PREMISES AFFECTED 40 Woodhull Street, South Side, 85 West of Hicks Street, Block 363, Lot

PREMISES AFFECTED – 40 Woodhull Street, south side, 85’ west of Hicks Street, Block 363, Lot 20, Borough of Brooklyn.

302-04-BZ CEQR #05-BSA-041K APPLICANT – Martyn & Don Weston for Regina Formisano, owner. SUBJECT – Application September 10, 2004 – under Z.R. §72-21 – To permit the proposed construction of a residential building on a vacant lot, located in an M1-1 zoning district, is contrary to Z.R. §42-00. PREMISES AFFECTED – 40 Woodhull Street, south side, 85’ west of Hicks Street, Block 363, Lot 20, Borough of Brooklyn. COMMUNITY BOARD #6BK APPEARANCES – For Applicant: Don Weston. THE VOTE TO CLOSE HEARING – ACTION OF THE BOARD - Application granted on condition. THE VOTE TO GRANT - Affirmative: Chair Srinivasan, Vice-Chair Babbar, Commissioner Miele and Commissioner Chin...... 4 Negative:...... 0 THE RESOLUTION - WHEREAS, the decision of the Brooklyn Borough Commissioner, dated August 26, 2004, acting on Department of Buildings Application No. 301683998, reads: “A residential use in a M1-1 zoning district is contrary to Section 42-00 Z.R.”; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on this application on July 19, 2005, after due notice by publication in the City Record, with a continued hearing on August 16, 2005, and then to decision on September 13, 2005; and WHEREAS, the premises and surrounding area had a site and neighborhood examination by a committee of the Board, consisting of Chair Srinivasan, Vice-Chair Babbar, Commissioner Miele and Commissioner Chin; and WHEREAS, this is an application under Z.R. § 72-21, to permit, within an M1-1 zoning district, the proposed construction of a new three-family, four-story residential building on a vacant lot, contrary to Z.R. § 42-00; and WHEREAS, Community Board 6, Brooklyn, recommends conditional approval of this application; and WHEREAS, this application contemplates a four-story residential building plus cellar and garage, with floor area of 5,200 sq. ft., a floor area ratio (“F.A.R.”) of 2.6, and a total building height of 39’-2”; and WHEREAS, the subject premises is a 20’-0” by 100’-0” vacant lot, with 2,000 sq. ft. of lot area, located on the south side of Woodhull Street, west of Hicks Street; and WHEREAS, the applicant represents that the site was developed prior to 1915 with four row-houses that were subsequently demolished in 1944, along with thirteen other row-houses; and WHEREAS, the applicant states that since 1962, the site has been used as a parking lot; and WHEREAS, the applicant represents that the entire block on the south side of Woodhull Street is developed with residential buildings, with the exception of one building; and WHEREAS, the applicant represents that the north side of Woodhull Street is in an R6 zoning district, and is characterized by residential buildings of three to four stories or three stories plus basement; and WHEREAS, the applicant represents that the following are unique physical conditions, which create practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship in developing the subject lot in conformance with underlying district regulations: the site is small and narrow, vacant, and surrounded by residential uses on both the south and north sides of Woodhull Street; and WHEREAS, the applicant further represents that the narrow size of the lot would not be conducive to a floor plate for a commercial or industrial building; and WHEREAS, the Board finds that the narrow width and small size of this pre-existing and vacant lot, which was previously developed with residential uses and abuts a residential district, and, create practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship in developing the site in strict conformity with current applicable zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, the applicant initially submitted a feasibility analysis that showed that a 1,900 sq. ft. manufacturing building would not result in a reasonable return, but that the four-story proposal would; and WHEREAS, the Board questioned the applicant’s site valuation, because the applicant included adjusted comparables from the nearby R6 zoning district rather than considering comparables in other manufacturing zones; and WHEREAS, the applicant subsequently submitted comparables from locations within an M1-1 zoning district; the Board found these comparables to be more acceptable than the comparables included by the applicant in the initial feasibility study; and WHEREAS, based upon the above, the Board has determined that because of the subject lot’s unique physical condition, there is no reasonable possibility that development in strict conformance with the provisions applicable in the subject zoning district will provide a reasonable return; and WHEREAS, the site is located on a block with many pre-existing non-conforming residential uses, including five row-houses on one side of the site and three row-houses on the other; and WHEREAS, the north side of the block, where the site is located, is within an R6 zoning district; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a