Thursday, June 14, 2007

Willets Point will cost a bundle

The envisioned transformation of Willets Point from a scruffy haven for scrap yards and auto shops into a residential, retail and convention megadevelopment will cost "north of $3 billion," a city official said yesterday.

Willets Point rehab tab put at $3B-plus

Lieber added, "This is a big project, you know, you've got 60 acres of land to develop, with very large density of what we're going to do, but you know it's not unrealistic to think that this would be a project that is north of $3 billion ... in excess of $3 billion."...He ventured a "guesstimate" the public costs might be in the $100 million-to-$200 million range.

Yikes. And here we thought the city didn't have any money to spend.

What about the businesses there now?

"We will do everything we can do to accommodate the needs of these businesses," he testified..."But as the mayor said [at his announcement] on May 1, he's not going to let one person be the holdout for the good that's associated with so many other people."

55 comments:

Anonymous said...

WOW! What's Claire's and Evan's commission on this deal?

Anonymous said...

That's a lot of money to develop Wellington Point. Oh, I meant Willets Point. Or did I?

Anonymous said...

Claire, obviously, gets a "Platinum Parachute" for her years of "service" ! Crooks always take care of their own !

I'd like to see Evan join hands with Mc Laughlin and "Pinky" Gallagher and get at least 5 years in jail !

They might form a new "Prison Party" political club while they're all in stir together !

Can you just imagine ? !!!!!!

Alan said...

"We will do everything we can do to accommodate the needs of these businesses," he testified..."But as the mayor said [at his announcement] on May 1, he's not going to let one person be the holdout for the good that's associated with so many other people."

If one takes off the rose-colored glasses, he or she would realize the negative impact that the proposed mayoral project would have on tens of thousands of people, especially in neighboring communities that already endure an overwhelming amount of traffic and the pollution it generates.

Are there any environmental impact studies being done? Is there an effort to ask the residents and business owners in surrounding communities how they feel about this ambitious boondoggle? WE know who will really be the beneficiaries of this deal and it stinks like the Flushing River at low tide!

Taxpayer said...

..."But as the mayor said [at his announcement] on May 1, he's not going to let one person be the holdout for the good that's associated with so many other people."

Who in the hell does this impudent little turtle-face prick think he is?

He now determines what's good for all the "Little People"?

This arrogant elitist needs to be taught a lesson in democracy. He doesn't decide for us; we decide for ourselves. That's how it works, Mikey!

Businessmen in Willits Point: Show this briber-taker a thing or two.

Anonymous said...

All of you shortsighted complainers need to wake up. Why should the people of Queens and NY be denied a beautiful, thriving, economically beneficial development in a high-profile location so that we can keep a filthy, disgusting patch of land with undesirable junkyards? Genius . . .

Genius said...

Maybe because the property doesn't belong to us, it belongs to the people who own the junkyards...

Alan said...

"economically beneficial development"

Please explain. Economically beneficial for whom? The people of College Point have not received any advantage, economic or otherwise, for the development and operation of the corporate park. Instead, they are burdened with additional traffic, pollution, and noise. Therefore, I ask that you explain how this is beneficial outside of a small community of developers, most of whom are friends of one city official or another.

Alan said...

Oops. I forgot to mention the impact that these projects have on the health of the people who live in high pollution areas. Do you think the mayor and his administration cares? Who could forget what he said to me when I asked him about health issues concerning the people who live just to the east (and downwind) of the College Point Corporate Park.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkV6yBXHODg

Anonymous said...

The property may belong to the junkyard owners, but the government can always re-zone and make the property more desirable for development. The junkyard owners can negotiate deals to sell their property, the value of which will now increase tenfold. This is called making progress. What you see as traffic and noise, most people view as jobs, urban convenience and activity. If this is so undesirable, these businesses would go under. We live in New York City people! If we listen to all you complainers, Queens would turn into some backwater hole in the wall.

Jill said...

The government could do that and the owners could sell. If they choose not to, the govt has no right to take the property from them.

Taxpayer said...

"Genius" is some moron. The government has NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to seize property because it is unattractive to prissy sissies.

Is "Genius" a Soviet leftover?

