beetle has not been seen since 1984. This comely reddish-orange beetle with four spots on each wing and a shared one in the middle has been displaced by a voracious cousin with seven spots, imported by the millions from Europe in the 1970s as a biological control agent.

The idea made sense at the time. Entomologists had observed that lady beetles eat aphids, so thought that a more aggressive species would be only that much more effective in controlling these common crop pests. They were, so much so it turned out, that the imported beetles monopolized the food source and apparently starved the natives out.
– Invaasion of the Species Snatchers, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Cornell University

So how can we take advantage of naturally occurring species? Plant a diverse garden, and plant for beneficial insects. For example, clovers are attractive to several kinds of insects which prey on aphids, including, wasps, pirate bugs, aphid midges, and of course, ladybugs. Buckwheat attracts lacewings, in addition to wasps and ladybugs. Plants in the Apiaceae (Umbelliferae) and Asteraceae (Compositae) support a wide range of insect species.

A heavy outbreak of aphids on Swamp Milkweed, Asclepias incarnata, in my backyard in October of last year.

Links

The Bug’s No Lady, Brooklynonmetry, June 6, 2008

Aphids Factsheet (also available as a PDF), Insect Diagnostic Laboratory, Cornell University
Managing Insect Pests in Vegetable Gardens, Home Gardening Resources, Cornell University
Sucking insects: Aphids, Integrated Pest Management, University of Connecticut
Use of Cover Crops and Green Manures to Attract Beneficial Insects, IPM, UConn

Wikipedia: Aphid
The Lost Ladybug Project
The Decline of C-9 – New York’s State Insect
Invaasion of the Species Snatchers, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Cornell University
New York’s state insect, the nine-spotted lady beetle, rediscovered in eastern U.S. after 14 elusive years, April 17, 2007

Colletes thoracicus (Colletidae), Cellophane Bees

Posted on 2008-05-27 by admin

Update 2009.05.09: Cellophane Bees Return
Update 2008.05.28: Many thanks to John Ascher for the id!

While spending most of the weekend gardening, I discovered that the garden is home to a small colony of mining cellophane bees. At first I thought they Andrenidae, mining bees, based on photos and this description on BugGuide.Net:

Many small, ground-nesting bees observed in areas of sandy soil are members of the family, Andrenidae. Characteristics of this family (of which there are approximately 3000 species) are: Small size, 20 mm, (or smaller) brown to black in color, and nesting in a burrow in areas of sparse vegetation, old meadows, dry road beds, sandy paths. Although the nests are built in close proximity of one another, the bees are solitary (each female capable of constructing a nest and reproducing). Many species are active in March and April when they collect pollen and nectar from early spring blooming flowers. The female bee digs a hole 2-3 inches deep excavating the soil and leaving a pile on the surface. She then digs a side tunnel that ends in a chamber (there are about 8 chambers per burrow). Each chamber is then filled with a small ball of pollen and nectar. An egg is laid on the top of each pollen ball and the female seals each brood chamber. The emerging larval bees feed on the pollen/nectar ball until they pupate.
– Family Andrenidae – Mining Bees, BugGuide.Net

I contacted Kevin Matteson, contact person for the Bee Watchers 2008 project here in NYC. I wasn’t able to attend any of their orientation session last week, so I forwarded him a link to this post. He in turn forwarded the link to his “colleague at the museum.” Thus turned out to be John Ascher, a BugGuide contributing editor, and all-around big bee guy, who identified the species in the first comment below. Considering I don’t have a Ph.D. in Entomology, I don’t feel so bad.

[Colletes] are virtually indistinguishable from some of the Andrenidae mining bees. Colletes are honey bee size, and have dramatic black and white banding on the abdomen. Some andrenids have similar markings, but are usually slightly smaller. Colletes tend to nest in dense aggregations, while andrenids are not usually as populous.
– Genus Colletes – Cellophane Bees, BugGuide.Net

I noticed the first entrance mound a couple of weeks ago, shortly after I put up the bat house. I saw a discoloration on the ground directly below the bat house, and thought it might be guano. On closer inspection, I thought it was an anthill.

