NEW YORK | 80 Flatbush (2 Towers) | 840 FT / 510 FT | 74 & 38 FLOORS

[chris08876]

As Brooklyn Towers Reach for the Sky, How Big Is Too Big?

The proposed project for 80 Flatbush would provide housing and schools, but critics point to 'unprecedented scale' near row houses

Corner, the question keeps coming up: how big is too big? And the follow-up question is never far behind: can developers, community members and public officials reach a happy medium on that issue?

A new test case for both questions is at hand: 80 Flatbush, a two-tower, five-building project containing two schools, office space, and apartments priced at both market and affordable rates. The complex, with towers reaching 74 and 38 stories, is proposed for an irregular block not far from Brooklyn Academy of Music and the Atlantic Terminal Mall (and its transit hub below).

At that spot, 80 Flatbush could serve, as the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership CEO Regina Myer has suggested, “as an exciting southern entryway to Downtown Brooklyn.” Certainly the borough has a need for all that the complex contains, from housing to schools. Alarmed neighbors, however, especially those on row-house State Street south and west of the 1.4-acre site, prize their neighborhood scale, and say the “over-loaded” plan ignores context. In protest, the Boerum Hill Association launched a petition that now has more than 900 signatures. Their slogan: “No Towers Over Brownstone Brooklyn.”

Without asking for any zoning changes, developers could put up a significant building of up to 400 feet, “as of right” in legal terms. But 80 Flatbush, with its towers rising 560 feet and 986 feet, would contain 1.1 million sq. ft. of floor area, or 2.8 times the as-of-right scenario. A rezoning would nearly triple the site’s Floor Area Ratio (FAR), which assesses bulk as a multiple of the lot size, from 6.5 to 18, what critics have called “unprecedented” development density in their neighborhood. So 80 Flatbush poses enduring questions about the benefits and burdens of building big.

The debate is about to begin in earnest. Approval—or modification of the plan—will emerge in the city’s Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), which launched Feb. 26 with the issuance of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Public hearings before Brooklyn Community Board 2 and Borough President Eric Adams will presage votes by the City Planning Commission and City Council.

“This is an exceedingly complicated project,” Council Member Stephen Levin, whose district contains the site, told The Bridge, “because it’s trying to do a lot on a very small portion of land” in what he calls a “transitional block,” including but not limited to Downtown Brooklyn.

[...]

============================
https://thebridgebk.com/brooklyn-tow...w-big-too-big/

[NYguy]

Without asking for any zoning changes, developers could put up a significant building of up to 400 feet, “as of right” in legal terms. But 80 Flatbush, with its towers rising 560 feet and 986 feet, would contain 1.1 million sq. ft. of floor area, or 2.8 times the as-of-right scenario.

Whether it's 400 ft or 800 ft, it would still tower over brownstones. In fact, if the original proposal were just for 800 ft, they would be trying to fight that. At some point, you just have to say it is what it is, and put your energies elsewhere. But the NIMBYs never get that.

[JMKeynes]

It’s absurd that NIMBYs are calling this “Brownstone Brooklyn.” This isn’t Park Slope or Brooklyn Heights. Until recently, it was a horrible, blighted stretch of the hood, filled with junk stores and thugs. The residents should be grAteful to have these new towers replace the existing roach motels.

I would oppose this project if it were proposed for the middle of Montague Street, but it’s appropriate for Flatbush Avenue.

[antinimby]

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

It’s absurd that NIMBYs are calling this “Brownstone Brooklyn.” This isn’t Park Slope or Brooklyn Heights. Until recently, it was a horrible, blighted stretch of the hood, filled with junk stores and thugs. The residents should be grAteful to have these new towers replace the existing roach motels.

I would oppose this project if it were proposed for the middle of Montague Street, but it’s appropriate for Flatbush Avenue.

Agreed, now send an email or letter out to Brooklyn CB 2 (http://www.brooklyn-usa.org/community-boards/), BP Eric Adams (no email but his office address is at the bottom of this page: http://www.brooklyn-usa.org/eric-adams-bio/), Councilman Stephen Levin (slevin@council.nyc.gov) and the City Planning Commission (https://a002-irm.nyc.gov/EventRegist...9-87b1bfa975ef) saying what you just said.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

It’s absurd that NIMBYs are calling this “Brownstone Brooklyn.” This isn’t Park Slope or Brooklyn Heights. Until recently, it was a horrible, blighted stretch of the hood, filled with junk stores and thugs. The residents should be grAteful to have these new towers replace the existing roach motels.