First, let "Genius" have any and all his property seized cheerfully. Clothing, photos, jewelry, home, furnishings, appliances, TV, Stereo, camera and PC. You'll cheer on that seizure, Genius? Yeah, Right!!

Anonymous said...

"All of you shortsighted complainers need to wake up. Why should the people of Queens and NY be denied a beautiful, thriving, economically beneficial development in a high-profile location so that we can keep a filthy, disgusting patch of land with undesirable junkyards?"

Exactly. The current businesses of Willets Pt have made it so bad, it may never be developed for residential usage at all. Cockroaches don't like it when you spray them with raid either, it's still the right thing to do.

And as to whoever asked who Bloomberg thinks he is, he is the person elected Mayor of NYC, not to mention one of the most forward-thinking, successful businessmen in the world. Who are YOU, to criticize him?

Julie said...

The current businesses of Willets Pt have made it so bad, it may never be developed for residential usage at all.

I digress. It's bad because the city neglected the area for decades.

Who are YOU, to criticize him?

His boss. Or have you forgotten that this is a democratic form of government and not a monarchy?

Anonymous said...

"It's bad because the city neglected the area for decades."

Agreed, they neglected to prevent these business from polluting and running rampant. This new development is their correction. Let them, and be thankful.

"Or have you forgotten that this is a democratic form of government and not a monarchy?"

Democracy has given you a right to vote, and it has given Bloomberg a right to lead. Let him, and be thankful.

Taxpayer said...

Genius said:
"Cockroaches don't like it when you spray them with raid either, it's still the right thing to do.

And as to whoever asked who Bloomberg thinks he is, he is the person elected Mayor of NYC, not to mention one of the most forward-thinking, successful businessmen in the world. Who are YOU, to criticize him?"

There, in a nutshell is the essence of the Soviet Lapdancer's view of disagreement and protest.

If the current Commissar says "jump", the Lapdancer calls the ones who protest "cockroaches".

Then the Lapdancer tightens his/her sphincter muscles for the Commissar's pleasure and announces that the cockroaches have no right to criticize the current "forward-thinking, successful businessman in the WORLD!!!!"

When the Commissar leaves, the Lapdancer moves right along to dance for the next one, even though the next one has other "Forward-thinking" notions.

Lapdancers are always ready to please the current master. Rights-Schmites. Laws-Schmaws. Constitution-Constipuken.

Jail for the cockroaches!

Genius, what is it like to live in fear of the current Commissar? Always ready to please this one, hoping the next one won't punish you? What is it like to never have had a thought that originated in your own head? To always be defending morons who will kick you under the bus as soon as you've stopped serving your designated purpose?

Oh, yeah. As a citizen, voter and taxpayer, I can damn well criticize any municipal employee who claims that my money, my time, my property belongs to him and his cronies.

It is my obligation, my duty to be ever critical of these people. If they came to me for approval to be elected, then they will stand up and take all the criticism I dish out.

Jump off the Commissar's lap (do it without permission for a change), and do a few lookups: Look up the word "criticize"; look up and read (absorbing every word, every clause) the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Accomplish this before the Fourth of July, so when we celebrate our INDEPENDENCE from Monarchs, Commissars, dictators and the like, you'll have a little better understanding of how little you've made yourself for the likes of the current Commisar.

The term for the likes of you is "sad sack".

Now, go to your room and do your homework. Don't come back until you've completed my assignment for you.

Anonymous said...

It wasn't until those Taiwanese "developers" like Tommy Huang (or Wellington Chen for that matter) first turned their interest towards Flushing.......that anyone cared much about the condition of Willets Point.

Now that Chen's projects (Muss' & Wilpon's etc......not to leave anyone else out) are in progress....we have to suddenly clean up that area's act in a hurry!

Of course, Wellington Chen lives cleanly and comfortably in Little Neck (doesn't he?).....far, far away from all this "progress" that's slated for Willets Point !

What can you expect from this diminutive power seeker , who has quietly passed beneath the radar screen for years.....when compared to the more in-your-face infamous Tommy Huang !

