Comments on: 24,000 square feet for parking

By: littledebbiet

littledebbiet — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:23:35 +0000

Seems like there is plenty of room for housing, a playground/green space for all the kids and adults who are going to be living there and some parking! Agreed this is nowhere near Prospect Park and its the best to have a place close by and safe for everybody to hang out with their neighbors.

By: Felix

Felix — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:05:37 +0000

What should be built in 24’000 public square feet in Kensington?
Playground for children should be nice.
A public pool would be nice too but it cost a lot of money to run.
Perhaps more basketball hoops.
What we should not built in 24’000 public square feet in Kensington?
No more parking for a mega 99 cent store.
No dogruns, they are disgusting, they stink!
No community gardens, they are just sad, get over it, you are in nyc.

By: Kay

Kay — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 18:01:40 +0000

Also Julie, no one is complaining about affordable housing at all. We are complaining about how it is done. The city is again putting the cart before the horse.
BUILD NOW,PLAN LATER. Our schools down here are already way overcrowded and our parks are too. Oh.Nevermind. We don;t have one!
Have you seen the plans for the zoning changes? It will be great to have something there but why can’t it be better PLANNED -with schools and green space not an afterthought?
If they aren’t careful NOW, the whole rezoned area will turn into a typical patchwork of ugly, cheap, overdeveloped, cram-as-many-apartments-as the developer-can get-away -with crappy crowded nabe.

By: Kay

Kay — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:48:34 +0000

Julie, Greenwood park and Prospect Park are not within walking distance for my small children. I don’t think we are asking for too much to have a little space for our kids to play. I live in a big apt bldg at the end of Church and we have many kids playing in our street. I don’t think this makes me a “yuppie” to want all of the kids to have a safe place to play.

By: Andrea

Andrea — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:34:10 +0000

Thanks for all of your great reporting on the Culver El project. It is greatly appreciated.

The more green space, the more public space, the better!

By: Joy Rich

Joy Rich — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:17:49 +0000

About the parking requirements–

The City Planning Department’s website says that “The amount of required parking varies according to the size, use, and location of a development.”

In the proposed M1-2 zoning district (commercial, manufacturing, and certain community facility uses), off-street parking is required.

In the proposed R6A (all housing types) and R6B (all housing types) zoning districts, parking is required for 50% of the dwelling units. That’s waived if five or fewer spaces are required.

In the proposed C4-2A zoning district (regional and local commercial uses, all housing types, and community facilities), parking is also required for 50% of the dwelling units, and required commercial and community facility parking varies based on use. Parking is waived when fewer than 25 spaces are required for all uses on a zoning lot.

The proposed C2-3 commercial overlay has the same parking requirements for most commercial uses as the proposed M1-2 and C4-2A districts, requiring one parking space for every 300 square feet of commercial space.

By: littledebbiet

littledebbiet — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:00:04 +0000

A car is definately useful in this part of Brooklyn. Gardens are lovely, there should be more of them. But until the trains start running consistently on the weekends and/or they start installing more elevators I will be throwing my kid in the car to do our shopping. I imagine folks with 3 kids and all their junk feel the same way.

By: Jole

Jole — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:58:40 +0000

Parking clarification: for every 4-unit /4 story building at Culver El Estates, there will be two parking places for tenants’ use, as required by NYC Planning rules–enough room for a tenant’s minivan, I assume. In addition, ““neighborhood community facilities” will also have 3 lots assigned to them (out of a total of 14), in which they get to park 48 cars.

By: frank@nycgarden

frank@nycgarden — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:33:16 +0000

I mean, is it simply an ignorant choice on the part of the builder? Or is it that the community they are building 4 bedroom apartments around might want a place to put their minivan and the builder sees this as an important amenity that is relatively low cost to install?

I understand that we are witnessing changing priorities in NYC and many cities regarding cars, parking and green spaces, but parking spaces are still a desirable luxury to most and I am simply presuming that it is no different at Culver El.

By: frank@nycgarden

frank@nycgarden — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:25:12 +0000

Richard,

Can you tell me why a builder would build parking lots when it doesn’t have to?