I definitely wouldn’t mind a more contextual redesign, but communities need to accept that extra height is one of the bigger incentives for affordable housing among luxury developments. Especially considering this site isn’t far from the center of downtown.
What most of the residents were certain of is that 74 stories, which is the height of the highest tower of the proposed pair, is too much. There is also the problem that the towers don’t fit in to the surrounding brownstone neighborhood, are too glassy, and cut off views of the Williamsburgh Savings Bank Tower across the street, aka 1 Hanson Place, they said.
[…] At the end, the questions came back to the sheer size of the buildings, which many felt overshadowed some of the project’s other benefits.
When we last checked in on 80 Flatbush Avenue, the controversial development plan at the nexus of Boerum Hill, Fort Greene and Downtown Brooklyn, local residents were concerned that the 74-story tower — the highest of a pair — is too tall for the surrounding neighborhood.
[…]
a scheduled public hearing on the matter for February 13 has been postponed, we’ve been told, due to the environmental review not being completed on time.
[…]
It’s now expected that the City Planning Commission will certify the application at their review session on February 12.
CB2 is anticipating a new public hearing will be scheduled in early to mid March, although a date and location have not been confirmed.
Its almost to good to be true. 2 Brooklyn super talls? (9 dekalb and this).
It saids above street level. I was thinking maybe it was above “sea” level and the extra height due to elevation? IDK, but lets keep fingers crossed its not an error.
if the renderings are anything to go by, phase one seems to have grown in height to above 500’ The Savings Bank Tower is 512’, and it’s closer in this angle.
I can’t seem to find any zoning documents for this or diagrams on the DOB. Recent filings would be quite useful to see if its the case. Either that or I’m using the wrong bin#.
Fingers crossed for this! NIMBY’s be damned!
I do hope for a redesign though, I don’t want just a boring blass box right in front of one hanson place which is probs Brooklyn’s most stunning tower
Brooklyn Community Board 2 members argue that the project sits in Boerum Hill and should hence be more contextual, but the project is in the the Downtown Brooklyn Special District, which environmental impact statement notes.
This type of friction in the early stages of large-scale projects such as 80 Flatbush is not uncommon, but the vote by the land use committee might give an indication about how the full community board will vote next month, and the Brooklyn Borough President after that.
The vote was unanimous, with one commissioner abstaining and a second recusing herself.
The development drew plenty of opposition from neighborhood groups, activists and local politicians during a lengthy hearing at Brooklyn Borough Hall in May, but it also received supportive testimony from pro-development groups, transportation advocates, labor unions and civic organizations.
The project heads to the City Council zoning subcommittee for a vote next week, followed by the council land use committee. The full council has to vote on the proposal by the end of September. Councilman Steve Levin oversees the district in which the property sits and has the final say over whether Alloy and ECF get their rezoning.
“Its a transition block!” >superficial height and FAR reduction? K!
The developers agreed to reduce the floor area ratio (FAR) from 18—which would have made it one of the city’s most dense projects—to 15.75; they also agreed to shave some height from the two skyscrapers that will dominate the development. A proposed 986-foot supertall will now stand 840 feet, and the second tower will shrink from 560 to 510 feet.
However, the community benefits touted by Alloy—including two schools and 200 units of permanently affordable housing—will remain. Furthermore, the schools—which will measure about 100,000 square feet—will have to be built first in order for the rest of project to proceed. Another point of contention for local residents—loading docks on State Street—have also been eliminated entirely from this new plan.
