Thursday, August 13, 2009



On Friday, August 7th, CORD posted some information on our blog and in our email/newsletter regarding the options available to us within the City Planning Commission's rezoning proposal.

Since Friday, we have received a bit more information regarding another difference between the current R6 and proposed R6A classification. This food for thought is from a CORD affiliated (NYC) zoning expert.

May we suggest that you review the August 7th blog post
as well as the proposed zoning map
so that you may review the information in its entirety.

It is important that when we go to the City Planning Commission Public hearing on the 19th, we clearly express our desires. In order to do that, we must all understand what the proposed changes can mean to us. CORD had tried to present an admittedly simplified, but accurate portrait of the zoning proposal.

We again reach out to you, especially those of you who reside on the blocks where the R6A classification is proposed, to email us at, and tell us how you feel about the rezoning proposal, and how you would like to see your street designated.

The following information is in addition to the August 7th blog post........

It was brought to our attention that we.............

Also did not address that R6A does not permit extra floor area for community facility use. Such floor area allocated for community facility use would be deducted from residential floor area potential. For the R6, on the short end of the block, community facility could occupy the entire ground floor other than what is being used as residential access to the residential floors above. In such a case, the achievable floor area is about the same as what allowed in the R6A district. For the long dimension of the block, the rear 30 feet of the property can not be used for many types of community uses (Examples of exceptions are schools, houses of worship). In such a case R6 would allow about 90% of the floor area what R6A allows. So the question is whether the certainty of 55 feet in maximum height is worth remaining available to more community facility use being incorporated into the neighborhood.

Finally, though R6A permits the height of 70 feet, the question is what height is realistic for properties that would gain additional floor area rights because of the zoning. Is one to two floors added and where is that possible? Or, where would a property build from scratch and given parcel size, does it make more sense (profit) to use up the floor area with as little as 4-5 floors, or up to seven.

Hope to hear from you.



With the "Protect Our Homes" petition, CORD was formed in May, 2007. This petition arose as an overwhelmingly negative response to the coming of the over-sized 360 Smith Street Development at the corner of Smith Street and Second Place (Aka Oliver House; aka 131 Second Place). This petition, which had well over three thousand signatures, led to a new zoning text amendment in summer of 2008.

To: Our Elected Officials, Community Leaders, The MTA:
(MAY, 2007)

We the undersigned Carroll Gardens homeowners and residents, are appalled by the "as of right" ruling which allows owners and developers to erect buildings in our neighborhood with no regard to the impact they will present to our quality of life and the value of our homes........