Culver El Hearing

Yet another hearing on Culver El this morning, this one before the City Council's Zoning and Franchises committee at 250 Broadway in Manhattan. Culver El is a substantial rezoning proposal on the edge of Kensington and Borough Park, whereby the city is changing zoning to allow residential uses where manufacturing was before, as well as to develop the strip of land along 37th Street that currently houses school buses and Bergament parking into 17 four story, mostly 5 bedroom affordable condominiums, intended for families within 80-110 % of area median income.

This time two people spoke for the project (the third did not say a word), and two against.

We have written about the project quite extensively, including posting positions taken by our councilmember Brad  Lander, Brooklyn Borough president Marty Markowitz, and Public Advocate Bill de Blasio. Our major concerns remain much in line with what councilmember Lander has stated over and over:

- city subsidized affordable housing should remain affordable in perpetuity. We understand that there seem to be negotiations on this issue among the different parties, and clearly there is a lot of pressure to leave the deal as is. Adam Rothkrug spoke on behalf of the Southern Brooklyn Community Organization in favor of the project, saying that they fear that should there be any change that that may jeopardize their ability to get funding - well - as is, who would not lend them the money, as all these condos they will be developing will become market rate units in 15 years, with no strings attached.

- We strongly believe the city should not be disposing public land for parking. As is, the three mid-residential block parking lots will be used by surrounding yeshivas for parking, and it seems at least one will be for parking buses. Jole Carliner asked when speaking against the project - how many public schools get subsidized parking? How about requiring that the schools have public grounds where the kids can play that can be used by all kids at non-school hours? We are very concerned about the safety of pedestrians given the number of curb cuts along the block these parking lots will require. What I do not understand is if what is needed is affordable housing, why was not the whole city owned land developed as affordable housing, and why parking takes precedence over green space, or at least public space. That said, there was much talk about finding more public space in the neighborhood, and possibly improving PS179 playground, along with the Dome Playground - none of which will add anything right now or in near future. As I write this I think of the small tot lot / playground on the corner of Argyle and Cortelyou and wonder if really there was no way ...

The other person who spoke against the project was Mr. Levy, the lawyer for the owner of Bergament, who claimed that excluding Bergament from zoning as proposed is discriminatory (he noted singling his client out as the only one "not of the community"), and basically a taking. Lander spoke up quite clearly stating the case why it is not, and why not having an affordable housing restriction on as of right conversions is wrong in his opinion where there is change in zoning. Bergament is the largest parcel and if zoned as proposed could have in excess of 100 residential units built on top of the store as of right.

Regardless of how this project comes out, there are many wrongs with the way public consultation and input is solicited, as there seemed to be no one in that room this morning (other than me and Jole) who were not paid to be there. And while we care much about the neighborhood, City Planning is really not doing anywhere near enough to inform residents about proposed plans (not one notice anywhere within the rezoning area, or the proposed development area?), or to solicit meaningful input. Who can take off work in the middle of the week, mid-morning, with minimal notice?