land use map showing numerous residential uses in the immediate area of the site; and WHEREAS, therefore, the Board finds that the use change proposed by the applicant is appropriate; and WHEREAS, the Board notes that although many of the surrounding buildings are only three stories, they have first floors with significant floor to ceiling heights; thus, the proposed overall building height is comparable to the heights of other buildings in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Board notes further that the proposed 2.6 FAR is consistent with R6 Quality Housing regulations that apply to sites within 100 ft. of a wide street, and that the site is located within 100 ft. of Hicks Street, a wide street; and WHEREAS, the initial application contemplated balconies on the front façade of the building; WHEREAS, at the request of the Board, the applicant has removed the balconies from its proposal; and WHEREAS, the Board questioned whether it was necessary for the applicant to retain the proposed garage on the ground floor given that the curb cut would result in a removal of a parking space and was not in character with the rest of the block; and WHEREAS, the applicant responded that the curb cut on Woodhull Street leading to the garage has been in existence for 44 years, and only takes up the space of half the curb length that a parked car would require to park on the street; therefore, restoring the curb cut would not improve on-street parking in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, in addition, the applicant submitted pictures of newer buildings in the area that have garages; and WHEREAS, based upon the above, the Board finds that this action will not alter the essential character of the surrounding neighborhood nor impair the use or development of adjacent properties, nor will it be detrimental to the public welfare; and WHEREAS, the Board finds that the hardship herein was not created by the owner or a predecessor in title; and WHEREAS, the Board finds that this proposal is the minimum necessary to afford the owner relief; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the evidence in the record supports the findings required to be made under Z.R. § 72-21; and WHEREAS, the project is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to 6 NYCRR, Part 617; and WHEREAS, the Board has conducted an environmental review of the proposed action and has documented relevant information about the project in the Final Environmental Assessment Statement (EAS) CEQR No. 05-BSA-041K dated June 1, 2005; and WHEREAS, the EAS documents that the project as proposed would not have significant adverse impacts on Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy; Socioeconomic Conditions; Community Facilities and Services; Open Space; Shadows; Historic Resources; Urban Design and Visual Resources; Neighborhood Character; Natural Resources; Waterfront Revitalization Program; Infrastructure; Hazardous Materials; Solid Waste and Sanitation Services; Energy; Traffic and Parking; Transit and Pedestrians; Air Quality; Noise; and Public Health; and WHEREAS, no other significant effects upon the environment that would require an Environmental Impact Statement are foreseeable; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the proposed action will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Therefore it is Resolved that the Board of Standards and Appeals issues a Negative Declaration, with conditions as stipulated below, prepared in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617, the Rules of Procedure for City Environmental Quality Review and Executive Order No. 91 of 1977, as amended, and makes the required findings under Z.R. § 72-21, to permit, within an M1-1 zoning district, the proposed construction of a new three-family, four-story plus cellar, residential building on a vacant lot, contrary to Z.R. § 42-00; on condition that all work shall substantially conform to drawings as they apply to the objections above noted, filed with this application marked “Received June 1, 2005”–1 sheet and “August 22, 2005”–8 sheets; and on further condition: THAT the bulk parameters of the proposed buildings shall be as follows: total maximum F.A.R. of 2.6; maximum floor area of 5,200 sq. ft.; and maximum total height of 39’-2”; THAT the streetwall of the building shall match the adjacent streetwalls; THAT a minimum rear yard of 30’-0” shall be retained; THAT all interior layouts and exits shall be as approved by the Department of Buildings; THAT this approval is limited to the relief granted by the Board in response to specifically cited and filed DOB/other jurisdiction objection(s) only; THAT the approved plans shall be considered approved only for the portions related to the specific relief granted; and THAT the Department of Buildings must ensure compliance with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning Resolution, the Administrative Code and any other relevant laws under its jurisdiction irrespective of plan(s)/configuration(s) not related to the relief granted. Adopted by the Board of Standards and Appeals, September 13, 2005.