Keep a watchful eye on this "Little Duke" (of Wellington).....I'm afraid he's "going places" !!!!!

Note the phrases he likes to use in interviews with the media (they're often peppered with military terms).
Perhaps (?) he's bent on conquest....or, at least, the building of a real estate empire for his boses ? He appears to be, after all, just a handmaiden and not destined to be an emperor in the NYC real estate/ building industry!

Anonymous said...

Taxpayer, either your anger has made you delusional, or your delusions have made you angry.

I am Queens. I've lived here my entire 35 years. I am very successful from starting my own business. I could move to Manhattan or Brooklyn, but I want to stay in North Queens. Soon, I will be buying a high-priced residence in North Queens. I want things in my borough to become less crappy. Citifield will do this, Willets Pt Development will do this, RKO Keith Development will do this. As a youth, I went to the movies there many times. Have you?

Thats what matters to me. Politicians understand this, and will do what is best for me, which is then best for them.

Taxpayer said...

Anonymous said...
"Taxpayer, either your anger has made you delusional, or your delusions have made you angry.

I am Queens. ... "

You are Queens? Why do you write such flatulence?

Apparently, you have no copy of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence or the dictionary. So, you came back without doing any of your homework.

Ask your Commissar master how to reply.

Alan said...

Boy. Some people just don't get it. There is development and there is overdevelopment. As I asked earlier, where are the environmental impact studies? Where is the call for community input? Why should we accept everything that we are told without questioning? Look at the mess in Flushing already. There is so much new housing but the infrastructure is not keeping up. School seats are becoming a precious commodity. Traffic is a nightmare as well. We have a right to question decisions that are being made by our elected officials, especially when these decisions affect our quality of life. The alternative is a dictatorship. Is that what you want?

Anonymous said...

Let's clarify some constitutional law concepts. The 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides for eminent domain. This allows the government to seize private property, while providing just compensation, for public use. For over 50 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this allows the government to take blighted property and transfer it to private developers to eliminate the blight and thus benefit the public. However, the complainers on this blog want to ignore the Constitution and keep the Willets Point blight rather than create a vibrant beautiful area. I have lived in Queens my entire life and I am thrilled that the area is finally getting world-class development. If you complainers don't want the business, stores and activity of a leading urban location, why are you living in New York City instead of some rural suburb? Genius.

Alan said...

You do not seem to be making your point very well! You write:
"This allows the government to seize private property, while providing just compensation, for public use."

The proposed project will be a benefit to private developers and not the public at large. The city created the blight and now wants to use the process of "eminent domain" to take property away from legitimate landowners who have paid into the system via their taxes even though they are not receiving the services that they are legally entitled to. Who made you King (or Queen)so that you can determine what is best for this part of Queens? Your absurd logic that the Constitution protects developers is totally unacceptable! You also write, "However, the complainers on this blog want to ignore the Constitution and keep the Willets Point blight rather than create a vibrant beautiful area." What you believe might be a vibrant beautiful area might be viewed as more congestion, overcrowding, and an affront to the quality of life of existing residential and business property owners.

This blog enables people to freely exchange thoughts, ideas and opinions. You offer nothing but single-minded and authoritarian views that do not seem to be very popular around here. Will you personally be impacted by this proposed development? Probably not. And I am living in Queens for 55 years and have seen the quality of life deteriorate as the years pass, not to mention the environmental-induced health problems that are not being addressed such as increased rates of asthma, blood cancers, and neurological problems. Enough said? When you start to care more about the people of Queens rather than the overdevelopment of the borough, then I will take you more seriously.

Taxpayer said...

To Genius:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

That's the Fifth Amendment in its entirety (see, I did part of your homework for you, recognizing your disability).

It's brief. Find the word "developer" in the text. Or, so you don't have to strain, just the string: "dev".

50 years of Supreme Court decisions?

Oh, oh! More homework for you. What was the first of those decisions? Which was most recent? How did the decisions say that my (or your) private property could be handed over to a private developer by the government.

Now, that was done in Germany and the Soviet Union by dictators. It's done today in Zimbabwe. Was all that "Fifth Amendment" seizing something you believe that the NYC Commissar needs to do so you don't have to look at junkyards?