I agree. The transformation of the Flatbush corridor is for the best. People do forget the crappy nature of the area not too long ago before the great boom during Bloomberg and now continued with DeBlasio. DoBro as a whole has become safer, livelier, and almost an extension of Manhattan.

Area wise, its a small portion of Brooklyn. I think these NIMBYS feel that it will kill the culture of the borough, but they always tend to use the whole borough or "Brooklyn" as a scapegoat when in reality, its a small area thats in the development cross hairs (DoBro). Its like equating the fall of "Queens" because LIC and Flushing are booming.

They, the vile NIMBY scum, pulled the same crap with Atlantic Yards aka Pacific Park. The battle is nowhere near as fierce as it was with that one, but this will blow over. Its just huffing and puffing. This will rise in time, most likely next cycle.

[JMKeynes]

When my wife and I would go to BAM fifteen years ago, I felt like I was in the Bonfire of the Vanities. It was horrible.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

When my wife and I would go to BAM fifteen years ago, I felt like I was in the Bonfire of the Vanities. It was horrible.

Then you should have stayed home.



Forest City really started the process of building more towers in DT Brooklyn, and there is a lengthy write up here about their groundwork over the years. Of course, it's written by a onetime enemy.



https://thebridgebk.com/forest-city-...n-the-way-out/

Forest City in Brooklyn: a Real Estate Pioneer on the Way Out?
The developer behind MetroTech and Barclays Center changed the borough's landscape. An in-depth look at a towering yet sometimes controversial legacy

By NORMAN ODER
March 20, 2018

Back in 1990, Ratner was asked, upon announcing what would be the borough’s second tallest tower, if he’d considered breaking the height record. ”We’re not into that,” he said. By 2003, though, Gehry’s “Miss Brooklyn” was to dwarf the 512-foot Williamsburgh Savings Bank. In a nod to public concern, Forest City, upon the 2006 Atlantic Yards approval, agreed to lower Gehry’s tower one foot below the bank, without reducing the bulk.

Today, such a gesture would seem quaint. New Downtown Brooklyn edifices dwarf the bank, renamed One Hanson Place, its offices turned into condos. Across the street, an Apple Store and Whole Foods 365 recently opened in 300 Ashland, a Two Trees tower. The new owner of the Atlantic Terminal and Atlantic Center malls plans to double the rents, adding upscale tenants.

Meanwhile, Greenland Forest City aims to move the bulk of the unbuilt “Miss Brooklyn” across Flatbush Avenue to a site currently housing a Modell’s and P.C. Richards, envisioning a two-tower complex nearly 800 feet tall. The project, yet to be approved, has been suggested for Amazon’s second headquarters and would contain high-end retail—a distinct contrast from Ratner’s early mall strategy. Up Flatbush Avenue, near Junior’s Restaurant, a supertall tower, some 1,066 feet, is rising. Even closer, just two blocks from the Barclays Center, developer Alloy has proposed 80 Flatbush, a huge two-tower project stretching 986 feet. Seeking permission to build what some call “unprecedented” density near row houses, Alloy promises schools, cultural space, and affordable housing. Such large projects—and com

[Skyrocket27]

Lhttp://https://jayboy2727.tumblr.com/post/172194771540

[JMKeynes]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Then you should have stayed home.

I don’t let “gangstas” dictate my life. In any event, I’m pleased that this area is being reclaimed by civilized members of society.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

I don’t let “gangstas” dictate my life. In any event, I’m pleased that this area is being reclaimed by civilized members of society.

[chris08876]

On a side note, we also have the potential Red Hook redevelopment which in theory, can add 40,000+ units.

Even amidst all of the construction, I still think the city is not keeping pace with the demand. The pace needs to increase. But anyways, here's to hoping!


Credit: bisnow

[NYguy]

https://bklyner.com/too-tall-too-clo...f-80-flatbush/

‘Too Tall! Too Close! Too Much!,’ Say Opponents Of 80 Flatbush



The line waiting to get into the CB2 ULURP Public Hearing for 80 Flatbush Rezoning (Photo: Pamela Wong/BKLYNER)






By Pamela Wong
March 29, 2018

Community Board 2 held the first ULURP (Uniform Land Use Review Procedure) public hearing for Alloy Development’s 80 Flatbush project Wednesday evening at St. Francis College.

