NEW YORK | Domino Sugar | 535 + 530 + 518 + 450 FT | 53 + 51 + 43 + 42 FLOORS

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by antinimby

If someone came along and said they'd raze the factory and turn it into perpetual open space, they'd be all for that.

Probably, but I get the feeling they would have an alternative plan to even that. The NIMBYs just basically don't like whatever someone proposes or plans to build. Only their plan is feasible to them. So, if you planned open space, they're response would be, "but wait, what type of events are you planning to have on this open space? We don't want loud music, crowds, etc...."

[Duck From NY]

Originally Posted by antinimby

Their true ulterior motive is not about preserving the factory. Like most NIMBY's in this city, they are against the influx of new people coming into the area. That's why they hate height because it equates to them, a large number of people will be moving in since a large building will house more people than a smaller one. That's why they become fixated on height, building size and density.

They only use shadows, open space, transportation, environment, preservation, views, neighborhood character, etc. as excuses for their arguments against development.

If someone came along and said they'd raze the factory and turn it into perpetual open space, they'd be all for that.

I think you're right about their motivations for the most part, but occasionally in the outer-boroughs the nimbys express (albeit poorly) a few legitimate concerns. In the case of this project they're just out of their damn minds.

Originally Posted by NYguy

Regardless of our views on what would be best for the neighborhood, reactionary plans like this are just unrealistic and downright bratty. I would like to keep the protruding pipe, and I like the shipping cranes sitting there on the Northern edge of the waterfront, but otherwise this would just bore the hell out of me even more the the modern incarnation of the Seaport.

P.S. That ferry needs to slow down before it crashes into that nimby wet dream!

[Roadcruiser1]

Here's a solution to NIMBYISM. Tear down their homes just like Robert Moses did, because it worked for him..........

[TouchTheSky13]

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

Here's a solution to NIMBYISM. Tear down their homes just like Robert Moses did, because it worked for him..........

Right. But Moses, who is revered by many, also committed many architectural and urban planning sins by cutting off much of manhattan's access to waterways with a huge expressway, giving the go ahead on several horrible projects including Madison Square Garden/New Penn Station, and getting rid of zoning laws which could have prevented decades worth of soulless, boxy architecture.

Don't get me wrong, NIMBYs can be a pain in the ass, but their input is just as important as the developer calling the shots. Many times, people with greater socioeconomic power forget to consider the input of the working class folks who live in these areas. This is a pervasive problem in not only New York, but the entire country.

My point is, don't just disregard this counter-proposal. I think it should be left up to the residents to decide as ultimately they are the ones who will be affected by this development.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by TouchTheSky13

My point is, don't just disregard this counter-proposal. I think it should be left up to the residents to decide as ultimately they are the ones who will be affected by this development.

There is no counter-proposal, and this has nothing to do with "resident input". Its just some nutcases trying to delay things further.

This project is already approved, and there were 10 years of "community input" that went into the approvals process.

The new developer is proposing changes to the overall master plan, but the community input phase passed many years ago. And the local community is generally a big supporter of both the old plan, and the new plan, because they want the affordable housing and waterfront open space.

[Duck From NY]

Originally Posted by Crawford

There is no counter-proposal, and this has nothing to do with "resident input". Its just some nutcases trying to delay things further.

This project is already approved, and there were 10 years of "community input" that went into the approvals process.

The new developer is proposing changes to the overall master plan, but the community input phase passed many years ago. And the local community is generally a big supporter of both the old plan, and the new plan, because they want the affordable housing and waterfront open space.

But what about that 2-3% of people that are hyper-emotional reactionaries who attempt to manipulate everyone into thinking their numbers are larger by yelling the loudest? Don't they count too?!

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by TouchTheSky13

My point is, don't just disregard this counter-proposal. I think it should be left up to the residents to decide as ultimately they are the ones who will be affected by this development.

Please. They're not being affected by anything. But even if they were, they could always move. They don't own the land. It isn't their property. Using your argument, nothing would ever be built, anywhere, because of the "affected" residents.

And that counter-proposal should be disregarded with the rest of the trash, it's just as useless.

[NYguy]

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2013/12/...point-landing/

City Council greenlights Greenpoint Landing
And Community Board 1 approves Two Trees' Domino Sugar Factory conversion





December 11, 2013
Julie Strickland

Bloomberg-era development projects are moving right along, with Two Trees Management’s Domino Sugar proposal getting the thumbs up from Community Board 1 and City Council passing Greenpoint Landing Associate’s controversial 10-tower Greenpoint Landing plan.

CB 1, in its advisory vote, recommended a few changes to the Domino plan, such as adding more three-bedrooms to the affordable units and designing more offerings for residents making 30 percent of the area’s median income. The board also asked that Two Trees give preference to area businesses when doling out the retail space.

“After more than a year of outreach and collaboration with local leaders, the community board vote makes it clear that neighborhood residents strongly prefer our new vision for Domino to the existing zoning,” Two Trees’ Director of Special Projects David Lombino told Brownstoner.

Two Trees will also be working to guarantee 660 units of “integrated affordable housing” and other community demands throughout the public approval process, he said.

The City Council similarly pressed for promises from Greenpoint Landing developers, upon which the latter promised to provide a site for an elementary school and to operate a free shuttle between the complex and public transportation. An additional 431 permanently affordable units were also part of the deal, available to families earning from 40 to 120 percent of the area’s median income. Greenpoint Landing Associates will also donate a total of $5.5 million to expand Newtown Barge Park.

