Saturday, January 27, 2007

Laments in the Ledger

All of these articles appear in this week's Times Ledger:

Playground cut from Sunnyside plan

VA shows plan to redo hospital but no blueprint for vacant land

Hotel building stirs anger

Jamaica landlord listed among city's 12 worst

Bloomy's property tax plan draws criticism in boro

Photo of St. Albans VA from Dept. of Veterans Affairs


Anonymous said...

"Plan commissioners and some elected officials had spoken with Landmarks Preservation Commission to request the change [to exclude a children's playgound and greenspace], Landmarks spokeswoman Elisabeth de Bourbon said, but she did not identify them more specifically."

Oh, I am getting confused good lady. Who is paying the taxes for your salary? The commissioners and officials, or the public?

Now lets take this a little step further, whose interests do you serve?

Now lets take this a big step further. Mr. Newspaper, now that you have stepped into this issue (you silly boy), why don't you do a little editorial on the ethics of this?

Anonymous said...

Oh, once again, this name Conley keeps coming up. Who is this guy and why is his opinion so important?

The last time we saw his name, we challenged him to go into a landmark district (Manhattan? Brooklyn? There must be dozens of them – we can help him select one) to explain his curious behavior on landmark designation in his own district. We are sure that he has a lot to teach those fools across the river about community development and, of course, we would love to hear their reaction.

You would think he has interests in some fashion in real estate (and if so, should really recuse himself from these discussions, you know, we do not want this hard working public centered man have any hint of conflict of interest and the like.)

Its nice that he has stated that he has received expressions of interest from developers.

Perhaps some parents can show up with their children at the next meeting where this public 'servant' is in attendance and broaden his somewhat limited horizons.

Anonymous said...

What this guy did to that proposal to landmark the Gardens is inexcusable.

We do not think he was fair to us.

Anonymous said...

"How could this issue of redevelopment happen and we don't know anything about it?"

That is a good question. Let’s start to put pressure on city council to pass legislation giving the community 6 months notice before new construction which will give them a chance to think and discuss the fate of their homes (often their greatest investment) and the impact this will have on their family (schools, traffic, litter, et al).

The city should meet the needs not of politicians getting reelected, developers ensuring their investments go up, but THE PEOPLE OF THAT LIVE THERE ON THAT BLOCK.

Is it not part of the life of a modern day Queens resident, when they get the first hint that something is happening on their block, its a construction fence that magically appears overnight? When they ask questions, all they get is ‘as of right’ or ‘it’s a done deal.’

When they read the permit, and all it states is a fence is going up.

It never says a thing about the 10-story building behind it.

Anonymous said...

Does de Boubon (decendent perhaps of the old French Boubon kings?) Elisabeth give a fig for Queens' problems? The aristos have said, "Let them eat cake"!