Dumbo Rezoning Passed City Council Vote

After a year and a half of review process by the City Planning Commission, the rezoning of a 10 block area of Dumbo (primarily East of the Manhattan Bridge) roughly bound by Bridge St, John St, Front St, and Adams Streets was passed by the City Council yesterday evening with a vote of 46-1 (The lone vote was opposed by Councilman Tony Avella). The approved rezoning boundaries allow buildings to be built up to 12 stories tall along Jay Street, with street level fronts rising to 6-8 stories. Buildings along Bridge Street could rise to 8 stories, with 4-6 stories at street level. Included are blocks containing 10, 20, 68 Jay and 155 Water Street zoned M1-4/R8A.

In April, the Community Board 2 rejected the Department of City Planning’s proposal by a vote of 13-10. The Community Board is only advisory, and the Borough President Markowitz proposed a rezoning recommendation (PDF).

We spoke with representatives from DUMBO Neighborhood Alliance, who supported Markowitz’ proposal, and were disappointed with the outcome. (Read DNA’s testimony (PDF) and proposed plan (PDF)).

The opposition to the rezoning argued that a Dumbo rezoning will allow building owners to convert buildings from commercial to residential that would lead to a loss of jobs to the area. In response to this, the Dumbo Improvement District made the following case to the Community Board 2:


10 Jay:
As of summer 2007, it was estimated that 10 Jay housed roughly 80 businesses and 250 workers. With or without the DUMBO rezoning it is possible that this building will one day convert to residential. That residential growth may occur at this site is no indication of job loss since the businesses could relocate within DUMBO.

20 Jay:
20 Jay is home to over 100 of DUMBO’s commercial businesses, over 500 workers, with retail at its base. Recently, Two Trees, its owner, invested over $5 M in the building’s upgrade. Two Tree’s principal, Jed Walentas has submitted a letter to the land use committee of CB2 stating that Two Trees has “…no plans to convert 20 Jay Street for residential use nor is the building even convertible. It features 40,000 sq. ft. floorplates and the building is 200 feet deep, which means that it is appropriate solely for commercial uses.” This building will continue to flourish as a home to the creative businesses the Dumbo Improvement District is proud to support.

68 Jay and 155 Water:
68 Jay houses roughly 500 workers in over 300 businesses. By its mere shape and large floorplates, 68 is not a conversion candidate – it is too large and too square to be converted. Pearl Realty, its owner, has confirmed this. Pearl is also on record discussing the success of their most recent commercial project, Green Desk, which according to their testimony at the CB2 public hearing offers “start up business affordable works space in an environmentally friendly venue. The project [located at 155 Water] has already filled up its space with more than 100 new businesses and brought more than 200 jobs to DUMBO.”


While any conversion/change of any buildings may happen, because the rezoning is within the Dumbo Historic District, the building owners must go through the Landmarks Preservation Commission for approval of the change.

We spoke with one building owner who wished to remain anonymous to get their take:

“The way I see it, DUMBO is split between the side north of the Manhattan Bridge and the side south of the bridge. South of the bridge almost all of the buildings are over 8 stories with a good mix of commercial & residential & no empty lots. North of the bridge there is a mix of residential & commercial, but a good number of empty lots & shells of buildings that might as well be empty lots.

I don’t see how making the buildings on the north side a few more stories will dramatically hurt the neighborhood considering the success of the south side… and if its going to take a rezoning for the large real estate holders (ie Guttman) to finally build something in these lots or finish gutted buildings then i guess we don’t really have a choice…
we may loose a few artists, but i believe the market will work out a middle ground between commercial & residential use & we should see a more vibrant north side in a few years, once the lots are filled in…

While the newly rezoned area of Dumbo may change the 10 block area, it remains to be seen what the impact will be to small businesses, retail, commercial and residential.

{City Planning Commission Report (PDF) 01Jul2009}
{Department of City Planning: Dumbo Rezoning}
{Dumbo Rezoning Being Considered, 27Feb2008}
{Dumbo Rezoning Proposal on the Table, 19Feb2009}
{City Planning Presents Dumbo Rezoning Proposal, 04Mar2009}
{Dumbo Rezoning Public Hearing, 18Mar2009}
{Dumbo Rezoning Plan Hearing Results, 20Mar2009}
{Dumbo Rezoning Rejected by CB2, 08Apr2009}

38 Comment

  • I’m wondering if Con Ed will close the Hudson Plant and make a killing. The only time that place is used is in an emergency.

  • I’m wondering if Con Ed will close the Hudson Plant and make a killing. The only time that place is used is in an emergency.