Anonymous said...

I see that Taxpayer and Alan are incapable of engaging in an intelligent discussion, especially when their opinions are shown to be consistently foolish. I really do not care to repeat myself. The first Supreme Court case that expanded the use of eminent domain was Berman v. Parker (1954). The most recent was Kelo v. City of New London (2005). The Berman and Kelo rulings clearly cover the use of eminent domain to transfer property to "developers." You really should do your research to make sure your statements are based on sound logic and facts before you publicize them.
Alan, you are the epitome of "the pot calling the kettle black." I disagree with your inane opinions, so you call me authoritarian and imply that I shouldn't express my viewpoint on this blog since most of the complainers here have different opinions than I do.
As far as developing the Willets Point mess; please stop arguing that the government has no right to the land - that ship has sailed with the Supreme Court rulings I mentioned above. I feel confident that a large majority of Queens and other New York City residents are enthusiastically in favor of taking away the blighted Willets Point area and developing a good, clean shopping/residential/dining destination that will bring many more good jobs with it. The current businesses can relocate to areas more conducive to them. The Gaslamp Quarter in San Diego that developed around its baseball park, and the Baltimore region around Camden Yards are perfect examples of such urban development. This is the beauty of democracy - the people elected our wonderful Mayor Bloomberg, who never hid his desire to revitalize and develop rundown areas of New York City. If you don't like it, try to convince the majority of the people to vote for someone with a different platform. I seriously doubt you will be able. You complain about overcrowding, congestion and traffic, but this is part of living in one of the largest cities in the world. Most people who choose to live here enjoy the metropolitan life, the large number of people, the diversity and the multitude of retail, shopping, dining and entertainment options. You complainers who want to live in a quiet, serene isolated area should move to Rockland County. Genius.

Anonymous said...

Don't worry, Genius, most of us are in agreement with you, and not this person:

Who made you King (or Queen)so that you can determine what is best for this part of Queens?

Anyone who thinks acres of crumbling junk-yards, crappy bodyshops, and polluting factories is best for Queens automatically invalidates anything they say.

Taxpayer said...

Genius: You're so easy to dispose of. The Kelo decision never said that developers could take private property. It did say that if an area was designated as "blighted", it could be seized by the city to produce higher taxes.

Once again, where in the US CONSTITUTION's Fifth Amendment is Blight, taxes, or developers mentioned? The Supreme court has been wrong before; it is profoundly wrong in Kelo. Naturally, the decision pleases some, but pleasantry is not the criteria for constitutional.

And, who can precisely define "blight". This kind of imprecision is dangerous in a democracy. A bit of graffiti on a garage door could easily produce a declaration that the area is "blighted". Laughable? Then you define "blight".

Now, you complain that other posters on this Blog want you silenced. But, it was you, in your early post, who brooked no disagreement with the Commissar Bloomberg. Once again, in this latest rant, you want those who have unpleasant opinions to move elsewhere.

Hardly a democratic disposition. It is more Soviet, Gestapo, or today, Zimbabwean.

Do you actually know about property seizure in these three dictatorships?

Do you know that your beliefs are exactly what permitted these three examples to occur?

Do you know that no government is ever to be trusted with our lives, limbs, freedom or property. No politician is ever to be taken at his/her word. I'll bet you strenuously object to our presence in Iraq. So, you will object to whatever displeases you, and want that same government to roll over on those who have different opinions. Do you always trust all police activities? Have you ever (now, tell the truth here) fought a ticket or protested that it was even issued?

You cannot have it both ways.

Now, complete the original assignment. Read both the Declaration of Independence as well as the Constitution. The essence of this nation is that government power is divided and specifically limited.

Let the meaning of just these two document seep in. Contemplate their meaning, and, then, based on that reading, explain to me why you believe the Commissar can seize private property on behalf of someone else who probably (most likely) will make a payoff to the Most Successful Businessman in the United States (until either we change our opinion or someone better comes along). Is a payoff an utter impossibility? If you actually believe it is an impossibility, then you are dangerously naive.

We, the people, are the power.