The community board had previously voted down the Greenpoint Landing proposal, citing a need for more affordable and senior housing.

[LMich]

Glad to see this approved. It was only a matter of time.

[ablerock]

Originally Posted by NYguy

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2013/12/...point-landing/

City Council greenlights Greenpoint Landing
And Community Board 1 approves Two Trees' Domino Sugar Factory conversion

What are their next steps in making this a reality? (Really looking forward. This is one of my favorite developments in the city.)

[Rail>Auto]

I LOVE the SHOP plan but I also wish they would keep more of Domino like the HAO plan. Leave the cranes, pier brick building and Domino tower to the right of the main plant building and build the SHOP proposal around it.

[NYguy]

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2013/12/...ndmarks-board/

Domino Sugar plan must be revised: Landmarks board




December 18, 2013
Mark Maurer

The Landmarks Preservation Commission criticized the height and glass roof additions proposed for Two Trees Management’s $1.5 billion Domino Sugar Refinery project on the Williamsburg waterfront.

The city agency said yesterday at a public hearing that the redevelopment plan for the 11-acre site would have to be revised in order to receive its support. Just six years ago, the shuttered factory at 292-314 Kent Avenue was designated a landmark. Plans call for 2,284 apartments, 631,000 square feet of office space and a quarter-mile waterfront park. Around one-third of the 660 affordable housing units are to be in the first tower slated for construction. Two Trees bought the site for $185 million in October 2012.

Commissioner Michael Devonshire expressed concerns that the roofline of the former factory would be obscured. Street-level signs above the building entrances would say “Domino,” a touch that the commission said was excessive.

http://www.brooklyneagle.com//articl...ust-be-refined

Some of the commissioners at a public hearing in Lower Manhattan Tuesday objected to the height and massing of proposed glass-clad additions to the roof of the iconic former factory on the Williamsburg waterfront.

At the same time, the developer's decision to turn the shuttered factory into office space for techies and creative types was widely applauded at the hearing.

The preservation agency's unwillingness to approve a fancy fix-up for the city landmark at 292-314 Kent Ave. will slow, however slightly, the progress of Two Trees' planned $1.5 billion development of the 11-acre Domino site.

The proposed additions, designed by distinguished Beyer Blinder Belle Architects & Planners, would obscure the roofline of the shuttered factory, Commissioner Michael Devonshire said, echoing the sentiments of several of his cohort.

The Walentas family company's plan for the Refinery is an amendation of a design done for the site's previous owners, the Community Preservation Corp. and the Katan Group.

Their original factory makeover, which LPC approved in 2008, had a glass roof addition four stories tall on the waterfront side of the property – with Domino Sugar's famous 40-foot yellow neon sign affixed to it.

The Walentas' plan for the Refinery also calls for the famed sign to be perched atop the former factory – and to place smaller versions of the word “Domino” above building entrances. Some of the commissioners thought the street-level signs were a bit much.

Since the prior owners planned to turn the Refinery into a residential building, portions of four floors in its core were to be torn down to allow light and air into the apartments.

The Walentas' Refinery plan also calls for the addition of four floors of glass-covered space facing the East River – plus a three-floor addition on the other side of the property.

Two Trees plans to surround the revamped sugar factory with modern apartment houses, some 50 stories tall or higher – including one that looks like a rectangular donut and one that's like twin needles connected by a sky bridge. The project design by SHoP Architects also has five acres of parks, a new office building and retail spaces for independent entrepreneurs.

[JayPro]

Now I'm fuming.........
I thought all this nonsense was a done deal.
The architects should sue the commission...or even back out of this whole bogus deal as token acknowledgment of (perhaps) having learned this valuable lesson: *Never* enter into *any* intended good-faith negotiation or business venture with a fecking NIMBY.

[Submariner]

I thought these people had the green light?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Submariner

I thought these people had the green light?

It was approved by the CB (read above) but is still in the approvals process.

What is in question are changes to the factory building itself.

[LMich]

Right, from my reading of the article excerpt, the criticism has only to do with the modifications to the historic property, not the project, in general.

[RobEss]

[JayPro]

OK...This kvetching is limited strictly to the refinery bulding's proposed glass roof addition.
I read this tooo quickly and ass-u-me'd that the other structures were being kvetched about.

[sbarn]

Originally Posted by JayPro

Now I'm fuming.........
I thought all this nonsense was a done deal.
The architects should sue the commission...or even back out of this whole bogus deal as token acknowledgment of (perhaps) having learned this valuable lesson: *Never* enter into *any* intended good-faith negotiation or business venture with a fecking NIMBY.

There are many jurisdictions involved in this project, which all require different approval processes. This isn't a big setback. The historic structures require approval from the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC), and it is pretty common for there to be a series of back and forth in order to satisfy LPC.

The overall project itself is going through the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), described HERE (warning PDF). It is a multi-step, multi-agency review process that will take upwards of one year. The project received approval at the first step by the Community Board (which is only advisory), but will also need approval from the City Planning Commission and the City Council.

[JayPro]

In that case, I'm somewhat more optimistic as to how the latter two entities will handle things.
You might well understand by now that every time I see the words "project subject to review by community board" put forth in that order within the same written sentence/utterance, my tendency is to grow somewhat concerned.