Good evening and thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Chris Walters and I am the Rezoning Technical Assistance Coordinator for the Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development (ANHD). ANHD is a coalition of community groups across the city working to build community power to win affordable housing and thriving, equitable neighborhoods for all New Yorkers.
In my comments today I want to echo the demand of neighborhood residents and stakeholders in stating that the Bushwick Community Plan’s zoning proposal must be studied as an alternative in the EIS.
I say this speaking from experience as a technical assistance provider on the Bushwick Community Plan, where I saw first-hand the thoughtfulness and consideration that went into the crafting of that vision. What the Bushwick Community Plan put forward was a zoning proposal that balances growth and preservation in a way that works better for the community than the existing zoning allows today – with a mix of upzonings along select corridors to provide new affordable housing opportunities through Mandatory Inclusionary Housing, and contextual zoning along the midblocks and smaller avenues to decrease development pressures there, while preserving and strengthening the neighborhood’s Manufacturing zones to help protect the good paying jobs that they provide.
Though DCP’s proposed zoning follows the general framework of upzoning corridors and the contextual zoning of midblocks, it strays significantly from the vision put forward by the community, and in fact essentially ignores the majority of its specific recommendations. Compared to the Bushwick Community Plan, DCP’s proposed rezoning includes:
- Significantly higher densities along most of the avenues, including an R8A equivalent along Broadway that would allow buildings up to 17 stories
- R6B zoning along too wide a swath of midblocks, meaning development pressure is likely to remain in those areas
- The rezoning of significant portions of existing manufacturing zoned land to mixed-use residential, while providing no protections for industrial uses in the areas that remain M zoned.
Studying the Bushwick Community Plan’s zoning as an alternative would make clear the difference between what DCP has proposed and the community’s plan for:
- More appropriate zoning designations along transit corridors (R6A and R7A or their commercial equivalents)
- Contextual zonings for the midblocks that truly matches the existing character of most streets
- Preserving and strengthening the existing Manufacturing zones
Including the Bushwick Community Plan’s zoning as an alternative in the EIS is the only way to understand the difference between the community’s vision and the plan that DCP is putting forward - comparing them side by side so that the public and their representatives can make an informed decision about which plan works best for them.
In addition, DCP should study further components of the Bushwick Community Plan that pertain to zoning and development, including:
- Restricting competing commercial uses in preserved Manufacturing zones
- Requiring industrial space in developments happening in proposed Mx areas
- The impacts of utilizing all Bushwick Community Plan identified city-owned sites for public access open space, locally/deeply affordable housing and community facility use
The Bushwick Community Plan took years of work with the dedicated commitment of countless neighborhood residents and stakeholders and their proposals must be studied as part of the EIS. Their work and energy cannot be ignored. Thank you.
