No Gowanus Planning Without Meaningful Representation: Let's Demand A Truly Democratic Process

From 2008's City Planning Gowanus Draft Rezoning Proposal

Pratt Center's Draft Timeline For "Gowanus Community Planning"

Proposed Gowanus Zoning study area

No Gowanus Planning Without Meaningful Representation:

A rather long post about a terribly important issue

With the Brooklyn real estate market soaring in the last decade, developers have been salivating over the mostly-industrial Gowanus Canal area.  However, their dreams of luxury glass-clad high-rises clashes with the popular vision of Gowanus as an incubator for small businesses, light manufacturing and the arts.
Local residents have been debating the merits of one over the other with much fervor. The conversation became more divisive when, in November 2008, New York City Department of Planning Commissioner Amanda Burden came to the community to introduce her agency's Draft Rezoning Proposal for 25 blocks along the Gowanus Canal. The land use framework put forth by City Planning addressed issues like land use, density, bulk and waterfront access.

Though the rezoning proposal sought to maintain areas for continued industrial and commercial use,

it also allowing for a mix of uses, including residential, in certain areas currently zoned for manufacturing.  According to the timeline presented by City Planning at the time, the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP), the public review process of a rezoning, was due to begin in early 2009.

What City Planning was envisioning for those mixed-use areas would soon become clear.  In February 2009, after a contentious ULURP process and much community opposition, City Planning granted Toll Brothers, a national developer, a rezoning from manufacturing to mixed use, allowing Toll to build 470 residential condo units at the edge of the canal.
At the time, City Planning justified their decision to allow Toll Brothers to move ahead of the City's over-all rezoning by saying that the project was essentially based on their own plans for Gowanus.

But just two months later, in April 2009,  the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed the 1.8 mile long Gowanus Canal to the Agency’s Superfund National Priorities List, a list reserved for the country's most polluted sites.  Toll Brothers bailed on their project, and City Planning shelved their rezoning.

By the following year, the EPA had formally designated the Gowanus a Superfund site.  The agency made it clear that they would not get involved in land-use issues, but suggested that it would be helpful to the agency to know the end use of the uplands.

Then in 2011, Hurricane Sandy slammed into the area, and caused serious flooding to homes and businesses in Gowanus.  City Planning made clear that the agency had no plans to resume its rezoning effort until Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had released its redrawn post-Sandy draft flood maps.

After the hurricane, many of our local elected officials addressed this 'new reality.' Congresswoman Velázquez spoke of the need to set public policy and of a revision of the type of development allowed along the coastline. Councilman Brad Lander felt that this was a very important time, one which offered a re-set button in regards to development on the shores of the Gowanus Canal.

The Superfund nomination of the canal and the hurricane only offered a short reprieve from a rezoning. By this spring, Councilman Lander was ready to resume the conversation about 'planning for Gowanus'. However, at several meetings, he hinted that a rezoning should be moved forward under a new administration,  and that "the upcoming transition at City Hall – with a new Mayor and City Planning Commission – presents an opportunity for a better outcome."

On August 5, 2013, State Senator Velmanette Montgomery, Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez, State Assemblywoman Joan Millman,  Councilmember Steven Levin and Councilmember Lander convened  a Gowanus Planning Kick-Off meeting. On the list of invited stakeholders were representatives from local organizations and neighborhood associations.***

This first step in what Councilman Brad Lander called "inclusive community planning" didn't seem so inclusive to some.  The meeting was not announced, not posted in any way on the internet,  not open to the general public and was closed to the press.

Pratt Center for Community Development (not to be confused with the Pratt Institute) has been hired by the elected officials as the consultant that is running the planning process.

According to an overview  prepared by Pratt, the goal of these planning meetings is to:

*Develop the outlines of a comprehensive, community‐based infrastructure and land‐use plan for a safe, vibrant, and sustainable Gowanus area

*Bring community stakeholders together to build as much consensus as we can around a long‐term vision for the Gowanus Canal area
*Shape the next NYC mayoral administration’s thinking about the Gowanus Canal
*Create a space for honest conversation about different viewpoints

Just recently, Pratt has held a series of small group interviews with the stakeholders who were invited to the first meeting.  I was asked to participate in the group that apparently "cared deeply about the environment."  The interview, held on Monday evening, was led by Elena Conte and Paula Crespo of Pratt.  The questions were rather basic and covered such topics as what makes Gowanus special, what should be preserved, and what are some of the infrastructure issues.  

My group included members from CORD, Save Gowanus, and South Brooklyn Local Development.

(FROGG, though invited, did not send a representative because the group put into question the validity of the process.)

The group quickly seemed to reach consensus that before moving ahead with any re-zoning, a health study and a hydrological study were needed to investigate the health effects of exposure to the environmental hazards in Gowanus, and to evaluate the effect of new development in this flood prone area. We also felt that we first need assurances that the City Of New York will pay and follow through  on the EPA-mandated retention basins that will help reduce the Combined Sewer Overflows and improve water quality in the canal.  Without these studies and without the retention basins, planning more housing in Gowanus seemed "recklessly premature."

