Greenpoint and Sustainable City Principles

Abstract

This chapter aims to determine the extent that the planning of the Greenpoint neighborhood addresses Sustainable City Principles (SCPs). Greenpoint is one of three selected case study Brooklyn neighborhoods (of nine studied neighborhoods over three New York boroughs). The chapter firstly provides a background to Greenpoint, including results of an on-ground author survey of the neighborhood. Three key Sustainable City Principles (SCPs) (as adopted in Chap. 2) are then introduced, including: Heritage Protection; Housing Provision: and, Open Spaces Allocation. Current development in Greenpoint is then examined using the three SCPs as a guide The Greenpoint neighborhood needs and issues are then examined (under the three SCPs). This examination is centered on the annual profile report completed by the Brooklyn Community Board 1 (containing Greenpoint) for the City Council. A Greenpoint case study redevelopment project (e.g. Foreshore Development Zone) is then selected. The SCPs are addressed for this case study and conclusions drawn. Finally, an overall conclusion is drawn on the extent that the planning of Greenpoint addresses the SCPs. With this conclusion, it’s noted that comments are made in the final chapter (after examining all neighborhoods) on the extent neighborhood planning in New York addresses SCPs. It is also noted that the final chapter will comment on neighborhood planning addressing SCPs in any city or urban area (also referencing futurists and planning theorists as introduced respectively in Chaps. 1 and 2).

Plate 8.1

Henry Miller (Source Wikipedia 2017)

Addendum 8.1: Key Needs and Issues Within Brooklyn Community District 1 Statement of Needs Report Fiscal Year 2017

• (a) The District has a population of 173,083 (2010), an increase of (7.9% since the Census of 2000). Those residents on income supplements represent 41.5% of the population.

• (b) Affordable housing in Community Board No. 1 is a top priority that must be addressed as a critical need. If the District is to remain viable and attract/retain jobs and a stable work force, an adequate supply of decent and affordable housing must be available at various income levels.

• (c) There is a great need for housing of the elderly and an increasing senior citizen population in Community Board No. 1 (over 20,000) remains of paramount concern.

• (d) There needs to be a reduction/elimination of the “warehousing” of the homeless in our Community District and throughout the City. Expensive temporary housing must be replaced with permanent low-rent housing, including housing for single individuals

• (e) Over the past years over 41 transfer stations have been opened within the District. Today 53% of all C&D, fill and putrescible waste transfer stations in Brooklyn and 25% in New York City exist in Community Board No. 1. These numbers translate into a population of 17 permitted transfer stations presently doing business in the district. This makes our district the most heavily impacted area in the entire City. We urge that strong regulatory policies be developed, enforcement is strict and unpermitted stations closed.

• (f) Recent hotel growth in Brooklyn has been in residential and industrial areas, crowding out local communities, manufacturing spaces, and affordable housing. This hotel growth has led to the gentrification and homogenization of our communities, and it has inflated rents and property taxes. The District needs a real voice in the development process and an opportunity to engage developers before they start building.

• (g) To maintain our vibrant city, every effort should be made to preserve socioeconomic diversity and keep our neighborhoods affordable for the mix of uses (residential, community spaces, artistic) that currently exist.

• (h) Community Board No. 1 still lacks adequate funding. The meager budget provided for our board does not keep pace with inflation and any increased operating costs. Community Board No. 1 is always facing yet another round of budget cuts in the budget process. The cost for acquiring much needed newer technology, computer software, upgraded hardware as well as internet/web access capabilities is expensive.