citymeetings.nyc

Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.

Q&A

Comparison of different angle options for the sloping plane

0:27:22

·

140 sec

Video Player is loading.

Current TimeÂ 27:22

DurationÂ 1:40:00

Loaded: 27.41%

Stream TypeÂ LIVE

Remaining TimeÂ 1:12:38

Â

Council Member Kevin Riley asks for an explanation of the differences between the 15-degree angle approved by CPC and the 10-degree angle requested by the Brooklyn Botanic Garden. David Rosenberg provides a detailed comparison of the various options and their impacts.

The angle of the sloping plane controls the density that can be put on the site
The CPC-approved 15-degree angle allows for a 5.35 FAR, which is R70 density
Reducing to R7A with a 10-degree angle would further reduce units and project viability
The shadow impact difference between R70 and R7A is minimal (3 minutes), but the reduction in units is significant

Kevin Riley

0:27:22

Can you explain the difference between the 10 degree angle approved by CPC and the 10 degree angle requested by the garden.

0:27:30

And what does that do to the project?

David Rosenberg

0:27:32

Yeah.

0:27:32

And if you look at slide 9 in the presentation, you can see here how all of this comes together, both in what was originally certified city planning, what we had proposed to our text amendment, what city planning ultimately approved and what BBG is now requesting with the r 7 a and the 10 degree angle.

0:27:51

What it comes down to, the way that these So the angle of is the thing that ultimately controls how much density we can put onto the site.

0:27:59

So we had initially proposed a so a 26.83 degree angle, which allowed us to maximize all of the floor area available with our 8 day, 475 units, that now is off the table.

0:28:14

So with city planning, reducing that to 15 degrees, what that did was effectively max out the amount of floor area that we could fit into the envelope.

0:28:25

Which puts us at about a 5.35 FAR, which is in our 70 density.

0:28:29

And what that did compared to what we were proposing, was reduced the longest shadow on the Brooklyn Potato Garden from 1 hour 29 minutes on the Hardy Planner's reyard on that June 21st analysis day to 1 hour 9 minutes.

0:28:43

So a total reduction of 20 minutes.

0:28:45

The reduction from r 7 d to r 7 a would knock off an additional 10% of the units, about 36 units.

0:28:53

We kind of we would be capped out at 4.81 f a r.

0:28:57

So that assumed at r 7a, that assumes that city of yes is adopted, which would raise the r 7a f a r to 5.01.

0:29:05

Otherwise, it would have to write with r 7 a would be 4.6 without it.

0:29:11

So potentially even a further reduction of another 15 or 20 so units, and all of which the shadow impact would go from an hour 9 minutes on the longest shadow in the r 70 to 1 hour 6 minutes with the r 7a.

0:29:27

So 3 minutes of shadow differences, but what it does by knocking down the unit count even further than where it's now the project would be entirely not viable even with workforce housing.

0:29:39

And there would be nothing to do but to move forward on an as of right basis.

← Previous Chapter

Consequences if workforce housing option is not approved

Next Chapter →

Council Member's perspective on the project and need for proactive measures