This weekend, I was doing a lot of work near that corner of the house, and the presence of bees was more obvious, especially when I started digging up and dividing perennials (Hemerocallis and Hosta) from a bed I was preparing for a new sunny native plant border.

I also noticed that the bees were entering and leaving what I had taken to be ant hills. Here’s the area where they’re all nesting. There are six entrance holes visible in this photo. There are a couple more hidden beneath leaves. The area is less than a square foot.

Here’s a closer view of the three entrances to the left. Zoom in and check out the leftmost one. There’s a little bee in there checking me out.

When I saw all this activity around numerous holes, I thought I might have a hive. Since they’re adjacent to the house, I was worried that they might move in. Before I did anything with them, I wanted to identify them to find out what they were.

To photograph this individual, I captured it in a plastic jug and placed it in the refrigerator for a few hours. When I retrieved it, it was inert, and I first feared I had killed it. When I took it into the backyard, where temperatures were still in the 70s, thankfully it slowly revived. I placed it on a piece of graph paper from my notebook for scale. The squares are 1/4″.

Here are two more views of the same individual. When I was done, I returned it back to the nesting area. Not realizing these are solitary bees, I thought it would return to the hive. It flew off, instead. I hope it returns and is able to find its own nest, again.

I want to take some more shots. I think I can get a shot of the wing venation without harming the individual. I’ll be more careful to not keep the subject away from its nest for so long next time. Maybe only a half-hour of chilling is all I would need to get my shots.

I’m not satisfied with the depth of field (DOF) in any of these shots. My macro lens has a focal length of 105mm (digital, around 150mm equivalent 35mm), which compresses DOF. Using the flash helped a lot. A tripod would be better. I’ll try some different options on my next attempts.

Links

Colletes thoracicus, Discover Life
Bee Watchers 2008
Family Andrenidae – Mining Bees, BugGuide.Net

The Bluebell Wood at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden

Posted on 2008-05-19 by admin

The Bluebell Wood at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden as it appeared last Thursday, May 15th, 2008.

One of the things that great public gardens offer is large-scale displays of which gardeners of more modest means, and space, can only dream. The Bluebell Wood at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden is one such display:

More than 45,000 bluebells (Hyacinthoides hispanica ‘Excelsior’) are planted under a mature stand of oak, birch, and beech trees just south of Cherry Esplanade. In May, the bluebells burst into flower and create an enchanting woodland display.

I’d also like to know how much area they cover. It feels like an acre, but it’s probably “only” a quarter-acre. City gardeners don’t get much sense of garden space measured in acres. We’re usually dealing with space on the order of square feet.

These photos show how it looked last Thursday, when I also took the photos of the Osborne Garden. I don’t know how long this show lasts. I’ll be back there Wednesday evening for the start of my Pest Management class and see how it’s holding up.

The path in the photo above and immediately below leads to the meandering Cherry Walk and the two western entrances to the Japanese Garden.

This path leads from the formal fountain and roses – part of the Cranford Rose Garden – at the foot of the Cherry Esplanade.

Photos don’t do it justice. It’s hard to capture and adjust for the blue and light filtering through the trees. Morning or mid-day would probably be a better time for this than evening, when I visited.

Earlier in the Spring, it really doesn’t look like much at all.

Links

The Bluebell Wood, Brooklyn Botanic Garden

The Osborne Garden and Shade Garden at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden

Posted on 2008-05-17 by admin

Wisteria and Azaleas blooming in the Osborne Garden of the Brooklyn Botanic Garden

There are some stunning vistas to be had right now at the Osborne Garden of the Brooklyn Botanic Garden. The Wisteria on the arbors and the azaleas bordering the central lawn are both in full bloom.

There’s also a sizable yet nearly hidden area of shade gardens. Right now, these are dominated by the flash of the Azaleas and Rhododendrons in bloom.

But the long shady borders have their own attractions, and provide lots of ideas for sun-challenged urban gardeners. Granted, this is “ideal” shade: a high canopy of shade provided by widely spaced trees with little competition from roots. Still, I’m getting some ideas for the shady border on the north side of my house.

