Author Topic: The development threat facing Jackson Heights is greater than we thought  (Read 7285 times)

Offline lmaniace

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 465
JK Resident,

I notice no apology or admission that you were just making things up last night in order to smear the campaign to expand the Jackson Heights historic district.

And now you are making things up about affordable housing being built when bulldozers roll into Jackson Heights.

Affordable housing being built in LIC, in what is considered the most massive development/redevelopment project in the nation??? There were ZERO affordable housing units built or planned in the redevelopment of Long Island City when I wrote a report for Metro New York a year and a half ago. If it's changed since then, I'd be happy to hear of it because it is needed. At that time there were 6,000 units built and another 16,000 planned for the massive market-driven development along Jackson Avenue and around Queensborough Plaza. (The waterfront development is a different kind of animal it was organized by the New York State.)

Also you refuse to acknowledge that a historic district does not prevent new construction. We had a new six-story building put up on 37th Avenue a few years ago and a five-story building is planned there too, both replacing one-story structures. Historic district status requires that new construction be in character with the surrounding neighborhood.

Jackson Heights (zip code, 11372) is already one of the densest neighborhoods in NYC; it was well planned; it has distinctive architecture; it's on the U.S. Register of Historic Places. Put hey, it's in Queens so lets make some big bucks.

Another fantasy you wrote about last night was that the new subway computerized signaling system would solve our transit crowding problems. If I remember correctly, this improvement will result in a roughly 10 percent increase in subway service during rush hours, maybe keeping up with the ridership growth that we've had in the last 20 years  due to new construction in Queens, and doing nothing to account for future construction.

It will NOT provide subway service in the vast parts of Queens that are a transit dessert. These folks need to take buses to get to the 7 Train or the Queens Boulevard lines. A new subway line would serve these folks and lessen the load on the above subway lines.

Well that's it. I don't have time to keep fact-checking the stuff you put out. Perhaps we should just ignore it.

Offline JK resident

  • Activist
  • *****
  • Posts: 226
You are clearly hysterical when you state bulldozers will roll into Jackson Heights. The vast majority of JH is already developed. No one is going to tear down six story apartment buildings to put up a new seven or eight story buildings. This is obviously a red scare tactic to prevent construction of any new housing. There are a group of historic junkies that want to control the appearance of any new construction. That new apartment building was allowed only after a tragic fire required the demolition of the old structure. People just want to control other people. The vast majority of buildings outside the historic district are ugly old brick boxes that do not deserve any protection.

Offline Lilybell

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 1107
Quote
Many people from third world countries are used to living in squalor.

Wow, JK Resident. Just wow.  >:(

Offline CaptainFlannel

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 776
Could the moderators address JK resident's incivility on this forum? Could everyone else flag his/her posts?

Offline dssjh

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 3630
 
Quote
Many people from third world countries are used to living in squalor.


and some -- thankfully, not many -- people from Jackson Heights are used to lolling around in moral squalor and attempting to spread it.


Offline theplanesland

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 534
Here comes more apartments:

https://therealdeal.com/2018/06/07/following-dob-rejection-developer-adds-62-apartments-to-jackson-heights-project/

7 stories, 90th and Roosevelt, right by the tracks. Seems legit to me. It's not going to damage the charming nature of ... Roosevelt under the tracks. But apartments averaging 400sqft? Something doesn't quite line up there.

Offline dssjh

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 3630
it's kind of in line with the micro-apartment micro-trend, which has popped up here and there in brooklyn and manhattan. tiny studios at exorbitant prices, which should be lower out here.

https://ny.curbed.com/2017/12/8/16751842/brooklyn-micro-apartments-for-rent-fort-greene

Offline Shelby2

  • Global Moderator
  • Mayor
  • *****
  • Posts: 4629
Here comes more apartments:

https://therealdeal.com/2018/06/07/following-dob-rejection-developer-adds-62-apartments-to-jackson-heights-project/

7 stories, 90th and Roosevelt, right by the tracks. Seems legit to me. It's not going to damage the charming nature of ... Roosevelt under the tracks. But apartments averaging 400sqft? Something doesn't quite line up there.

There's a new article about this project on NY Yimby. Regarding the average of 400 square feet, the article says, "150 apartments will result, averaging 400 square feet apiece, indicating rental or possibly hotel use." IMO, this is not a good sign. So many new hotels in outer borough neighborhoods end up being used by the city to house people who can't be accommodated by the over-capacity shelters.

Wouldn't a hotel require different permits than a residential building? I'm not really sure I understand how permits could be filed with no requirement that the applicant say what the building's use will be.

https://newyorkyimby.com/2018/06/permits-filed-for-91-09-roosevelt-avenue-jackson-heights-queens.html

Offline dssjh

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 3630
i don't read that as "this will be a hotel," but as "this will be an alternative place for the city to place people who might be placed in hotels." the zoning for a hotel would definitely be different, but don't think they'd need any building variance to allow the placement of people in need.

Offline JK resident

  • Activist
  • *****
  • Posts: 226
It is only fair that Jackson Heights accept its share of homeless. They all can’t live on 57th Steeet. There are also a lot of immigrant men who need a small space to live while they work to send money back home. Unfortunately this brings lots of prostitution and other services for these hard working migrants.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2018, 01:48:42 PM by JK resident »

Offline Simka

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 287
It is only fair that Jackson Heights accept its share of homeless. They all can’t live on 57th Steeet. There are also a lot of immigrant men who need a small space to live while they work to send money back home. Unfortunately this brings lots of prostitution and other services for these hard working migrants.

What brings "lots of prostitution"? And what "other services" are you talking about?

Offline dssjh

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 3630
It is only fair that Jackson Heights accept its share of homeless. They all can’t live on 57th Steeet. There are also a lot of immigrant men who need a small space to live while they work to send money back home. Unfortunately this brings lots of prostitution and other services for these hard working migrants.

What brings "lots of prostitution"? And what "other services" are you talking about?

perhaps electricity or the demon satellite tv?

and as far as prostitution, go to any high end hotel  in midtown with an Amex Black card. you'll be awash in "services."

Offline lmaniace

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 465
IMHO, hotels are not really the best place for the homeless, so I can understand why some people here may not be thrilled with the possibility of this being a hotel. Assisted housing run by some nonprofit groups where homeless folks can live in a helping community that provides real services is what works. From my reporting experience, when these places are well run and not focused on profits, they don't negatively affect neighborhoods.

Jackson Heights Life