Some “good” news?

It looks like us coming together as a community might be paying off: The Brooklyn Paper reported that BFS might be moving away from the location that has caused so much discontent in our area and is now looking at three other sites, as per the head of the school, Michael Nill.

Here is the article in the Brooklyn Paper:

“The Downtown Brooklyn private school is moving away from a controversial plan to build a new educational center on State Street in nearby Boerum Hill, and is now looking at three other sites that do not require a tough-to-get rezoning, said Michael Nill, the head of school.

“Acquiring [the State Street] site for the school is not impossible, but it would take an effort to get community approval,” Nill said.

Angry neighbors on the block between Hoyt and Bond streets met with school representatives in early October to protest the Quaker school’s proposal for a five-story, 400-student elementary school that would replace the existing facility on Pearl Street. Neighbors complained that heavy traffic and noise would result if the project was approved. That protest irked other neighbors who support the expansion because it would bring a high-quality school to their block.

Nill would not say where the new locations are, but said that they are already zoned for high rises, unlike the low-rise zoning at the State Street location, which would also need approval from the Empire State Development Corporation because the lot is actually state-owned.

The announcement was hailed by some residents of State Street.

“Sure, we’re relieved it may not happen in this location, though we still think Brooklyn Friends would be an asset to our community,” said Alex Guillot, who opposed the State Street proposal, but suggested an empty lot at the corner of Hoyt and Schermerhorn streets in hopes that the school would build there. “There are plenty of places around where everyone would have benefitted, without putting strain on our blocks.”

Nill promised an official announcement on the new site in spring.”

While this seems to be good news for all of us, we need to remain vigilant and continue to raise support against the proposed location until this is confirmed.

Thanks to all of you that have joined us since we launched our group. It shows that at the end of the day, we can come together and decide what is right for our community.

Stay tuned.

The ESDC Speaks

Here is a notice we distributed in the neighborhood yesterday.

Dear Neighbors,

We wanted to let you know of some good news: The Empire State Development Corporation, the state agency that oversees the vacant lots on our street, has decided to uphold the residential covenant on the lot at the corner of State and Hoyt, which the developers wished to sell to Brooklyn Friends School for a new school building.

We appreciate your support and help in achieving this important goal.  Our October 5 meeting brought together more than 70 concerned residents of State between Smith and Bond, and of Hoyt from State to Atlantic. The ESDC identified this community as the one whose opinion was relevant, since we would be the people most affected by the imposition of a school and by any ripple effect on the street’s remaining undeveloped urban renewal lots.

A representative from the ESDC and the Borough President’s office attended the October 5 meeting and made a report on the project.  In addition, Keep State Street Residential sent a report and a summary of our concerns to the ESDC; Marty Markowitz; Richard Bearak, the Borough President’s Land Use coordinator; State Senator Velmanette Montgomery; and Councilman David Yassky. We included the list of supporters from these blocks, which now numbers over 60 people from over 40 households, most of whom are property owners.

The ESDC felt it needed “overwhelming reason” to overturn something as important as a covenant to a deed, and it made its decision based on all this information and more. The Borough President’s office has also sent us a letter reiterating that the ESDC has final jurisdiction over this decision and that there is no plan to reconvene the Hoyt-Schermerhorn task force to consider the proposal.

But, never say never: the developers and the school may still be looking for ways to finalize a sale. We need to continue to show our strength and stay vigilant. If you want to see the street developed appropriately, it’s important for you to be counted among the supporters of Keep State Street Residential. If you haven’t already signed up, email your name, address and contact info to keepstatestreetresidential@gmail.com. Thank you.

Update

A lot of people have approached us since the meeting and asked us how they can help.

Right now we want to continue to grow our list of LOCAL residents who are against overturning the covenant and against building something other than a residential building on the site.

An growing number of people from outside State Street wish to join our list. While we appreciate their support, we need to keep the focus on the people most affected by the project—those who live on State St between Smith and Bond and on Hoyt St between State and Atlantic. This is the community identified by the ESDC as the one whose opinion matters.

If you do live on those blocks and have not yet joined our group, please do so by sending your name and address here. If you know others who are interested, please send them a link to this blog.