Politicians disregard this at the peril of reelection. Look at the Fate of Bush' Amnesty Bill after the furor it caused.

Being a lapdancing toady is really a dead-end job.

Alan said...

"Anyone who thinks acres of crumbling junk-yards, crappy bodyshops, and polluting factories is best for Queens automatically invalidates anything they say."

It is really hard to argue with people who put words in your mouth. Please show me where I said that the area should not be cleaned up. I agree that leaving the property as is cannot be a solution but you have not addressed the points that I have made about how the process should move forward. I have continuously stated that there is more than one community that needs to be involved in the process. Why is the mayor's plan the best for that property?

"I see that Taxpayer and Alan are incapable of engaging in an intelligent discussion, especially when their opinions are shown to be consistently foolish. I really do not care to repeat myself."

I fail to see how insulting my intelligence is going to prove your point. You are the fool if you think that these projects are not going to take their toll on an infrastructure that cannot handle the current load. My point is that these projects need to be studied and planned out before being thrust upon us. Why are you avoiding a discussion of environmental impacts and health effects? Probably because you can't handle the truth. I care more about people than the almighty dollar. So sue me.

Anonymous said...

Wellington Chen lives cleanly and comfortably in Little Neck

And the junk-yard roaches live cleanly and comfortably in Long Island, far from the mess they made in my borough. Chen wins, hypocrite.

I fail to see how insulting my intelligence is going to prove your point. You are the fool

Just as hypocritical and laughable.

Anonymous said...

Oh my! The development of Wellington Point isn't going to be as easy as Evan and Claire thought.

Anonymous said...

CONTRACT Between The PARKSIDE GROUP AND FLUSHING, WILLETS POINT, CORONA, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

Who's funding the Flushing, Willets Point,Corona Development Corporation?

Does The Parkside Group charge the Corporation $5,000.00 for posting on this blog?

Anonymous said...

NYS Department of State Division of Corporations Entity Information

Anonymous said...

Interesting address for the "Corporation". Same address as Time Warner Cable, in the Flushing Center. Muss's building.

Anonymous said...

A "Domestic Not-For-Profit Corporation"? Yeah right!!!! Tax Exempt?

Alan said...

"I fail to see how insulting my intelligence is going to prove your point. You are the fool"

"Just as hypocritical and laughable."


Your points continue to make no sense and why do you overlook other potential uses such as schools, hospitals, and other far more useful entities? Why are you so fixated on the mayor's plan when no alternatives are being considered? Where do you live and what is your agenda? If you don't have anything else constructive to add, you throw around insults and I don't think anyone is going to take you seriously. You haven't even addressed my point about putting words in my mouth. Once again I ask you to point out where I said the area should be left as is! Don't you think that there are many others who might like a voice in the process? What might look good on paper today can have horrific ramifications in the future. Why jump the gun?

Anonymous said...

It would be interesting to see who Evan and Claire put on the Board of Directors of this BOGUS group.

Anonymous said...

Looks like Deputy Dapper Dan Doctoroff's office is the lead agency for Wellington Point. Let's hope he is just as successful in stealing these properties from innocent folks as he was with bringing the olympics to NYC.

Anonymous said...

Alan.... The Parkside people are just trying to make you lose your focus. Name calling is just one of their tactics.

Many of use share your concerns about this issue. Particularly we who are property owners in Queens.

Anonymous said...

Parkside gets $60,000.00 a year from this "new" corporation. Where is the money coming from?

Anonymous said...

Why are you so fixated on the mayor's plan when no alternatives are being considered?

I am overjoyed at the mayors plan because no other alternatives are being considered.

Enough talk, enough dreaming, enough sniveling hand-wringing, its time to step up and get it done and in over three decades, Bloomberg is the first to actually do so. That is why the residents of Queens, including me, praise him.

Anonymous said...

Bloomberg is clueless when it comes to Queens. On second thought, I take that back. He does know there are airports here. He has the inconvenience of keeping his private jets here.

This is NOT Bloomberg's plan. Plans to develop this area have been discussed since before the Giuliani administration. Actually, the area did come into discussion at the time of the USTA expansion. That was Dinkins pet project. Before that it was Koch and Donald Trump.