I really like this Saruma, in the Ginger family. I saw one on the Brownstone Brooklyn Garden Walk last year. I never imagined drifts of it as I saw yesterday evening.

Saruma henryi

This is Chrysogonum virginianum “Pierre”. I’ve got the “Allen Bush” cultivar blooming in the native plant garden in my backyard right now.

Last night was the last session of my Botany class, the first of eight courses I need to complete to receive a Certificate in Horticulture from the Brooklyn Botanic Garden. I start Pest Management next week, and Woody Plant Identification after that. Expect more periodic, if irregular, updates of the garden as I get to witness and record its changes every week through the summer.

The Osborne Garden, April 6, 2008

Links

Osborne Garden, Brooklyn Botanic Garden

Garden Blogging Bloom Day, May 2008

Posted on 2008-05-15 by admin

2012-01-14: Corrected ID of Bearded Iris ‘Gracchus’, which I had incorrectly id’d as I. neglecta.

Part of my backyard native plant garden.

It’s Garden Blogging Bloom Day, the 15th of the month, when garden bloggers all over the world report on what’s blooming in their gardens.

I’ve organized this by the four gardens, one for each side of the house: the native plant garden in the backyard, the shady and sunny borders on the north and south, and the heirloom garden in the front yard. The heirloom bulbs in the front yard are nearly done; just one Tulip lingers on. The wildflowers in the native plant garden have most of the action right now.

This is my first report for Garden Blogging Bloom Day. I didn’t get to take any shots specifically for this post. I’ve uploaded an added what I have. If there’s something in particular you’re curious to see, let me know in a comment.

Native Plant Garden

Wildflowers in the native plant garden

In alphabetical order by botanical name.

Amsonia tabernaemontana, Eastern Bluestar
Aquilegia canadensis, Eastern Columbine
Chrysogonum virginianum “Allen Bush”, Green & Gold
Dicentra eximia “Aurora”, white-flowering Eastern Bleeding Heart
Iris setosa canadensis
Lonicera sempervirens, Trumpet Honeysuckle
Phlox stolonifera “Sherwood Purple”, Creeping Phlox
Stylophorum diphyllum, Celandine or Woodland Poppy
Tiarella “Running Tapestry”
Viola, white-flowering, unidentified species, possibly Viola striata, Creamy Violet
Zizia aurea, golden zizia

Iris setosa canadensis

Lonicera sempervirens

Here’s the unknown violet. I think it’s Viola striata, Creamy Violet. Any ids?

Zizia aurea

Shady Border

Corydalis cheilanthifolia
Corydalis “Berry Exciting”
Epimedium x versicolor “Sulphureum”, Barrenwort
Rodgersia podophylla? This has a tall, 3-foot spike on it, and it’s still only in bud.

Epimedium x versicolor “Sulphureum”, Barrenwort

Sunny Border

Part of the sunny/long border

Geranium macrorrhizum, another pass-along.
Geranium macrorrhizum “Variegatum”
Bearded Iris “Dee’s Purple.” Not a real cultivar name, just what I call it. It’s a tall, purple Beared Iris, a pass-along I got from Blog Widow John’s mother’s (Dee) house in upstate New York after she died several years ago.
Tradescantia, Spiderwort, a pass-along I got from a neighbor

Geranium macrorrhizum

Iris “Dee’s Purple”

Heirloom Garden

Heirloom Bearded Iris ‘Gracchus’, introduced 1884
Tulip “Clara Butt” (Heirloom, 1880)
The Tree Peony just finished up a few days ago.

Heirloom Bearded Iris ‘Gracchus’, introduced 1884

Links

GBBD, May 2008, May Dreams Gardens

Last day to vote for the Mousies

Posted on 2008-05-12 by admin

Acer buergerianum, Bonsai, Root over rock style, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, November 2006

Voting for the 2008 Mouse & Trowel Awards, the “Mousies,” closes at midnight Eastern Time tomorrow, May 13th. Flatbush Gardener is a finalist in the category of “Best Photography in a Garden Blog.”