An enormous number of local residents have voiced their opposition since learning that community approval was necessary to overturn the covenant and that this was not a done deal, despite the developers’ best efforts.

Stay tuned.

Feedback from the community meeting on the future of State as a residential street

Great meeting last night for those of you who attended it.

Under the sponsorship of the Boerum Hill Association and the participation of its president, Howard Kolins, we invited IBEC, the developer that owns the site at Hoyt and State, and Brooklyn Friends to formally present their proposal for our street. This gave them an opportunity to present their plans to the residents of State Street, allow them to answer questions and to get a sense of some of the concerns and objections that an increasing number of residents have about this project.

First

• Great turnout: more than 70 people came (plus 10 presenters) and stayed until late into the evening to hear what our presenters had to say and then have an open discussion among the residents most affected by the possible construction.

The “Keep State St Residential” meeting on Oct 5th

A lot of residents either did not know of the project before or worse, thought this was a done deal.

Our presenters were:

• Chris Aston, a representative of Keep State Street residential who outlined our views and concerns in this letter: Keep State Street Residential Speech – Oct 5 2009 meeting

• followed by a presentation by IBEC

• a quick introduction by the Head of Brooklyn Friends: it was interesting to learn from him that:
  1. BFS wants to be part of a residential neighborhood
  2. They had had an opportunity to move into a new building in Brooklyn Heights a few years ago and declined it because they preferred to stay in downtown Brooklyn. They spoke of their desire to be on a residential neighborhood; at another point asserted the State is downtown Brooklyn, not Boerum Hill
  3. BFS’s interest in the Hoyt-State site has much to do with their need to move into a new building by September 2012. The school has already increased preschool class enrollments before having a new building in place, or even in contract
  4. The lower school population at the new site was now estimated at 400 kids and 80 teachers and staff

• a presentation by a parent at BFS

• a presentation by the architect responsible for the design project: here are a couple of what the proposed building would look like:

The Hoyt Street side of the school, top; the State Street side, bottom

• a brief presentation of a BFS-commissioned traffic study. The study was based on observation of one morning’s drop-off period on a non-rainy day in front of the existing BFS building, which is tucked deep into downtown Brooklyn, on gated, dead-end street. Here is a summary of their findings:
  • The results showed that on the morning observed, 32 cars arrived at Pearl Street over a 90 minute period of staggered start times. As enrollment increases 30% they would assume 30% more cars, or 43 cars every morning trying to maneuver AND park on Hoyt and State Streets. This also doesn’t account for bad and cold weather driving patterns.
    
  • They did not examine afternoon pick-ups.
  • They did not assess the existing traffic situation at State and Hoyt.

All the presentations went uninterrupted and then we turned the floor to questions from the residents to both IBEC and BFS. The residents got an opportunity to raise their concerns and for a large number of them, their opposition to this project. Here are some of the clear themes debated last night:

1. Consensus

Most residents made it clear that this is absolutely not an action against Brooklyn Friends. By most accounts, most people that attended the meeting as well as most people that we have talked to recently in the area (for or against the project) all agree on one thing: BFS is a great institution and if this area was to have a new school building, BFS would be an asset. Those of us who are against the project are against the proposed location only.

In addition, we stressed that there are other locations being considered in the area (see bullet #5) that we feel would bring this fine school to the neighborhood and shoppers to our local businesses but avoid the negative impact of being at the corner of two oversubscribed streets like State and Hoyt.

2. Traffic

• A lot of questions were asked about the increased traffic and congestion that would result in the school opening up on the corner of the street. Most people did not seem reassured by the findings of the traffic study mentioned above as it clearly missed the mark (findings were based on an unusually forbidding drop-off location, unlike our accessible intersection; there was no examination of the traffic on our block; it did not include the afternoon drop-offs; it was not done in weather conditions more likely to result in higher traffic, etc) but more importantly did not provide any reasonable solutions for this particular corner of Boerum Hill.
• The school also did not seem to understand how busy the street already is: a lot of drivers coming from either the BQE, the Brooklyn bridge or Atlantic Avenue use State Street as an alternative to Atlantic Avenue. Most of us would agree that cars drive way too fast already.