  • Good news for the neighborhood, and great news for the property owners and developers north of Manhattan Br to Vinegar Hill. Here comes the gold rush.

  • Good news for the neighborhood, and great news for the property owners and developers north of Manhattan Br to Vinegar Hill. Here comes the gold rush.

  • Sorry loose stool, probably won’t happen.

    ConEdison is notorious for holding on to land. Just check out the empty parking lot they own on Hudson and Water.

    It took a real arm wrestle with the city before they conceded one of their lots to Brooklyn Bridge Park.

    Besides, that area has been some kind of ‘plant’ for over 100 years. It would take a clean-up on the level of Superfund to make it safe for people to live there.

  • Sorry loose stool, probably won’t happen.

    ConEdison is notorious for holding on to land. Just check out the empty parking lot they own on Hudson and Water.

    It took a real arm wrestle with the city before they conceded one of their lots to Brooklyn Bridge Park.

    Besides, that area has been some kind of ‘plant’ for over 100 years. It would take a clean-up on the level of Superfund to make it safe for people to live there.

  • Dear VinegarHillCitizen
    I’m sure that the toxicity level of the entire north half of Dumbo could be painted with that brush (literally) given the history of paint and chemical manufacturing and disasters in the hood. You raise an interesting point given the requirements for starting new construction by the DEP, EPA, etc. New apartments there might be a hard sell to people who want to start a family. Maybe the Dock St. School will be better used for special ed in about 10 years.

  • Dear VinegarHillCitizen
    I’m sure that the toxicity level of the entire north half of Dumbo could be painted with that brush (literally) given the history of paint and chemical manufacturing and disasters in the hood. You raise an interesting point given the requirements for starting new construction by the DEP, EPA, etc. New apartments there might be a hard sell to people who want to start a family. Maybe the Dock St. School will be better used for special ed in about 10 years.

  • Same Old Song and Dance.
    DNA loses again.
    What an f’n joke they are, and always have been.
    They are a rag-tag group of impotent, unimaginative clowns.
    “Representatives from Dumbo Neighborhood Alliance were disappointed.” LOL
    Check out their pathetic website. They’re still railing on about Dock Street. These people should get a clue. They have no power, no influence, no voice, no reason for being. In my ten years of living here they have not one accomplishment. Not one! These people must walk around in life with a vat of KY at the ready. Hey, DNA, what’s that queasy feeling you have? It’s David Walentas’s boot imbedded in your anal cavity.

  • Same Old Song and Dance.
    DNA loses again.
    What an f’n joke they are, and always have been.
    They are a rag-tag group of impotent, unimaginative clowns.
    “Representatives from Dumbo Neighborhood Alliance were disappointed.” LOL
    Check out their pathetic website. They’re still railing on about Dock Street. These people should get a clue. They have no power, no influence, no voice, no reason for being. In my ten years of living here they have not one accomplishment. Not one! These people must walk around in life with a vat of KY at the ready. Hey, DNA, what’s that queasy feeling you have? It’s David Walentas’s boot imbedded in your anal cavity.

  • No one cares what loose shithead has to say or what the DNA does. DNA who?

  • No one cares what loose shithead has to say or what the DNA does. DNA who?

  • It was a nice hand-out by the City to a few key landowners. Very sweet deal. And I am not opposed to the re-zoning. But what also bother’s me is that one particular owner will just build more of the same crap with the help of his flunky architect.

    Con-ed will be around for a while to come. They make money from that plant not running because they get to sell the emission rights to other power plants.

  • It was a nice hand-out by the City to a few key landowners. Very sweet deal. And I am not opposed to the re-zoning. But what also bother’s me is that one particular owner will just build more of the same crap with the help of his flunky architect.

    Con-ed will be around for a while to come. They make money from that plant not running because they get to sell the emission rights to other power plants.

  • I think you’re being a bit naive VH. How else should housing be created in NYC. By default there will always be a only a “few key landowners” who have the Cojones to develop in NYC. The pressure will be on in Dumbo to build once the recession levels out, might be sooner than you think. What would you have the City do, give shovels to the poor people in Farragut and tell them to start digging foundations along Water Street?
    The only thing that will guarantee top notch architecture is competition. If someone wants to build a shithole like J Condo (sorry, I can’t resist) then he does so at his own peril.

