Brooklyn History Photo of the Week

01/05/2012 | Comment

bhs_v1974.7.78.jpg

Clinton Avenue at Fulton Street
March, 1888
Photo: A. A. Martense via BHS.

This photo, taken on Clinton Avenue at Fulton Street in March 1888 comes via the Brooklyn Historical Society’s blog. BHS has the full details, but what I like about the photo is the signage on the side of the building: trusses, crutches, and the Sutherland Sisters Hair Grower and Scalp Cleaner (which may have something to do with the “electricity applied” in the sign at the far right).

Judge Grants Injunction on Broadway Triangle

01/04/2012 | 1 Comment

State Supreme Court Judge Emily Goodman has granted a preliminary injunction that bars the City from moving forward with the development of affordable housing in the Broadway Triangle area. The suit, brought by the NY Civil Liberties Union, Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A, Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady and the Broadway Triangle Community Coalition, alleges that the City’s 2006 rezoning of Broadway Triangle violates the Federal Fair Housing Act, in that it would increase racial segregation in the neighborhoods surrounding the Broadway Triangle. Judge Goodman, in granting the injunction, ruled that the “plaintiffs had demonstrated the likelihood that they would succeed at trial on the merits of the case” (in other words, the case itself has not yet been litigated).

The Broadway Triangle rezoning covers a small swath of land north of Flushing Avenue and west of Broadway. The area that the City rezoned lies within Community Board 1, but borders directly on CB3. Most of the area that was rezoned is privately owned, but a number of City-owned parcels were set aside for the development of affordable housing. 50% of that affordable housing would be set aside for residents of CB1 (such set-asides are standard in the City). The plaintiffs contend that because Williamsburg (CB1) is predominantly white (about 60% according to the evidence presented by the plaintiffs), and Bedford-Stuyvesant is predominantly (77%) black, that the set aside would perpetuate and increase the racial segregation between the two neighborhoods. A demographer retained by the plaintiff found that only 3% of residents in the new housing would be black.

The plaintiffs’ argument – accepted by Judge Goodman – is that the City is required under Federal law to conduct an analysis on the racial impact of all rezonings. Judge Goodman wrote in her ruling that there “can be no compliance with the Fair Housing Act where defendants never analyzed the impact of the community preference”.

The issues on which the injunction was issued are ones that (to my recollection) never came up during the protracted fight over the Broadway Triangle rezoning, and certainly never came up in any of the other large and small rezonings in North Brooklyn that were enacted by the City over the past decade. On the merits, it stands to reason given the demographics of the two neighborhoods that the set aside would favor whites applying for affordable housing. But many other rezonings have created (or could create) “dramatic racial disparities”.

As NYCLU’s press release notes, this ruling has implications far beyond Broadway Triangle:

This decision puts the city is clearly on notice: When it proceeds to develop housing – whether in the Broadway Triangle or anywhere else – it must evaluate the potential impact on segregation and develop projects that include the entire community and will create more integrated neighborhoods.

So the bigger question is, how does this effect other rezonings (past and future)? Is a racial analysis required for all housing types (affordable and market rate)?

Bike Lane Plan on Greenpoint Avenue Bridge

01/04/2012 | Comment

The City is promising to install bike lanes on the Greenpoint Avenue Bridge – upsetting some but cheering others:

“Greenpoint Avenue is not fun to ride on,” said Ryan Kuonen, a community organizer at north Brooklyn’s Neighbors Allied for Good Growth and an avid cyclist [and also a Community Board member]. “It really needs a redesign.”

Avid business owners along Greenpoint Avenue (who stand lose parking) are opposed to the project. Unnamed avid motorists are also opposed to the project. No word on how avid pedestrians view it.

Retail Report

01/03/2012 | Comment

A few random observations on the Northside (more or less) retail/commercial front:

Kitten Coffee, a roaster located in Bed-Stuy is opening what looks like its first retail outlet at the former Blackbird spot at North 6th and Bedford.

Evolve Motorcycles, a manufacturer of electric motorcycles, is opening a showroom (its first?) at 155 Grand Street (the former location of East Street Gallery and before that Lawanna’s last outpost). The storefront next door is available – the pizza parlor that had been there was seized by the marshals last month.