3. Parking was also on a lot of people’s mind.

Those of us that live here know how impossible parking has become on our two blocks:

• It seemed that the school clearly had not thought about the parking requirements of a lower school where young kids can not be dropped off on the street. Parents need to accompany the little ones in and may linger to talk to teachers and friends
• Moreover, the school cannot provide any parking solution for their own teachers but encourages them to walk or ride public transportation
• The school seemed to want to find some kind of drop off zone on Schermerhorn, which we felt would not be a viable solution as most kids would need to be brought into the school which means that parents or caregivers driving them here would need to find actual parking spaces, not standing space

4. Noise:

• a very large number of attendees were really concerned about the noise implications of such a site. Again, it seemed that the school and the architect tried to downplay the actual noise generated by 400 lower school kids playing on an open roof deck. While we all love and/or have kids, you can hardly say that kids between 3 and 9 are quieter than adult residents.
• More disturbing was the fact that the architectural firm had not even worked on their HVAC plan for the school and therefore could neither talk about its location (mostly on the roof) nor on the noise impact for the neighborhood. A resident pointed out his professional experience as the engineer who designed the abatement system commissioned by Berkeley Carroll school after neighbors took legal action over noise complaints.

5. Alternative Site: Hoyt St and Schermerhorn St

One of the possible alternate sites for BFS: the southeast corner of Hoyt and Schermehorn

One of the most interesting line of questions related to the availability of other sites being considered, including a very close alternative on the southeast corner of Hoyt and two-way Schermerhorn Street. We stressed to the school that most people “against” the State-Hoyt street location would support the Hoyt-Schermerhorn location. Surprisingly, their response was not that the alternate site would be more costly (because of the construction implications of building above the subway) but that the construction approval process with the MTA would make it impossible for them to meet their time line of 2012.

While most of us were happy to learn that BFS did not have major budget restrictions, we felt that the residents of State and Hoyt St did not have to shoulder the burden of a school because BFS was running out of time. It wasn’t clear why this proposal was coming at the eleventh hour.

6. Design and aesthetics

Some questions were raised about the aesthetics of the school and how it would “blend” into the existing townhouses. Many felt that the residential feel of State St would be dramatically altered by this type of large community building.

7. $4M Townhouses on State St? Seriously?

Some specific questions and comments were directed to IBEC, which has been proud to promote their Ensemble Living townhouses further down State Street toward Bond. IBEC could not answer why they can try to market $4M townhouses midblock but couldn’t market residential at State and Hoyt. Even the developers are skeptical that in a down market, wealthy buyers will commit to top price homes sight unseen.

8. Setting a precedent

One of the most sensitive subjects raised was the suggestion that if this community lets IBEC overturn the covenant and build the school on this corner, this could set a precedent that might affect the other developer holding empty lots on State. If this project is done, might they want to or feel compelled to be released from their existing commitments to build residential units on State Street?

At the end of the evening, both IBEC and BFS were thanked and asked to leave the meeting so that local residents could have a constructive discussion. It was good after all the divisiveness that this issue has caused to see our community come together to try to find a common voice.

A number of attendees at the end of the meeting signed to support “Keep State Street Residential“. Some attendees remained neutral or undecided and politely declined signing.

We now have 50 local residents signed in support of the group. We think the meeting was a success in that it allowed:

- local residents to get information and to discover that this is not a done deal

- our voices to be heard loud and clear against the proposed location

Both the school and IBEC tried to persuade us that a school building housing close to 500 people would have minimal impact on the neighborhood. They also invoked the urban historian Jane Jacobs, claiming that this community facility would improve the quality of life in the neighborhood. State Streeters pointed out that we already live in an area that sees a mix of uses Jane Jacobs hardly dreamnt of in her study of successful neighborhoods like Greenwich Village, between the jail (and its bailbondsmen), transit police, social services, the subway workers headquarters, churches, existing schools, shops and major transportation arteries.

What State Street needs is not more density and traffic, but 24-hour residents committed to their street, their neighbors and their neighborhood.

Special meeting for State Street Residents on Oct 5th at 7PM

The Boerum Hill Association has organized a meeting for the residents of State Street between Smith and Bond on October 5th at 7PM at the Belarusian Church at the corner of Bond St. and Atlantic Ave.. Brooklyn Friends School and the developers will explain their proposal to build a new school at the corner of State and Hoyt,  and we residents will have a chance to ask questions and raise our concerns.

