[NYguy]

http://www.nag-brooklyn.org/2013/04/domino-thoughts-from-the-nag-board-staff/

Domino — Thoughts from the NAG Board & Staff…





April 19, 2013

Just a few short weeks ago, we hosted a community forum on the new proposed development plan for the Domino Sugar Factory property by the current owners, Two Trees. We have been engaged in a lot of thought, a lot of discourse, and a lot of good conversations with forces both in favor and against the new plan. A lot of people have been asking our opinion and while it is too early to put out an official statement since we tend to do that during the hearings that are a part of the official ULURP process, we would like to share our thoughts on the plan so far.

NAG calls on the City to work with Two Trees and bring the new new Domino plan forward for formal public review. We believe that the Two Trees proposal is an improvement on the existing approval in many ways, and we encourage Two Trees to continue to work with the community to make further improvements. The City should pursue these changes, working with the developer and the Williamsburg community to ensure that all promises to the community are enforceable and transferable to any future owners.

In 2010, NAG opposed the Domino rezoning because the proposed density was an unsustainable burden on our community and because the developer’s promises were not backed by sufficient guarantees. The density proposed in 2010 was higher than that approved for the 2005 Greenpoint-Williamsburg Waterfront Rezoning and could cause a series of unmitigated community impacts, including a reduction in per capita open space, year-round shadow impacts on our local park, excessive waivers to provide additional parking, large-footprint neighborhood-unfriendly retail, and added burdens to our already over-taxed public transit system. Despite our opposition, the rezoning was approved. The primary community benefit, 660 units of affordable housing, was not guaranteed – a fact that became sadly relevant when the previous developer ran into financial trouble and was forced to sell the property.

Now, a new developer – Two Trees Management – has acquired the property and proposes to change the zoning. The choice presented to the community is the previous flawed zoning with its unenforceable promises, or a new plan that, in our view, addresses some of the flaws of the previous zoning. The Two Trees plan does not correct the central flaw of the density of the 2010 approval, and it does add considerable height to the development as a trade-off for improvements in other areas. However, based on what we have heard to date, these trade-offs could lead to a better plan for the community.

In our view, the Two Trees proposal appears to make significant improvements over the existing zoning in the following areas:

Commercial use: Two Trees proposes eliminating 116 residential units from the approved zoning, in favor of creating more than 530,000 additional square feet of commercial space. This includes using the landmarked refinery building entirely for commercial (and possibly community facility) purposes. This proposal is consistent with Community Board 1’s position on the 2005 rezoning; at that time, they envisioned North Brooklyn as a vibrant, mixed-use community.

Retail: The new construction on Kent Avenue built since the 2005 rezoning has generally provided large retail footprints, attracting corporate, big-box retail outlets to the neighborhood. NAG’s and CB1’s recommendations in 2005 included the promotion of locally owned small businesses, as job creators, entrepreneurial opportunities, and a strategy for keeping money in the local economy. Two Trees has verbally expressed its support for small retail footprints to encourage local businesses.

Open Space: One of the main pieces of feedback generated in the community meetings that NAG hosted about the Domino redevelopment was that open space is a priority for North Brooklyn, especially for the Southside, which is the most underserved portion of an underserved community when it comes to public green space. The trade-off of taller buildings allows for an interesting open space plan that not only provides more than two additional acres of open space to the neighborhood, but also creates an improved per capita open space ratio as opposed to that proposed by CPCR. Reintroducing the street grid to the site will make this open space feel like a true community benefit, rather than just a large backyard for the development’s tenants. In addition, the planned reconfiguration of the buildings on the site creates a less direct shadow impact on Grand Ferry Park