The lastest "plan" was Wellington Chen's. It was almost 8 years ago. He claimed he couldn't get investors to back his projects in downtown Flushing because of the eyesore on the other side of the Flushing River. He needed something to happen in Willets Point to protect his interests in Flushing. He got Shulman involved and then and the city agencies followed.

Bloomberg doesn't run this city. The left-over political hacks from previous administrations do. That's why Claire Shulman has been chosen to head up the development corporation. That and for the fact that she is an old woman. Its safe to hide behind her.

The only real plan here so far, is for the taking of private property. That's stealing AND THAT SUCKS!

Anonymous said...

The lastest "plan" was Wellington Chen's. It was almost 8 years ago. He claimed he couldn't get investors to back his projects in downtown Flushing because of the eyesore on the other side of the Flushing River. He needed something to happen in Willets Point to protect his interests in Flushing. He got Shulman involved and then and the city agencies followed.

In that case, THANK YOU WELLINGTON CHEN. What is good for his "projects" and "interests" is good for Flushing, and good for Queens.

Same with Trump in Manhattan, thats kinda how it works, kid.

Anonymous said...

It wasn't long ago that Community Board #7 had a strict policy against Eminent Domain, or was that the policy just for all non-Wellington projects?

Anonymous said...

Flushing "...was ripe for the taking....." !

A statement that has been attributed to Wellington Chen ??? Overheard at a meeting....perhaps ???

H-m-m-m-m !!! ???

Anonymous said...

My, my, my,.....it's nice to see so many "Constitutional" lawyers (???) or self appointed legal eagles on the job posting their "expert" opinions !

Let's cut to the chase....in simple language !

Nobody really likes that dirty junkyard eyesore but it's the filthy tactics that are being used in this world class land grab we object to!

Point made on Willets Point !!!

georgetheatheist said...

It is nice to regurgitate periodically - it cleanses the stomach. Let's all hold the commode now and see who signed the "Contract Between the Parkside Group and Flushing, Willets Point, Corona, Local Development Corporation":

Why it's our old buddies: 1) Democrat "Grandma" Claire Shulman (Factotum Extraordinaire of the late great Hara Kiri Master Donald Manes) and 2) Democrat William T. ("Twerp") Driscoll (Lackey and Water-Carrier for the late great Thomas "Queens Blvd. Miracle Mile" Manton)

Alan said...

"Why are you so fixated on the mayor's plan when no alternatives are being considered?"

"I am overjoyed at the mayors plan because no other alternatives are being considered."

You called me a hypocrite. You celebrate the fact that there is no choices being offered on how to clean up this property and yet you said that the people chose Bloomberg as mayor. In your words, "And as to whoever asked who Bloomberg thinks he is, he is the person elected Mayor of NYC". I am not happy with the choice of who is ruining oops I meant running the city but at least there was a choice. You bash me for criticizing the mayor but I think that we can still express our freedom of speech...until further notice. Who is the real hypocrite here?

What is your agenda? What are you going to get out of this project? One only needs to look at a map of Queens to see how building up this area will only create traffic nightmares in all directions, choking off many communities. For example, I live right off the northbound Whitestone Expressway. The traffic buildup exists in both directions and it seems that the current construction will not abate the increasing volume. With the NY Times printing plant expansion and the new police academy going into College Point, do you think that you can justify adding more cars to the equation?

The pollution from this traffic is taking its toll on the health of myself and many of my neighbors. Blood disorders, asthma, and neurological problems are prevalent. My own particular blood cancer, Polycythemia Vera, is clustered in the borough but my calls to Federal, State, and City officials and agencies have fallen on deaf ears. However, the same cancer has been identified as a cancer cluster in a western Pennsylvania town and the state's health department is conducting an investigation. It is thought that Benzene emissions may have something to do with the unusually high rate of the disease.