Don’t miss this opportunity to get together to keep State Street Residential.

We need to show that most of the RESIDENTS affected by this proposal (aka people leaving on State St between Hoyt and Bond) are against this project, despite what has been said by the developer and a limited few.

To ensure your voice is heard, join our group. Send us your contact information (name, address and email) at keepstatestreetresidential@gmail.com

Read the contract with the covenant that restricts State Street’s development

Here is the  document restricting the development of State Street to residential.

IBEC’s Hesky Brahimy signed it less than five years ago. See specifically the last page, Schedule B, for details of the covenant. Note that nowhere does it add “unless financially beneficial to the developers to do otherwise”….

An excerpt:

State Street:

All new development on State Street must visually relate to the adjacent buildings and streetscape in terms of scale and character:
• Development must be residential
• Street wall may not be closer to the street than adjacent properties; no balconies will be allowed
• Height of new development just not be substantially higher (i.e., 3 feet) than highest building.

Read the entire document:

Deed State Street.pdf

Excerpts from the development recommendations made by the Hoyt Schermerhorn Community Task Force

Here are some excerpts from a report made by the Hoyt Schermerhorn Community Task Force to the Empire State Development Corporation: Recommendations on the Development and Re-use of the Hoyt Schermerhorn Sites.

While this document was completed 10 years ago, it remains incredibly up-to-date and summarizes a lot of the issues that we’ve made about keeping State Street residential.

Here are some of the excerpts:

Neighborhood Character. The existing character of the neighborhood must be preserved and strengthened, and the development should serve as a bridge and buffer between downtown Brooklyn and Boerum Hill.

The community is concerned that downtown Brooklyn may encroach on the residential neighborhood of Boerum Hill. Therefore, any development of the Hoyt-Schermerhorn sites must serve as a bridge and a buffer between downtown Brooklyn and Boerum Hill. The development should connect State Street to the residential neighborhood of Boerum Hill, and connect Schermerhorn Street to downtown Brooklyn.

The community is concerned that the development of these sites may harm the existing character of the neighborhood. To ensure that the area is strengthened by any redevelopment, the following guidelines must be taken into consideration in the redevelopment of these sites:

- The residential character of Boerum Hill must be maintained.

- The development of the sites fronting Schermerhorn Street should strengthen the commercial or mixed use character of the corridor, and serve as a gradual transition from the downtown character of Livingston Street to the residential character of State Street.

Parking and Traffic Patterns.

The community is concerned with increased vehicular traffic in the area and increased transient foot traffic along State Street. Any development should take into consideration the future vehicular and foot traffic patterns of the area.

The community is concerned that the redevelopment of the Hoyt-Schermerhorn sites will further decrease the availability of street parking in the area. Any development must properly address this issue and provide alternatives to on-street parking.

Site #5:

This site covers the north side of State Street between Smith Street and Hoyt Street.

• The development at this site must be residential: it must fit the landmark/historic context of the adjacent townhouses on State Street. The facades and design must be compatible with the townhouse streetscape. The development must physically align with the adjacent townhouses.

Site #6:
This site covers both sides of Hoyt Street between State Street and Schermerhorn Street.

• Mid-rise residential use, with or without stoops, with entrances facing Hoyt (similar to the houses on Hoyt Street between State Street and Atlantic Avenue) is preferred for this site. Development may be higher rise as it nears Schermerhorn Street.
• Subway entrances at Hoyt and Schermerhorn Streets should be reopened and renovated, and included in the design of any new development on this corner. The developer and/or the TA must make subway improvements to this station. This corner should be designed as the entry way to Boerum Hill.
• Any development must be designed to maximize safety and prevent unwanted loitering.

Site #7:

This site covers the north side of State Street between Hoyt Street and Bond Street.

• The development at this site must be residential: it must fit the landmark/historic context of the adjacent townhouses on State Street. The facades and design must be compatible with the townhouse streetscape. The development must physically align with the adjacent townhouses.
• Green space should be included in this site, either as private back yards or common rear green space.

Sites #8 and #9:

These sites cover the south side of Schermerhorn Street between Bond Street and Smith Street.

