Author Topic: The development threat facing Jackson Heights is greater than we thought  (Read 8904 times)

Offline petster

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 460
Creating new housing doesn't mean destroying everything in its path. It should be compatible in scale. There are plenty of one and two family homes between 69 street and Junction.....not just six story apartments. The neighborhood was designed that way. It creates an orchestration of low density and apartment buildings that would allow you to have  open air and green.  I'm not against new housing, I just think it can be done much more thoughtfully....and Jackson Heights was NEVER created for density as is most of Queens.  Quite the opposite. People  moved to Queens historically to get away from the city and it's crowds. Six story apartment buildings in JH are not the same as these high rise monstrosities  that are going up.  The JH transit hub provides easy access to the city ( if your into congestion and crowds) and an escape from the city.  If people are complaining about the MTA, it's because the infra structure was never designed to  be used by so many people.

Offline lmaniace

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 487
Creating new housing doesn't mean destroying everything in its path. It should be compatible in scale. There are plenty of one and two family homes between 69 street and Junction.....not just six story apartments. The neighborhood was designed that way. It creates an orchestration of low density and apartment buildings that would allow you to have  open air and green.

Well said Petster, but you have a stronger argument than you realize for protecting this mix of housing here. JH is already one the densest neighborhoods in NYC. It doesn't feel that way, however,  because of the skillful blend of private housing, apartment buildings and gardens. That's what makes JH special and is a big part of why JH is a historic district and deserves to have that status extended to the deserving areas beyond the current district.

It's hard to understand why some would want to destroy that makes our relatively affordable neighborhood (in an unaffordable city) so livable and environmentally sustainable. It's just so short-sighted.
I'm willing to bet if any respond, they will say that we need more housing in NYC, ignoring the fact that historic district status does not stop new housing from being built. Facts are just so darn inconvenient... and stupid, as one former president said.

All the best.
 

Offline JHMNY

  • Global Moderator
  • Council Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 394
The Jackson Heights Beautification group has a new promotional video on the subject of the historic district's expansion:

Jackson Heights Historic District Expansion Promo

Online lalochezia

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 634
JH is already one the densest neighborhoods in NYC.

You keep repeating this line as if it were gospel. What data source are you using to back up this assertion?


In the 2010 census, Jackson Heights was one of the middling neighborhoods in NYC, density-wise
. There are dozens denser in manhattan,  at least 5 denser in brooklyn (likely more) and  at least 3 denser in queens (again, likely more given the granularity of the data).

Here's my source. Where's yours?

https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/data-maps/nyc-population/census2010/m_pl_p2_nta.pdf

Online lalochezia

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 634
.

Offline lmaniace

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 487
Good point, lalo.
The area that I've been referring to (and tried to regularly cite this in my posts) is zip code 11372, the part of JH south of Northern Boulevard, which roughly corresponds to the area included on National Register of Places and the MacDougall development plan. Once you go north of Northern, the density drops dramatically. It's mostly two-story buildings, so that would pull down the overall densite.
I thought I had posted the source here. I will post as I have on other pages.
You are absolutely right to raise question. At the risk of being irreverent, even the gospel, isn't the gospel truth.

Online lalochezia

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 634
Fair enough!. It would be nice to compare densities with other zipcodes then....

Offline dssjh

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 4440
i already *feel* crowded a lot of the time.  on the streets, in the subway, at businesses. we could ramp it up more so that it's more like manhattan in that sense, but is that a plus?

Offline lmaniace

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 487

lalochezia

Here is the link: http://zipatlas.com/us/ny/zip-code-comparison/population-density.htm

I've been trying to confirm the data with the NYPL, but I haven't been abel to track down an expert on this area. I've spent sometime on the U.S. Census website as well without luck finding any comparison of zip code data.
I'm planning on calling the Bureau if a I get a break at work in the next few days.

Online lalochezia

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 634
Fascinating. If the data & calcs in that table are good, I eat my words and doff my hat.

7th most dense according to their calcs; even if they are off by 10%, it still puts us in the top 15.

Offline JK resident

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 488
As far as expanding the district to include 6 story buildings, I don’t see a problem. Some of the houses that your map wants to preserve seem in poor shape and lack any architectural detail. So what if our neighborhood is dense. Why should it not be more dense? Are you claiming that the sewer , electric grid, schools can’t handle any more buildings.

Offline lmaniace

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 487
And that is 7th densest in the nation!!!

Thanks LALO. I was a daily journalist for 34 years so I appreciate a little skepticism.

I hope you think this is a good project. Aside from the architectural merit, my thinking is: we are a dense neighborhood, but it doesn't feel it AND that's a tribute to the original plan for JH. Perhaps this is how we should create dense city neighborhoods -- with a little more park space, though!!!!

All the best.


Offline CaptainFlannel

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 893
Quote
So what if our neighborhood is dense. Why should it not be more dense?

Clearly this is a matter of opinion. Folks ITT have given their reasons for why they like the character of the neighborhood and want to preserve it and extend the historic district. People aren't under any obligation to explain the reasons for their opinion again and again in a fruitless attempt to justify their already explained opinion to those who disagree with them. That's just argument for argument's sake, and serves no real purpose.  Sometimes we just have to agree to disagree.

Offline Shelby2

  • Global Moderator
  • Mayor
  • *****
  • Posts: 4946
i already *feel* crowded a lot of the time.  on the streets, in the subway, at businesses. we could ramp it up more so that it's more like manhattan in that sense, but is that a plus?

I agree. I've taken to changing my walking route in order to avoid overly crowded sidewalks that are really unpleasant to navigate. My route changes only help a little bit. I was interested to read Jadasie's post from another thread, pasted below, that shows the increase in pedestrian traffic over the past ten years. It really is too crowded here!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's another data set (Excel file), this time from the DOT, measuring neighborhood foot traffic:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/misc/nycdot-bi-annual-pedestrian-index.xls

The latest count is from May 2016, which shows that the stretch of 82nd street from 37th Ave to Roosevelt has the following single-day pedestrian counts:

Weekday (7-9am): 2868 (counted on 5/11/16)
Weekday (4-7pm): 9190 (counted on 5/11/16)
Saturday (12-2pm): 5285 (counted on 6/4/16)

In May 2007 those numbers were:

Weekday (7-9am): 1739 (5/9/07)
Weekday (4-7pm): 4753 (5/9/07)
Saturday (12-2pm): 3114 (5/12/07)

That's roughly a two-fold increase in foot traffic in less than 10 years.

Offline JK resident

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 488
This whole argument of there being too many residents in Jackson Heights on sidewalks to walk is pretty silly. Just take another street if this bugs you. I don’t believe there has been a building boom in the area so the increase is not from new construction but from more people subdividing their apartment or houses. Jackson Heights has one of the highest rates of unrelated people living together. I believe the real reason there are so many people is that DOB does not enforce the laws and we are overrun with illegals conversions. This whole argument supports a modification of our zoning laws but not an expansion of the historic district.

Jackson Heights Life