All Brooklyn news
Neighborhood Map
Bay Ridge
  • Bensonhurst, Dyker Heights
Brooklyn Heights
  • Downtown, DUMBO
Carroll Gardens
  • Cobble Hill, Red Hook, Boerum Hill
Fort Greene
  • Clinton Hill, Crown Heights
North Brooklyn
  • Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
Park Slope
  • Prospect Heights, Windsor Terrace, Greenwood Heights
GO Brooklyn
Dining Guide
Where to GO
Events calendar
Classifieds
The Brooklyn Wire
Not Just Nets
Police Blotter
Perspective
Parenting
Politics
Transit
Podcasts
Brooklyn Cyclones
Special sections
About The Paper
Mobile site
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds

‘State’ of disunion! Residents clash over school expansion plan

for The Brooklyn Paper

Neighbor is turning against neighbor on State Street over a private school’s plan for a new facility that some say will bring congestion to the residential enclave between Hoyt and Bond streets.

The site in question is at the corner of State and Hoyt streets. Developer IBEC Building Corporation bought the land in 2004 with the intention of constructing upscale townhouses — but when the market for such housing tanked, the company decided to sell the land to the progressive Brooklyn Friends School.

That change in plans annoyed some neighbors, who say that a school will cause more traffic than apartments.

“There have been tons of accidents on this block,” said Jamieson Webster, who is leading the fight. “The community even petitioned the city for a traffic light.”

At least 13 households signed onto a Webster-penned petition titled, “Keep State Street Residential.” But others, like Nat Hendricks, who has lived on the block since 1967, support the school plan.

“A quality school would be a great asset to the Boerum Hill community, and is sorely needed,” he said.

The neighborly squabble sits against the backdrop of a larger historic struggle. It took most of the 1990s, but Boerum Hill residents eventually convinced the city to institute “contextual” zoning on area streets that had slowly become residential over the previous decades.

That “contextual” zoning would allow a school, but a restrictive covenant on the deed for the IBEC site specifically stipulates that only residential construction would be permitted. As a result, IBEC needs to get the Empire State Development Corporation to sign off on the school plan before any construction could begin.

As much as the community might want a residential building, IBEC says that it’s just not feasible at this time.

“No bank will support a project with no tenants lined-up,” said Samy Brahimy, a company spokesman. “This project is a really interesting case of how to move forward through changing economic times.”

The construction on State and Bond Streets is just one part of a larger effort by the developer. Phase I of the project was the State Renaissance Court, a fully occupied, mixed-income building above the Hoyt–Schermerhorn subway station. Phase II, a row of six townhouses closer to Bond Street, is in its planning phase, and has generally been well-received by the block’s residents.

Taking the economy into account, some residents recognize that a school is not the worst possible outcome.

“They want to build an elementary school, not an oil refinery,” said James Cohen, who has rented on State Street for four years.

Brahimy said that his company is working with Brooklyn Friends to determine how much car and foot traffic will actually be generated by the school. They hope to win over their detractors at a presentation to the community in early October.

Updated 05:49 pm, September, 24 2009: Story was updated to correct the number of households that signed onto the opposition letter.

Reader Feedback

Boerum Hill resident from boerum hill says:

Changing the covenant is just short sighted as it will have more implications for other empty lots around Boerum Hill. Start with a five stories building and you will finish with high rise building on a street that was supposed to be the last residential street before Downtown
Brooklyn.

The economy or the greed of some developers should not destroy years of battle to keep this neighborhood residential.
Sept. 23, 2009, 8:34 am
Simon Critchley from Boerum Hill says:
What isn't mentioned in this article is that there are other nearby sites under consideration that are more appropriate- for example those on the 4 lane street of Schermerhorn. We would have all of the agreed upon benefits of a good school without it encroaching on a small residential street that already has a lot of difficulties being so close to downtown, surrounded by institution after institution.

The developers would like to make everyone anxious touting the word recession everytime this issue comes up- so ultimately they benefit by getting out of their contract. This neighborhood has lived through A LOT and come out strong as a residential community. I happen to think it is sad that anxiety about a 'recession' could divide a community against itself so easily and make people give up the original vision they worked so hard for.
Sept. 23, 2009, 9:56 am
statestreeter from Boerum Hill says:
My child goes to public school and more than likely always will. I don't want to be 'against a school' but this is an elite private school that costs $28,000, and then some, a year. I just keep thinking about walking him past a fancy new school that moved in because it likes the down-home quiet non-threatening feel of our neighborhood, that he won't go to and can't afford to go to, to his now under-funded thanks to the Bush administration public school. It makes my stomach curl.
Sept. 23, 2009, 10:03 am
boerumhillrez from boerum hill says:
A "case study" of how to move forward in changing times? Yes, selling off the neighborhood is a great way for the developers to "move forward," but for those of us who have made their home here for five, ten or twenty years and may live here for twenty more years, and who've worked hard to move these blocks forward, this is a little more significant than a "case study." We will live with the traffic forever,and should the school's needs for the building change, we will live with those changes, too.

This article neglects to mention that Phase II was actually 14 townhouses, eight at this site and six down the road. If they can market those six, they can market these 8, or keep looking for a buyer who will build residential here. We've waited this long. We can wait a little longer.
Sept. 23, 2009, 10:53 am
boerumhillrez from boerum hill says:
Also, 25 residents signed the letter, and more would have liked to add their names but couldn't. Some feared to voice their opposition.
Sept. 23, 2009, 11 am
boerum hill resident from B says:
Sid, This is a ridiculous statement.

The developers called for a meeting to present their new project and to ask for a change of the covenant in the middle of the summer when everyone is away. They try to proceed to a vote despite the lack of a "fair representation of the resident". So some people did not raise their voice simply because they were kept in the dark in purpose.
Sept. 23, 2009, 1:50 pm
Sid from Boerum Hill says:
"feared to voice their opposition" really doesn't seem to stop most people....maybe they were just in favor of it and afraid to say so because one of their neighbors would be angry at them, I suspect that even some people who signed really aren't against it.
Sept. 23, 2009, 1:55 pm
Sid from Boerum Hill says:
Sid, This is a ridiculous statement.

The developers called for a meeting to present their new project and to ask for a change of the covenant in the middle of the summer when everyone is away. They try to proceed to a vote despite the lack of a "fair representation of the resident". So some people did not raise their voice simply because they were kept in the dark in purpose.

What a rude response. Your mother did not raise you well.
I said that I really doubt that people were afraid to voice their opposition. I do know many merchants who on other issues are afraid to say what they really think because those on the other side will boycott them. Think what happened to "Arena Pizza". I do suspect that some people who are in favor of it will keep that info to themselves so that they won't be the brunt of rude remarks like yours.
Sept. 23, 2009, 3:16 pm

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not BrooklynPaper.com or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to BrooklynPaper.com the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.

Links