In the coming weeks, Pratt Center will compile the information from these interviews and will then host a series of three public meetings.  The first one is scheduled for Thursday, November 14th.  (The time and place has not yet been determined.  As soon as I find out, I will post the information.)

Personally, I remain very skeptical of this entire 'Gowanus planning' process and doubt that the community will have a true say or vote in the outcome.  Though I appreciate the opportunity to weigh in on the area's future,  I can't shake the suspicion that my participation in these meetings only serves to rubber-stamp a re-zoning plan that has already been chosen by our politicians and by developers.

As far as Brad's suggestion that planning under a new city administration presents the opportunity for a better outcome, he may be mistaken.

As the latest numbers indicate, Bill deBlasio will most likely be our next mayor.  DeBlasio not only supported the Toll Brothers spot-rezoning back in '08, he fought hard to drive away the EPA when the agency proposed to list the Gowanus as a Superfund.

If DeBlasio wins , we can be sure that he will hand over the Gowanus Canal to developers on a silver platter, no matter what we say.

In a speech on fostering economic growth given last year, DeBlasio declared:

"I give Mayor Bloomberg tremendous credit for fighting [the EPA] tooth and nail, and I was proud to stand with him. We tried every play in the book to save the [Toll Brothers'] development deal.
In the end, the EPA won out, the development stalled and every time I drive past that site I see derelict lots where we should now have hundreds of new homes and jobs.

I couldn't disagree more. Today, the Gowanus Canal area is slowly healing after years of neglect. Small businesses and a vibrant artist community are thriving there.  Jobs are being created.  Yes, the area has some serious environmental problems, but thanks to the EPA, they are being addressed.  What seems to be holding back Gowanus is the threat of a zoning change that will most likely drive away many businesses, and the speculation by developers that a re-zoning will reward them for holding on to their 'derelict lots'.

We owe it to ourselves and to all who will come after us to take our seat at the table, and to push for a true, transparent, democratic process.  We need to tell our politicians that before any new development is envisioned, we need to first find out what the Gowanus can sustain.  We need to first invest in infrastructure to strengthen the businesses and the residential areas that are already there, and we need to demand new tools in City Planning's tool box.  Because Gowanus is unique and deserves solutions that are just as unique.

***I was invited to the August meeting but was out of the country and could not attend.

'Save Gowanus' Planning Community Rally To Voice Concerns About Lightstone Group Project On Thursday Evening

rendering by Lightstone Group

Meanwhile, back in Brooklyn....
'Save Gowanus' is planning a rally on Thursday night at the Carroll Street bridge to protest the Lightstone Group's 12 story, 700 unit project at 363-365 Bond Street on the shores of the Gowanus Canal.

Save Gowanus is composed of Gowanus residents and home-owners living near the site on Bond Street between Carroll Street and 2nd Street, as well as members of civic groups Friends of Bond (FOB) and Friends and Residents of Greater Gowanus (FROGG)

Mayoral candidate Bill Thompson is scheduled to attend and will be speaking with concerned community members about the impact the Lightstone apartment complex will have on the community and on the Gowanus flood zone.

From a FROGG press release:
"This is not a rally to endorse Thompson's mayoral candidacy; instead, it is a chance "to bring broader attention to the issue of irresponsible development (which endangers scale, zoning, schools, transit and health and safety) in the context of the mayoral race.
It is extremely urgent that as many of you attend as possible. Please invite your neighbors as well. We need to show all our elected representatives how important this issue is to our community. They've already heard from the developers and their lobbyists; now it's our turn to be heard. This is the protest that will hopefully help bring attention to our issue in the media and the mayoral race."

***UPDATE  From Save Gowanus

Tonite's rally, which will be attended both by the media and by Mayoral candidate Bill Thompson, is still scheduled to happen at the Carroll Street Bridge.

However, in chance of rain, we'll be moving indoors to the community room of Mary Star of the Sea, 41 1st Street.

Keep your eyes peeled to the website, savegowanus.org, to find out if the rally has been moved to that indoor location.

Friends And Residents Of Greater Gowanus (FROGG) To City Planning: After Sandy, How Can Department Consider 700-Unit Apartment Complex In Gowanus?

Proposed Lightstone Development next to the Gowanus Canal (credit: Lightstone Group)

Lightstone Development site, Canal at Carroll Street during Sandy  (photo credit: Margaret Maugenest)

Second and Bond Streets during storm (photo credit: Triada Samaras)

Sandy flooding at First and Bond Streets near Canal (photo credit: Carl Teitelbaum)

On November 13th***, NYC's Department Of City Planning will be reviewing The Lightstone Group's application for "minor modifications" to the previously approved land use actions at 363-365 Bond Street on two blocks right next to the Gowanus Canal. One of those minor modifications is to increase the number of units from 447 to 700, which doesn't seem so very minor at all.

In 2009, after a Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP) that was set in motion by Toll Brothers, a national development company, the property was spot re-zoned by City Planning from manufacturing to special mixed-use, which allows housing.
After the Gowanus Canal was declared a Superfund Site by the US Environmental Protection Agency in 2010, Toll Brothers decided to abandon plans for their proposed condo development.