• Higher rise buildings are acceptable along both blocks of Schermerhorn Street.
• The design of this development must be compatible with the surrounding area, and the use must not harm the residences on State Street. Specifically, the development must not create excessive noise from air conditioning and circulation units, or from whatever the future use of these buildings may be.
• Big box store developments with cinderblock or warehouse construction are unacceptable uses for these sites. Examples of unacceptable designs include the Atlantic Center Mall, the PC Richards on Flatbush and Pacific and the Price CostCo in Sunset Park.

· Improved traffic calming efforts, to steer traffic off State and onto Schermerhorn Street;

Improved physical condition of the north side of Schermerhom Street, which may include facade restorations, tree plantings, benches and additional street and pedestrian lamp posts.

To read the entire document, click the link below:

Hoyt_Schermerhorn_Task_Force_Report[1]

What did the developers promise to build on State Street?

You might be interested in seeing what IBEC developers proposed for the site at State and Hoyt when they were awarded a huge chunk of the Hoyt Schermerhorn project:

Here, from the pages of architectural firm James McCullar and Associates, who designed the apartment building at 200 Schermerhorn, are actual renderings and text describing phase two of the winning proposal.

Here is the actual link to JMA’s web site.

Phase one (completed)

Phase two of the construction with the "scheduled" townhouses on the left and on the right

A rendering of what the existing building on Schermerhorn on the left and the "scheduled" townhouses on the right

The site plan for the completed project (phases one and two)

“Mixed-use building over a subway station / Construction Phase

The proposed design for Site B in the Hoyt-Schermerhorn Urban Renewal Plan is planned in two phases: Phase 1 includes an 8-story mixed-use building with 158 apartments, retail stores, and indoor parking at Schermerhorn Street. Phase 2 includes the design of new infill townhouses on State Street. The development team was selected in a competitive RFP by the Empire State Development Corporation with community based design guidelines.

The building designs are intended to form a transition in scale from the commercial activity of downtown Brooklyn to the residential character of “brownstone Brooklyn”. The 8-story building is located above the Hoyt-Schermerhorn subway station which was designed to support a future building. However, new seismic criteria requires a first floor truss-like structure isolated from the subway structure and anchored by pile foundations at the adjacent townhouse sites. As a result, the 447-ft. frontage is treated as one building, with a central lobby leading to three elevator cores, and is divided equally between market-rate and affordable rental units. The Phase 2 townhouses will be a market-rate condominium.”

A Letter of Concern to Residents of State St. Between Smith and Bond

The State Street Coalition was formed to protect the interests of  homeowners of  State St. in downtown Brooklyn, NY, while also ensuring that these two amazing  blocks remain a great residential neighborhood for all. This is our first letter to our friends and neighbors to raise their awareness of a proposed school construction project on the corner of State St. and Hoyt St. in Brooklyn.

In case you haven’t heard, a controversial project has been proposed for our neighborhood.

IBEC Corp., which owns the large apartment building at 200 Schermerhorn and two empty lots on State between Hoyt and Bond, wants to sell one lot, at the northeast corner of State and Hoyt, to Brooklyn Friends School. BFS, a private nonprofit, would fill the entire space with a 55,000-square-foot, five-story-plus-basements building for a projected 350 lower-school students. (That’s the equivalent of a medium-sized office building.) In addition there would be two very large rooftop playgrounds. The entrance would straddle the corner of Hoyt and State.

The actual proposed site for the BFS construction

Some important background: In the 90s, hundreds of dedicated community members banded together to do something about the long-neglected empty lots, left by subway construction in the 1920s, that blighted the Hoyt-Schermerhorn neighborhood. Over the course of ten years, they worked with the city to hammer out detailed development guidelines that laid out the kinds of buildings that should go where. Major thoroughfares like Schermerhorn and Atlantic were appropriate for tall apartment buildings, business and institutions. State Street was to be filled in with low-rise residential housing, buffered against downtown.

IBEC said they’d do that (see a rendering from their proposal, above) and was awarded the project—88,000 square feet of prime New York City real estate for just $3.5 million. Less than five years ago, they signed a contract specifying an apartment building with a quota of affordable housing on Schermerhorn and townhouses on State.