Sensation

208 Grand Street (at right, the new building with the best air conditioner grilles in Brooklyn) is getting a restaurant – Sensation – which will serve “new Shanghai cuisine”.

The newly-opened Hotel Williamsburg is changing hands – the potential new owners came to CB1 tonight for a transfer of the liquor license. One of the new owners was involved in the operation of the Barbizon, Ryalton, Paramount and Gramercy Park Hotels, as well as Coco Pazzo on the Upper East Side. The second partner is Meyer Chetrit (coincidentally, the Chetrit Group has just sold 175 Kent to Sam Zell).

Also on the CB1 docket tonight (but not on the Northside), the owners of Traif are opening Xixa, Mexican restaurant, three doors down at the old Aldo’s Coffee Shop space on South 4th Street.

Inside the City’s Ghost Subway System

Moses Gates took WNYC on a tour of some “ghost” subways sites in the city’s transit system.

The piece includes this cool interactive map of the system’s once-planned routes and abandoned stations. Most of the abandoned stations were taken out of service over time – the exception is the South 4th Street station, which was never completed. A few clicks around the interactive map show how different the Southside might have been if the Depression hadn’t stopped this major expansion (the 6th Avenue (F) and 8th Avenue (C?) lines both would have come out to Williamsburg, where they would have hooked up with Crosstown (G) service).

What IS Con Ed Up To On River Street?

12/30/2011 | Comment

con-ed-demo.jpg

Con Ed’s River Street site, partially demolished
Photo: Sharese Ann Frederick on flickr


I’ve mentioned this in passing before, but Con Ed is doing some serious demolition at its River Street facilities. The two-block site used to house a series of storage tanks, but over the past few months, the tanks have been slowly coming down. (The speed of the demo is probably due to the fact that the tanks are constructed of concrete 20″ thick; there is no evidence of any environmental remediation at the site that I can find.)

So what’s in store for this site? Could it be the site of the recently-rumored Williamsburg Whole Foods (I’m betting not)? Some other development (I’ve heard rumors that CineMagic’s Riverfront Studios is expanding somewhere “within a few blocks” of their Kent Avenue/South 9th Street studios, though I doubt this is that site)? Or is Con Ed just going to mothball it like they have their other waterfront site, the former BRT Power Plant at Division and Kent?

The options are somewhat limited by zoning, which is heavy industrial (M3-1), which limits the as-of-right options to industrial uses and certain commercial uses. (The six-block area between North 3rd and Grand Street west of Kent Avenue is actually ripe for rezoning – the industrial zoning on five of the six blocks is completely anachronistic since the residential rezoning of the Domino properties to the south in 2010.)

Or perhaps Con Ed will do something truly useful for the community and turn the site over for a waterfront park and esplanade? It would make a fantastic extension of the esplanade at 184 Kent to the north, wouldn’t it?

St. Vincent De Paul Sells

12/20/2011 | Comment

bell-tolls.jpg

Photo: Heather Roslund

According to Brownstoner, the broker handling the sale of St. Vincent De Paul Church on North 6th Street has announced the sale of the property for $13.7 million. MNS, the broker, says that the mystery owner plans to convert the church.

The church owns two parcels on North 6th Street. One of those parcels (lot 30) is the rectory, a four-and-a-half story building that was constructed in 1869 (Patrick Keely, architect). The other parcel (lot 15) wraps around the rectory and consists of the church itself (also constructed in 1869 and designed by Keely), as well as the large parking lot to the west of the rectory and the 1960s (?) school on North 7th Street.

So the first question is, which properties did the church sell? The second question is, what does the new owner plan for the rest of the site? Taking at face value the claim that the church itself will be converted, there is still a huge development potential for the rest of the site (the larger site – excluding the rectory – is over 33,000 sf; that is a lot of development rights, even at the R6B zoning for the block).

UPDATE:The Real Deal posted the story last night; according to their piece, the lot is 37,500 sf (my figure was from Oasis). The article is also a bit squishier on the fate of the church (” the buyer may choose to develop within the existing structure of the building”), and it notes that the sale went into contract last Spring, and only closed this week.