Lightstone revived the project and is planning a 700-unit rental complex. In order to proceed, they just need City Planning's approval.  (It is important to note that Lightstone could start construction on the previously approved 447 unit building immediately.)

Many Gowanus residents have warned that the building site is in a flood zone A and that the infrastructure, especially the sewer system in the Gowanus area is dreadfully antiquated.  

After Hurricane Sandy and the ensuing flooding, these concerns are well founded.

The group Friends And Residents Of Greater Gowanus (FROGG) just released the  statement below aimed at NYC Planning and Chairperson Amanda Burden to address the 'new reality' about the vulnerability of our shoreline and the risks of bringing more residents to a flood plain.

BROOKLYN RESIDENTS, SMALL BUSINESSES BLAST NY CITY PLANNING’S DECISION TO CONSIDER A NEW 700-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX IN CONTAMINATED ZONE A

Development would be the first approved since Superstorm Sandy despite being in a flood-prone, mandatory evacuation zone along a hazardous Superfund site; Brooklyners upset at the prospective rise in insurance costs from the eventual bail out of this building in the next storm; City Planning to discuss approval November 13.***

Brooklyn residents and small businesses are outraged that the New York City Planning Commission will consider a proposal to build a gigantic 8 to 12 story apartment complex to house over 1400 residents on the banks of the Gowanus Canal, which is a hazardous federal Superfund site. Their proposed site was under more than 10 feet of toxic, sewage- contaminated water during Hurricane Sandy.
After the mandatory evacuation order for Zone A and the continuing devastation from the hurricane, many Gowanus residents have still not been allowed to return to their damaged buildings. Other high rises in the neighborhood, such as the Gowanus Houses, are still without power and heat a week after the storm. The EPA is currently conducting street-level site sampling to determie whether the cancer-causing contaminants from the canal’s toxic sediments linger and are harmful to citizens. It’s in this dystopian environment that the Lightstone Group is applying
to build an apartment complex. “It is lunacy for the city to consider this project in light of the damage from the hurricane,” says Linda Mariano, co-chair of the community advisory group Friends and Residents of the Greater Gowanus (FROGG). “We are calling for a full moratorium on development and all up-scale zoning changes in any waterfront district.”
A 2010 State Sea-Level Task Force Report recommends " restriction of new development and redevelopment in high- risk areas”. That’s because the costs of dealing with a storm’s aftermath is too costly to New York taxpayers. The dollars to bail out residents during future storm surges raises everyone’s taxes as well as insurance rates.
The NY City Planning Commission will discuss this project at a November 13 meeting at which the public is not allowed to speak. Unlike other proposals for new developments, the Lightstone project is slipping backdoor through a loophole in the city planning process. The proposal will not go through a city ULURP hearing or have to file and environmental impact statement because of
an earlier area spot zoning in 2009. However, given the federal government’s designation of the Gowanus Canal as a Superfund site in 2010 and the incredible damage and displacement
from Hurricane Sandy, it is irresponsible for the City Planning Commission to greenlight such a development at this time.
Lightstone has said that despite the storm, it will proceed with building, claiming that they plan to raise the grade of their development to offer protection to the new residents. However, the surge brought in by Sandy exceeded their proposed elevation changes. And even if their buildings are above the flood plain,  all their of nearly 1400 residents will still need to be evacuated in the next storm– a task made more complicated by the city’s evacuation route also being underwater for high tides during the storm. Furthermore, in Sandy’s wake, new developments can’t only seek to impede a flood by trapping storm water, but also need to be evaluated as to whether they can assist in the speedy drainage of future storm surges, something Lightstone’s proposal does not include.
“Flood water would not only find another path, it would go further up each side of the Canal to find open or other accessible space,” says Diane Buxbaum, a neighborhood resident and environmentalist “It makes no sense to continue building on our shore areas. Creating open areas and trying to restore some link to wetlands is the better choice.”
More than 500 Brooklyn residents and small businesses have signed a petition decrying the development, and it is also opposed by a large number of community groups incluing FROGG (Friends and Residents of Greater Gowanus), CORD (Coalition for Responsible Development) and the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats, among others.
These allies call upon Governor Cuomo, Mayor Bloomberg, Congresswoman Nydia Velasquez and Councilman Brad Lander and other elected officials, acting under the power of the current “State of Emergency,” to take the first steps in addressing the effects of hurricane and storm surge catastrophes by calling for a moratorium on development and all up-scale zoning changes in any waterfront district that was affected by the storm surge of hurricane Sandy. They call for Amanda Burden and the NY City Planning to put an immediate moratorium on the review or approval of any pending projects planned for Zone A, including that of the Lightstone Group, until new guidelines for such development have been created. To do otherwise would not only be foolish, but irresponsible and costly to the community as well. As Governor Andrew Cuomo recently stated, “We have a 100-year flood every two years now.” The NY City Department of Planning must acknowledge this fact, and act accordingly.
We must rebuild following Sandy – but not at the water’s edge. Let’s not create new and costly regional flood control problems.

*** The hearing on this development was delayed. The date apeared on NYC Department of City Planning's online calendar prior to Hurricane Sandy, but was removed after the storm. No word yet on when it will be rescheduled.