Founders Auditorium was packed as supporters and opponents of the project came in droves to get their voices heard. Trying to get the long line of attendees inside and signed in proved difficult, delaying the hearing’s start time by 25 minutes. Approximately 200 people were shut out of the meeting once the venue reached capacity.

The floor was then opened up for public testimony, where supporters and opponents were given two minutes to voice their opinions about the project. Once the clock struck 9pm (the time the hearing was originally scheduled to end), Singletary noted that he still hadn’t gotten through half of the list of those who’d signed up to speak, so he had to cut the time limit to one minute in an effort to hear from everyone.

President of Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, Regina Myer:
“On behalf of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, I’d like to express our strong support for the 80 Flatbush project. This project will bring critical public infrastructure to Brooklyn with two new public schools, market-rate and affordable housing, a new cultural and community facility, and Class-A office space, and the project delivers all this public benefit without the use of any city capital funds at one of the most transit-rich locations in New York City.”

“Brooklyn has seen an unprecedented residential and commercial growth over the past ten years and we need to be strategic about how and where that growth can be accommodated. The area surrounding the intersections of Flatbush, 4th, and Atlantic Avenues has been an active hub dating back to the completion of the Williamsburgh Savings Bank in 1929 with its extensive access to transit, especially along Flatbush and Atlantic Terminal, we believe 80 Flatbush is particularly appropriate.”

Rockwell Place Community Garden, Coordinator, Ron Janoff:
“Our 38 volunteer members have voted unanimously to oppose the rezoning after learning from Alloy’s EIS [Environmental Impact Statement] that our public amenity will be irremediably damaged by the shadow of their development…. Zoning was introduced in New York City in 1960 to tame development and save sunlight for citizens. Now Brooklyn, once dead, is coming back to life but its streets are going dark. Our garden stands to be the unwitting victim of unpredictable spot rezoning spinning out of control. We were here when no one was here. We want to be here for generations to come…. We are calling on you to reject the rezoning and the Alloy proposal and Save Our Sunlight.”

Eight-year-old Maxwell: “I dearly oppose this project that will destroy our neighborhood…. Why open an even bigger door to Brooklyn becoming midtown Manhattan?”

[Multi]

Isn't the 986 foot building technically a super tall?

[chris08876]

Yea. 300m is considered super tall status or 984 ft.

The CTBUH for example classifies it that way.

[NYguy]

https://www.architecturalrecord.com/...-community-ire

New Tower Planned for Brooklyn Draws Community Ire




April 9, 2018
Cara Greenberg

Emotions are running high around 80 Flatbush, a massive mixed-use complex with a 74-story tower, planned for a site near Barclays Center, practically alongside Victorian row houses where Downtown Brooklyn meets the brownstones. If things go well for its developers, the project—which also includes a 38-story structure, two new schools and two 19th century commercial buildings to be repurposed as cultural venues—will become the latest to join the relentless march of luxury high-rise towers up Flatbush Avenue, from the East River to what was for decades Brooklyn’s tallest building: the 37-story, 500-foot-tall Williamsburg Savings Bank building, which is now called 1 Hansen Place. At 1,000 feet, 80 Flatbush will dwarf the 1929 building’s beloved Art Deco clock tower.

State Senator Velmanette Montgomery went so far as to say, “The character and spirit of our neighborhoods are dying, and 80 Flatbush is killing it,” drawing sustained cheers and applause.

Construction has proceeded without this level of furor on other residential and office towers along Flatbush, including the 720-foot, 68-story Kohn Pederson Fox-designed Brooklyn Point, now under construction by Extell, and SHoP’s 78-story tower 9 DeKalb, a project of JDS Development Group, which will exceed 1,000 feet by its completion in 2020. Those two projects are situated on the westernmost section of Flatbush Avenue, which has long been a heavily trafficked commercial thoroughfare.

But where the diagonal avenue lines the brownstone neighborhoods of Boerum Hill and Fort Greene—where 80 Flatbush is planned—neighbors and other well-organized pioneers of gentrification are up in arms.

“We’re all concerned about the precedent of Manhattan-style density moving to Brooklyn,” says Howard Kolins, longtime president of the BHA. “I applaud Alloy for being willing to tweak the design, but there needs to be a new paradigm for Brooklyn, not just replicating Manhattan business district zoning.” As for what the ultimate outcome regarding 80 Flatbush is likely to be, says Kolins, “That I can’t tell you.”