  • I think you’re being a bit naive VH. How else should housing be created in NYC. By default there will always be a only a “few key landowners” who have the Cojones to develop in NYC. The pressure will be on in Dumbo to build once the recession levels out, might be sooner than you think. What would you have the City do, give shovels to the poor people in Farragut and tell them to start digging foundations along Water Street?
    The only thing that will guarantee top notch architecture is competition. If someone wants to build a shithole like J Condo (sorry, I can’t resist) then he does so at his own peril.

  • You’re probably right about Con Ed however. The next shoe to drop might be the Zebras’ empty block. They may be crazy but not stupid, They will sell that block at some point. Me and my sister wives will be the first to move in. Backyard with a pool. Holy Yahweh!

  • You’re probably right about Con Ed however. The next shoe to drop might be the Zebras’ empty block. They may be crazy but not stupid, They will sell that block at some point. Me and my sister wives will be the first to move in. Backyard with a pool. Holy Yahweh!

  • loose drool, pants around his ankles, one hand on the keyboard, strikes again. and again. and again. And again and again and faster…done. Submit comment.

  • loose drool, pants around his ankles, one hand on the keyboard, strikes again. and again. and again. And again and again and faster…done. Submit comment.

  • Its not naive, its a fact. There have been plenty of zoning changes made throughout the city that benefit just a few, or benefit many. Some get lucky because they buy in the downtimes, and have great future opportunity to develop in the good times.
    Not sure where your class comment about people digging holes along water Street comes from considering that I never mentioned that.
    I don’t think the J-condo is so bad. Its like what you see on the upper-east side, its a bore. The unfinished Bridge & Water Street project, now that’s a shithole.

  • Its not naive, its a fact. There have been plenty of zoning changes made throughout the city that benefit just a few, or benefit many. Some get lucky because they buy in the downtimes, and have great future opportunity to develop in the good times.
    Not sure where your class comment about people digging holes along water Street comes from considering that I never mentioned that.
    I don’t think the J-condo is so bad. Its like what you see on the upper-east side, its a bore. The unfinished Bridge & Water Street project, now that’s a shithole.

  • Then I would ask VH, How does the zoning change only help “a few landowners”. It seems to me any change to a residential zoning takes the pressure off existing housing and possibly keeps rents, if not down, at least on a slower rise. This benefits everyone in NYC in some way. To continually see subversion and plots is not a healthy questioning of authority, it is intellectual laziness and a need to identify with the “Grassy Knoll” crowd.
    Judging architecture as to it’s look is purely subjective. I would dismiss the J Condo for the reason you define it (the upper east side), but that’s only my opinion.

  • Then I would ask VH, How does the zoning change only help “a few landowners”. It seems to me any change to a residential zoning takes the pressure off existing housing and possibly keeps rents, if not down, at least on a slower rise. This benefits everyone in NYC in some way. To continually see subversion and plots is not a healthy questioning of authority, it is intellectual laziness and a need to identify with the “Grassy Knoll” crowd.
    Judging architecture as to it’s look is purely subjective. I would dismiss the J Condo for the reason you define it (the upper east side), but that’s only my opinion.

  • Take a close look at the zoning map and you can see which property owners it helps.
    Your theory about greater inventory always driving down rents, or holding them to a slower increase, is not correct because there are more factors at play. If a location is in demand then greater inventory will satisfy some of the demand, but will not always lead to a reduction in rents and/or prices. The West-Village is a perfect example of this, and so is Central Park West.
    I enjoy your thinking. You generalize and then you accuse me of: “to continually see subversion..” Yet this is the only topic for which I have been commenting on. I notice that each comment you make tends to go far off topic and/or tries to tie me to some far-out state of mind.
    L.S., you have to try stay on point with this or we will get nowhere.

    As for the J-condo, the design is what the design is. But, the quality of its construction is far better then what tends to be built as of late in Brooklyn.

  • Take a close look at the zoning map and you can see which property owners it helps.
    Your theory about greater inventory always driving down rents, or holding them to a slower increase, is not correct because there are more factors at play. If a location is in demand then greater inventory will satisfy some of the demand, but will not always lead to a reduction in rents and/or prices. The West-Village is a perfect example of this, and so is Central Park West.
    I enjoy your thinking. You generalize and then you accuse me of: “to continually see subversion..” Yet this is the only topic for which I have been commenting on. I notice that each comment you make tends to go far off topic and/or tries to tie me to some far-out state of mind.
    L.S., you have to try stay on point with this or we will get nowhere.

    As for the J-condo, the design is what the design is. But, the quality of its construction is far better then what tends to be built as of late in Brooklyn.

