Meeting Tonight About Plan To Turn Union Street Garage Into Luxury Rental Building


Tonight, Thursday, June 26 at 6pm, the Landmarks/Land Use Committee of Community Board 6 will be holding a public hearing about a potential new residential building at 798-804 Union Street, just off 7th Avenue. Currently a 260-car garage (where spots reportedly fetch up to $80,000 per year), the owner hopes to build a 6-story, 28-unit residential building.

John Derow, a Union Street resident, attended the first CB6 meeting in May where the project was presented, and expressed concerns over what he calls a lack of concern for the neighborhood on behalf of the developer.

“The presentation by the developer claimed that the 28 luxury residences and 7000+ square feet of street-level retail (likely slated for a national chain store) would benefit the neighborhood, but failed to indicate how or why,” he wrote in an email. “There were numerous other failures to follow, such as the failure to indicate how their plans would impact traffic on Union Street or in greater Park Slope.”

It’s not just traffic that’s a concern to neighbors, but how the addition of residential units might impact an already crowded, popular local school, and what the effect will be on current and future businesses.

“It would be 28 additional families into the crowded 321, the retail would increase traffic, the garage would be gone, and two long time small business closed,” said a neighbor who contacted us to encourage locals to attend the meeting.

The meeting will be held at the Prospect Park YMCA at 357 9th Street, and it is open to the public.

Image via Google Maps

About Author

  • Coop member

    28 apartments does not translate into 28 more families sending kids to school. Presumably some of the apartments would be 1 bedrooms. Many would be occupied by people without kids. This sounds like fear-mongering to me.

    • ohnonononono

      Also 28 more taxpaying families in the neighborhood justifies additional school funding and facilities space in the long run. NYC DOE is required to keep tabs on new development and do projections of enrollment when planning for new schools and expansion. Long before PS 321 existed obviously Park Slope was farmland and probably had a 1-room schoolhouse at that point… nobody should have built all those brownstones 100 years ago by that measure. Nonsense.

  • Eric McClure

    In addition, eliminating a parking garage will reduce traffic, not create more of it, not to mention putting an end to drivers, not all of whom are careful, crossing a sometimes-busy sidewalk. CB6 should support the conversion of this building to residential/retail. There are few land uses less beneficial than parking garages. The complaints about the project seem not very well thought out.

    • Alex

      The answer to how removing a large parking garage from a street will impact traffic is pretty plain: It will reduce it because all those cars won’t be driving to that garage.

      • beth

        Actually, instead of quickly getting into that garage, they will be circling blocks looking for open spaces on the street instead of tucked away in garage = more traffic.

        • Joel

          Others will shift to other ways of getting around.

  • Doug G.

    Presumably, some of the people paying $317/month to park their cars can and will be able to garage them somewhere else, so the idea that 260 cars will now be competing for free parking seems unlikely. Sure, finding parking on the street is already a pain, but that’s because it’s free. Imagine the line at Uncle Louie G’s if every day was free cone day.

    Regarding traffic, perhaps we’ll get more truck deliveries on Union St to supply this building’s new businesses, but surely that will be more than offset by the loss of all of those cars going in and out of the garage at all hours of the day and night. Plus those delivery trucks won’t be crossing a sidewalk filled with pedestrians. Seems like a net positive for people on foot.

    Park Slope, like much of Brooklyn, faces a serious housing problem. Limiting supply is not the way to alleviate it. This building means that 28 buyers or renters won’t be competing for other apartments in the neighborhood. Yes, these apartments won’t be cheap, but that alone shouldn’t be a reason to oppose them. I don’t hear conversion opponents arguing that these should all be affordable units, which says to me that this “controversy” is mostly about parking.

  • ParkSlopePerson

    How will it reduce traffic? Now you will have even more people driving around and around and around looking for parking since so many garages are closing up or are full. The idea that people who own cars and have owned cars for a while will all of a sudden find new transportation is silly. It will just make for more congestion, more air pollution and less street parking.

Site Meter