More About Scoping the Toll Brothers Gowanus Development

Pratt Center for Community Development Director and City Council candidate Brad Lander was among those who spoke at the City Planning Scoping hearing on Thursday on the big and controversial Toll Brothers project in Gowanus. Late on Friday, Mr. Lander emailed to us to clarify things because he had been described as giving testimony that was supportive of the development. He said in the email that he is "not a supporter of the Toll Brothers project, generally or otherwise."

One thing that has become clear to us is that the Toll Brothers proposal has become even more polarizing in Gowanus and Carroll Gardens than the rezoning that it seeks to circumvent. (The rezoning discussion is like to revive when the city presents its draft plans in late spring or early summer, per a timetable related to us by Brooklyn Planning Director Purnima Kapur.) Based on comments that are appearing in our posts and conversations we are having with residents in both neighborhoods, the development is causing (or reflecting) deep divisions in the community and some is very personal. Public controversy about the Toll Brothers development has, in fact, been far louder than that surrounding the far bigger Public Place project which would be only a few blocks away.

Mr. Lander's lengthy testimony, from which we will excerpt a few passages, was actually quite thorough in terms of the issues with which the project review should deal. He spoke on behalf of a group called the Coalition for Responsible Redevelopment of the Gowanus Canal which includes the Carroll Gardens Association, the Fifth Avenue Committee, the Gowanus Canal Community Development Corp., the Gowanus Canal Conservancy, the NYC Central Labor Council and other labor and community groups. "Because Toll Brothers is proposing a rezoning for substantial residential development for 363-365 Bond Street in advance of a broader public rezoning of the Gowanus Canal area, this action must be held to a higher standard," he said. "If approved, this rezoning would likely start a chain reaction of development that would have significant and broad public impact far beyond its borders. It is therefore appropriate and necessary that a full range of alternatives be considered, and that the EIS be broadly scoped to answer questions about the potential impact of this action."

Significantly, Mr. Lander asked that the environmental review consider the Toll project with the "cumulative impact of other proposed development" in the area, even if they would not be finished until later. "The Scope of Work indicates that other projects that will not be completed by the Build Year of 2011 will not be considered in this DEIS," he said. "We strongly object to this exclusion. If every project is able to look only at short-term impacts, then no one project may trigger sufficient impacts to show the need for additional school seats, or infrastructure investments, or child care, or traffic calming … but surely collectively they will generate these impacts."

The testimony also requested that the environmental review consider on-site wastewater treatment, height limits, how it the development would impact overall zoning goals for Gowanus, long range impact of all developments on community facilities, and a host of other factors. Mr. Lander also called for a rezoning of Carroll Gardens to take place with a Gowanus rezoning (which is not likely to happen given the city's timetable) and that the Toll development take this context into account as well. In terms of canalside uses, the testimony said:

The DEIS should consider additional small-scale retail and commercial uses, preferably artisan-, environmental- and community-oriented, along the Canal. We believe that adding a mix of uses along the Canal will help to enliven it, to the benefit of the project and the community at large. These should not be uses that would draw car traffic, but instead that would encourage pedestrian visits.

Written comments about the critical environmental review and what it should include can be submitted through March 24. (While comments can cover anything, at this stage, the most useful comments should cover elements that should be present in the environmental review; opportunities for lengthy commentary for or against the project will be available later.) The comments should be sent to Robert Dobruskin, Dept. of City Planning, 22 Reade St., New York, NY 10007. A copy should also be sent to Community Board 6 at 250 Baltic St., Brooklyn, NY 11231.