The photo above is one of six I submitted for inclusion in the video A Photoblog Tribute to Brooklyn which premiered at the Brooklyn Blogfest last Thursday evening. Four of the six are from gardens in Brooklyn.

Front Garden, 320 Stratford Road, Beverley Square West, Flatbush, Brooklyn, June 2007

Hibiscus, Pier 44 Waterfront Garden, Red Hook, Brooklyn, July 2007

Sanguinaria canadensis, Bloodroot, Native Flora Garden, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, April 2007

You can see my photographs in posts labeled with Photos on this blog. You can also browse my Flickr Collections; most of my Flickr photographs are linked back to the posts in which they appear.

Links

VOTE NOW!, Mouse & Trowel Awards

Photoblog Tribute to Brooklyn

Posted on 2008-05-09 by admin

A highlight for me at last night’s Blogfest was the chance to see some of my photos on “the big screen.” This video was produced by Morgan Pehme, Brooklyn Optimist, compiled from submissions from several of Brooklyn’s “photobloggers.” Six of my photos appear from 1:40 to 1:59 in the video.

Links

Watch the video on YouTube. Select “High quality” and full-screen for best effect.

Here are all the photographers, listed in the order in which they appear in the video.
Tracy Collins
Sharon Kwik
Frank Jump
Kevin Walsh
Hugh Crawford
Joseph Holmes
Lara Wechsler
Will Femia
Heather Letzkus
Robin Lester
Dalton Rooney
Tom Giebel
Adrian Kinloch

The Brooklyn Blogfest 2008

Posted on 2008-05-09 by admin

My view of last night’s Blogfest attendees when I took the stage to talk about the Brooklyn Blogade.

Last night I attended the third annual Brooklyn Blogfest. I spoke briefly about the Brooklyn Blogade (about which there will be more in another post later today) at the end of a lineup of illustrious Brooklyn bloggers.

I estimate about 165 people attended. There were 210-220 chairs on the floor of the auditorium; they were mostly filled, but it was not a packed house. I helped collect the donations at the door and kept a tally of everyone who paid; we only had three $0 donations. We had about 130-140 people at the door. That does not include staff, sponsors or media, who comprised an additional 30 or so.

Four Mikes

Pre-show Briefing

I didn’t get any shots of the speakers, since I was still busy staffing the table during the event. I got a couple shots of the shout-out, where bloggers get to introduce themselves and their blogs, and the after-show party.

The Shout-out

After-show party

Cupcakes from Red Mango Bakery

Beers, lots and lots of beers, provided by outside.in

My official “Staff” badge for the event. Anne Pope of Sustainable Flatbush made up all our name tags. Her strategy was to make the name – Xris – larger than the blog name – Flatbush Gardener – so that people would have to actually come up to you to find out what your blog was.

Links

See Blogfest 20008 Coverage

Sources of Plants for Brooklyn Gardeners

Posted on 2008-04-29 by admin

Left to right: Gowanus Nursery, Liberty Sunset Garden Center, Chelsea Garden Center, and Brooklyn Terminal Market

Flats and racks of annuals at Whitey Produce, Brooklyn Terminal Market

Just a timely pointer to my post from last year, Sources of Plants for Brooklyn Gardeners, May 24, 2007. Since Blogspot doesn’t give me any means of creating a standing topic page, I continue to keep that post up to date.

Liberty Sunset Garden Center, July 20, 2007
Brooklyn Terminal Market is NOT Closed, June 22, 2007
Chelsea Garden Center, June 16, 2007
Sources of Plants for Brooklyn Gardeners, May 24, 2007
Opening Day at Gowanus, March 31, 2007
A Visit to the Brooklyn Terminal Market, May, 2006

The study area

Summary of the Proposal

Case Study: Beverley Square West

Case Study: South Midwood

Related Posts

Important DCP Links

Other Links

Managing Aphids

Biological controls

Related Content

Links

Links

Related Content

Links

Related Posts

Links

Native Plant Garden

Shady Border

Sunny Border

Heirloom Garden

Related content

Native Plant Profiles

Links

Related Posts

Links

Related Content

Links

Related Content

Links

Related Posts