  • VH you site exceptions (and only 2)to the rule to try to disprove a rather simple supply and demand theory. Of course there are many factors at play but as a general rule the more apartments for rent the cheaper the rent. Do you actually disagree with that?
    I don’t think calling you intellectually lazy or lumping you with “Grassy Knoll” paranoids is tying you to some “far-out state of mind”. To the contrary it is predictable and de rigueur for people who have little understanding of human nature and how things get done.

  • VH you site exceptions (and only 2)to the rule to try to disprove a rather simple supply and demand theory. Of course there are many factors at play but as a general rule the more apartments for rent the cheaper the rent. Do you actually disagree with that?
    I don’t think calling you intellectually lazy or lumping you with “Grassy Knoll” paranoids is tying you to some “far-out state of mind”. To the contrary it is predictable and de rigueur for people who have little understanding of human nature and how things get done.

  • Hey LS, give me a time you want to meet and we can have a four plus hour sit down to review past and current real-estate data regarding the NYC market. We can look at all of the power-point data, which is difficult to do on this site, and then come to a decision.
    Based upon my work experience; I do dispute the ‘general rule’ that having more vacant apts available will always lead to lower rents. And, please take notice that I use the word ‘always’.
    I love how you go right for the insult. Esp. when you have no idea to whom you are even speaking to. But that’s the fun of posting.
    Oh and L.S., the correct word you should have used in your post is: ‘cite’, not ‘site’.

  • Hey LS, give me a time you want to meet and we can have a four plus hour sit down to review past and current real-estate data regarding the NYC market. We can look at all of the power-point data, which is difficult to do on this site, and then come to a decision.
    Based upon my work experience; I do dispute the ‘general rule’ that having more vacant apts available will always lead to lower rents. And, please take notice that I use the word ‘always’.
    I love how you go right for the insult. Esp. when you have no idea to whom you are even speaking to. But that’s the fun of posting.
    Oh and L.S., the correct word you should have used in your post is: ‘cite’, not ‘site’.

  • Burn! Loose Stool = Diarrhea of the Mouth Syndrome.

  • Burn! Loose Stool = Diarrhea of the Mouth Syndrome.

  • You know what VH. I have said that more apartments will “possibly keeps rents, if not down, at least on a slower rise”. And I have also said “more apartments for rent the cheaper the rent”. For some bizarre reason you interpret this as “lower rent” for said apartments. For all your patronizing and “you don’t know who your talking to” attitude, Youze don’t cum off 2 smartz! I suspect your “work experience” (that you imply is in the RE business) is more on side of the Janitorial.

  • You know what VH. I have said that more apartments will “possibly keeps rents, if not down, at least on a slower rise”. And I have also said “more apartments for rent the cheaper the rent”. For some bizarre reason you interpret this as “lower rent” for said apartments. For all your patronizing and “you don’t know who your talking to” attitude, Youze don’t cum off 2 smartz! I suspect your “work experience” (that you imply is in the RE business) is more on side of the Janitorial.

  • I vote for the simple supply and demand argument. The key variable is whether the volume of new apartments will offset demand. Yes, if enough apartments were built in the West Village prices would indeed drop… but you would need to build a lot of them. This is basic economics and, bubbles aside, there is data going back 500 years demonstrating this principle. The long term demand for Dumbo is still uncharted, but I don’t anticipate a crash. It is possible new units may hold prices down, but given the current economic state I’d say no one *really* knows.

    During the dot com boom there was all sorts of data suggesting a “long” boom to last 40 years. And, in defense of this data, more people use the web now than in the 90s… and the biggest IPO in history actually happened after the dot com crash: Google. So, I guess I am saying either scenario is viable in terms of supply and demand.

  • I vote for the simple supply and demand argument. The key variable is whether the volume of new apartments will offset demand. Yes, if enough apartments were built in the West Village prices would indeed drop… but you would need to build a lot of them. This is basic economics and, bubbles aside, there is data going back 500 years demonstrating this principle. The long term demand for Dumbo is still uncharted, but I don’t anticipate a crash. It is possible new units may hold prices down, but given the current economic state I’d say no one *really* knows.

    During the dot com boom there was all sorts of data suggesting a “long” boom to last 40 years. And, in defense of this data, more people use the web now than in the 90s… and the biggest IPO in history actually happened after the dot com crash: Google. So, I guess I am saying either scenario is viable in terms of supply and demand.

  • Pingback: Dumbo NYC, Brooklyn » Archive » Toll Brothers to Build Condos at 205 Water St (DumboNYC.com)

  • Pingback: Dumbo NYC, Brooklyn » Archive » Toll Brothers to Build Condos at 205 Water St (DumboNYC.com)