[The Best Forumer]

Originally Posted by TREPYE

Another boxy square top that is hundreds of feet tall.

You haven't been to Houston... that's all we have here... boxes. with glass.


at least ya'll have much more variety.

[yankeesfan1000]

Edit : For clarity, this is not binding. This is the first of a few votes before it goes before the City Planning Commission who's verdict is binding. Assuming I'm understanding the unending layers of bureaucracy correctly.

CB 2 Land Use Committee Votes Against Proposed Development at 80 Flatbush

"...Of the 11 members of the CB 2 Land Use Committee who were present Wednesday night at their monthly meeting, 10 voted to reject the proposal for the controversial development at 80 Flatbush Avenue. One member abstained.

Two committee members made comments after the vote last night, and they were brief. Both made clear that they felt the location of 80 Flatbush was actually in Boerum Hill, not Downtown Brooklyn. Indeed, 80 Flatbush is in Boerum Hill, as the decades-old map of the Boerum Hill Association shows.

However, for the purposes of zoning, the development is located in the Downtown Brooklyn Special District, as the Environmental Impact Statement notes.

...Borough President Eric Adams will next conduct a public hearing regarding 80 Flatbush on April 30 as part of the ULURP process but will hold his vote until CB 2 makes their final recommendation at their next general meeting on May 9."

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000

Edit : For clarity, this is not binding. This is the first of a few votes before it goes before the City Planning Commission who's verdict is binding. Assuming I'm understanding the unending layers of bureaucracy correctly.

Yes. Of course, the CB was never going to give its blessing. Skyscrapers will rarely get a CB's approval. The only person to watch closely is the City Council member who represents the district.


https://www.brownstoner.com/developm...ublic-hearing/

Speaking on behalf of New York City Council Majority Leader Laurie A. Cumbo, a representative told the crowd she did not have a position at this time, which elicited jeers from the audience.

https://council.nyc.gov/district-35/

[chris08876]

The Planning Commission will make the right choice.

[chris08876]

Brooklyn NIMBYs Remove Online Poll After Broad Public Support Confirmed For Schools And Housing At 80 Flatbush Avenue

New York’s NIMBYs rarely choose battles worth fighting, needlessly and maliciously bogging down the process of new development in many of the city’s neighborhoods. But one of the more vindictive melees now taking place is being fought over 80 Flatbush Avenue, a pair of mixed-use buildings that would add substantially to Brooklyn’s housing stock, promising 900 new apartments, office space, retail and cultural amenities, and two schools totaling 700 seats. After launching a website, NIMBYs opposing the project have doubled down on their regressive bottom line, deleting a poll they themselves had created, after a 3:1 voting margin in favor of the proposal threatened to undermine a message without merit.

80 Flatbush Avenue will not be a destination for oligarchs. It will house over 900 new apartments atop two brand new schools and retail space. 200 of those units will be designated as affordable. The arrangement will provide housing for humans, and opportunities for both adults and children, including the relocated Khalil Gibran International Academy. It is also located directly across the street from what was Brooklyn’s tallest tower from 1929 til the early 2000s. The scale is proportional to the surrounds, which include plans for a supertall at 9 DeKalb Avenue, just a few blocks away. The intention is positive, and the plan is attractive. There is no problem with 80 Flatbush Avenue.

There most certainly is a problem with the people who would cast a burgeoning neighborhood in amber, just as its actual potential begins to be reached. The West Village is proximate to just about every subway line in the Five Boroughs yet it has remained a graveyard of nineteenth century architecture despite the amount of capital all New Yorkers have paid into the development of its infrastructure. The area surrounding 80 Flatbush could be subsumed into a similarly Disney-esque and under-built state relative to its potential, if the actions of the moneyed few are not met with resistance from everyone else who stands to benefit from an imminent proliferation of new apartments, jobs, and opportunities for schooling their children.

[...]

This accumulation of privilege is lacking in most neighborhoods composed of people who work, which is why places like Greenwich Village have been cast in formaldehyde while places like Greenpoint and Bed-Stuy have continued to evolve. The democratizing effect of the internet is one way to mitigate this gaping chasm of representation, and in the case of 80 Flatbush, it has proven that the NIMBYs are set on ignoring widespread public support, revealed in their own poll.

=========================
NYY