Background

The City of New York, acting through the Department of City Planning (DCP), together with the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), the Department of Parks and Recreation (NYC Parks), and the Department of Citywide Administrative Services is proposing a series of land use actions — including zoning map amendments, zoning text amendments, City Map amendments, and disposition of City-owned property (collectively, the ​“Proposed Actions”) — to implement land use and zoning recommendations in the Gowanus Neighborhood Plan (the ​“Neighborhood Plan” or ​“Plan”).

The Proposed Actions are intended to facilitate development patterns that meet the long-term vision of a thriving, inclusive, and more resilient Gowanus where existing and future residents and workers can participate in civic, cultural, and economic activities and where a wholly unique resource — the Gowanus Canal — can thrive and play an active role in that equitable and sustainable growth.

RPA Supports the Gowanus Plan

RPA supports the proposed Gowanus neighborhood plan. We believe that the residents of Gowanus have the ability to improve the conditions of their neighborhood, and at the same time contribute their fair share to the housing needs of thousands of New Yorkers across the city. After years of community engagement and building partnerships, the proposed neighborhood framework is by and large the right one.

Fair share approach to housing

The city’s current housing crisis and the need to prioritize a fair share approach, justify the proposed land use actions. Existing households living in the Brooklyn Gowanus study area are by and large more affluent and socioeconomically resilient than most other New York City neighborhoods. When measured in terms of socioeconomic, household composition, demographic and minority status, and even health outcomes, the Gowanus study area is a much more socially resilient neighborhood when compared to the rest of the city. The city’s current housing crisis and the need to address it through a fair share approach, largely justifies the proposed actions currently undergoing the ULURP process.

The exceptions to the aforementioned conditions are the residents of NYCHA Wyckoff and Gowanus houses, who certainly deserve special attention and commitments to bring the properties and buildings back to a state of good repair. This is something that should be guaranteed throughout this process.

Current socioeconomic trends indicate greater affluence and less diversity

With the exception of NYCHA, the Gowanus neighborhood is affluent and is rapidly becoming even more affluent with time. The estimated average (mean) household income in the study area is $160,514, which is over $70,000 higher than that of Brooklyn overall ($87,330), and over $60,000 higher than that of New York City overall ($99,261). Average income in the study area has increased by approximately 29.1 percent since 2010, far outpacing growth in average household incomes in Brooklyn (18.8 percent) and New York City (8.6 percent). The estimated median household income in the study area ($111,458) is nearly twice as high as that of Brooklyn ($56,941) and New York City ($61,766). Median household incomes in the study area and comparison geographies follow similar trends as average household incomes.

Housing shortage has been exacerbated by the residential markets in the neighborhoods surrounding Gowanus, including Carroll Gardens, Park Slope, and Boerum Hill. These, as well as other historic districts and low density zoning areas, are artificially constraining housing supply, contributing to rising rents and increasing land values. Such dynamics generally externalize housing cost burdens onto lower income residents, exacerbating housing insecurity within the Gowanus study area and for the rest of the city.

These pressures are largely manifested in residential rents, which have steadily increased in the study area and have surpassed the rest of the city since 2010. Median rent in the study area has increased by 20.6 percent and average rent has increased by 16.3 percent since 2010. Median and average rent in the study area are approximately $600 higher than those in Brooklyn and New York City overall.

Comparing future scenarios

Future without actions

In the future without the Proposed Actions it is anticipated that the existing trends of increasing rents and increasing household income in the study area would continue, with neighborhood becoming wealthier and probably more white. In the No Action condition, Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH) would not be mapped in the Project Area. Instead of rent restricted units, hundreds of market rate units (most of them likely high end rentals) would be built without any affordability requirements. Because development in the surrounding neighborhoods is limited by zoning and historic districts, luxury residential development has concentrated along the few areas in Gowanus that allow residential uses, such as along 4th Avenue. Such concentration of new luxury development would most likely continue.

On the other hand, based on the Proposed Actions, both market and affordable units would increase, due in large part to the application of the MIH program to the Project Area. The proposed actions would result in a net increase of 8,495 units over the no action condition. The conservative estimate in the DEIS also projects that approximately 2,471 units would be affordable under MIH.

Future with actions

In the With Action condition, the average household income of new residents would be less than the average household income of existing residents in the study area. In this scenario the average household income of the incoming population would be approximately $122,310— approximately $38,000 less than the average household income of the existing study area population.

The proposed actions would partially mitigate trends that otherwise result in an even more exclusive neighborhood and segregated city

Conclusion

There are issues that should be addressed throughout the remaining time of the review process: guaranteeing resources to improve conditions at both NYCHA campuses, further reducing minimum parking requirements at future development sites, assistance with the relocation of businesses facing displacement, ensuring implementation of the new Unified Stormwater Rule to improve water quality, and creating a task force to provide accountability regarding capital programs and other commitments. But by and large, we believe that the proposed framework is the right one to advance and effectively address these issues.

We urge the Brooklyn Borough President to approve and move forward with this consequential plan.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this proposal. As always, we are ready to serve as a resource in helping to further think through these issues and develop the right mix of solutions to address our planning challenges.