Now it’s advantageous for them to sell this property, reversing the course set by the community and contrary to their promise. But they need community approval to get New York State to override the terms of their contract.

State Street still has lots of gaps and all of it is zoned for residential or institutional use. Both developers who won the rights to these two blocks agreed to put townhouses on our street. Any of these lots could be in jeopardy for institutional use. We think strengthening the residential character of our block is essential—especially with downtown’s enormous growth and the likelihood that State will become a shortcut to a new arena.

Now, BFS is a fine school, currently undertaking an ambitious improvement plan. We wish BFS success but think their new school will find a more appropriate home at one of the other, nearby sites they’re considering, such as one on Schermerhorn Street.

A school won’t have the positive impact that housing will on a street likes ours, rebuilding after years of blight and hemmed in by downtown Brooklyn and Atlantic Avenue to the north and south, and the jail and courts to the west.

Unlike a nonprofit private school, residents pay property taxes that support our public schools. Residents patronize local businesses morning and evening, weekdays and weekends, summer and winter. They help keep the street safe at night. Homes make a neighborhood more cohesive and more desirable.

Consider the permanent effect of a school:

• Vehicle traffic

Even if only 10% of the students are driven—and a location more accessible than BFS’s current Pearl Street home will likely encourage more driving—that’s 35 double-parked cars, along with school buses, idling, honking and spewing carbon monoxide for all the children who live here. Will deliveries of food and supplies and visits from private waste-disposal trucks take place solely on one-lane Hoyt, already filled by local transit police and court workers for 24-hour parking?

A recent picture (Sept 18th) of the existing traffic on the corner of State St and Hoyt St when one car blocked the street. A woman was actually hit that day by a car that got tired of waiting for traffic to move on Hoyt St and try to get through using the Bike lane.

• Foot traffic

Roughly 800 people—students, each with a parent or caregiver, plus faculty and staff—will flood our streets twice a day.

• Garbage

A great deal of garbage is generated by 350 daily lunches,waste paper, etc. We’ve all seen the mountains of bags outside the Nu Hotel or in front of Brooklyn Fare.

• Dead zone

At night this corner will permanently be as much of a no-man’s land as it is now.

• Property values

Many potential buyers are unwilling to live near a school, for all the reasons listed above. Appraisers often reduce a home’s value either a flat amount, or 4 or 5 percent, if it’s within sight of a school.

• A slippery slope

Could a school jeopardize the townhouses Hamlin Ventures has planned to put on the northwest corner of Hoyt and State, just opposite the proposed school? Could we end up with another facility there, all the easier to justify because of the incursion of a school? Even less green space and more car traffic?

IBEC is floating the idea of building six luxury townhouses on State closer to Bond Street—if they have market interest, according to the owners. They could just as well market residential buildings at both their lots.

Some residents fear that something worse will fill the Hoyt Street lot if we don’t support the school. But even if IBEC sells the property, the original development mandate would hold, with changes subject to our support.

Like the dedicated community members who envisioned the rebuilding of State Street, we believe a more residential neighborhood will be a better place for everyone to live. Let’s not sell off our street because of recession anxiety. A large facility here will permanently change the character of our street. After waiting so long, we think it’s worth waiting a little longer to reach this goal.

The Boerum Hill Association will be sponsoring a meeting in early October to discuss this issue. The date, place and time will be posted soon. Please attend. You have a voice.

Signed by the following property owners of State Street:

• Maren Stange and Charles Hobson, 293 State
• Marci Rosa, 296 State
• Chris Aston, 297 State
• Lynne Zeavin and Don Moss, 303 State
• Arlene Jennings and Blase Katterhagen, 306 State
• Anne Hoy, 310 State
• Kate Perry and David Caplan, 318 State
• Daryl Kerrigan and Paul Leonard, 324 State
• Jamieson Webster and Simon Critchley, 321 ½ State
• Janet Liles and Andre Georges, 323 State
• Merryl Snow Zegar and Charles M. Zegar, 323 State
• Nathalie and Alex Guillot, 340 State
• Ann Armbruster and Darren Lew, 344 State
• Doug Wilson and Kathy Geiszler, 352 State
• The New School for Social Research, owners, 321 ½ State