Also, our tax dollars are going to be spent and my fellow citizens and I damn well should have a say in how they are spent. Our illustious mayor also speaks with a forked tongue. In 2004 he told a Flushing audience that the city cannot afford a new Mets Stadium and a new Yankee Stadium and that our priorities are schools and libraries. In his own words:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJgmME5l_Os

Then he was re-elected and his buddies are replacing the stadiums. Where did the city money come from and why are schools and libraries still underfunded? What about public transportation? It is obvious what this city administration's priorites are and we are being handed crumbs while the fat cats are getting fatter! Get over yourself and open your eyes to the real issues regarding the Willets Point site.

Anonymous said...

What is your agenda? What are you going to get out of this project?

I am a Queens resident, all day everyday. I am going to get a less *crappy* borough, more development, more people, more places, more things.

You want to complain about traffic, learn to use a subway. You want to complain about pollution, move to Kansas.

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget our history fellas !

Donald Manes had eyed the Willets Point environs for development decades ago.

Remember the Grand Prix racing track he wanted to build around Willow Lake ?

Who really knows what he had in mind for the "Olympic Venue" which (no doubt) would have included the Willets Point area....I'm sure !

Don't worry....Manes' handmaiden Shulman will see to it that the Wellington Point job is completed for her late crooked boss (the "other Donald")....posthumously!!!

Alan said...

"You want to complain about traffic, learn to use a subway. You want to complain about pollution, move to Kansas."

You are a piece of work. It is hard to argue with the mentally challenged!

Alan said...

By the way, I assumed you could read:

Queens Crap
A website focused on the problem of overdevelopment in the borough of Queens in the City

Anonymous said...

Alan, I did not know about your illness. I truly hope for the best for you.

As for the development, I agree that traffic planning and environmental safety need to be included in any project. But part of living in a big city and having the benefit of all it has to offer is to live with the millions of people around you, including traffic. One of the desirable points of the Willets Point location is its close proximity to the highways, subway and LIRR. Increased traffic should never be a reason to stand in the way of building a better city, and this Willets Point development would be a wonderful creation on what is now a blighted area. And Mayor Bloomberg seems very focused on "green" development. He has done more for this city in that regard than any mayor previously.
Once the area thrives economically and develops residentially, the schools and hospitals will follow. It happened in San Diego and Baltimore and we should not stop it from happening here. Genius.

Alan said...

"But part of living in a big city and having the benefit of all it has to offer is to live with the millions of people around you, including traffic."

My feeling is that you can't put 10 lbs. of potatoes in a 5 lb. bag. When are the decison makers going to realize that bigger is not necessarily better? There is only so much space in Queens. What about an antiquated infrastructure that cannot keep up with what we have already? As far as traffic, it is one of the biggest problems in this borough and to add a huge project like this is madness.

"One of the desirable points of the Willets Point location is its close proximity to the highways, subway and LIRR. Increased traffic should never be a reason to stand in the way of building a better city, and this Willets Point development would be a wonderful creation on what is now a blighted area."

This is exactly why this is the wrong location. The Willets Point that the mayor and his cohorts envision will only serve to choke off a central hub and cause more traffic nightmares. Besides all of the additional fumes and pollution, the number of fender benders is going up. How are emergency vehicles going to wend their way through all of the traffic jams? One only needs to look at the community of College Point to see how poor planning is causing traffic woes night and day. And as I pointed out previously, the NY Times expansion and police academy are going to increase this problem. When you add the Willets Point project, the number of vehicles using the Whitestone Expressway will increase dramatically. And let us not forget that the city is also eyeing Flushing Airport as another potential property to be developed for the public good. Poppycock!

"Once the area thrives economically and develops residentially, the schools and hospitals will follow."

Do you really believe this? The shortages now are significant. How will property be found for these facilities? I just don't see it. There is a point when there is too much of a good thing. Clean up the property and let there be options. How can you compare Baltimore and San Diego with New York City?

As you can tell, I feel very strongly about adding to the problems of Queens without providing solutions. Your attitude of let's build it and then take care of the difficulties is unrealistic. It won't work and many long time residents who wish to remain, such as myself, are concerned about not being part of decision making processes. I cite the expansion of the New York Times printing plant as an example of this city administration's callous disregard for the community, agencies, and elected officials who represent it. The buck has to stop somewhere.

Anonymous said...

By the way, I assumed you could think:

Queens Crap
A website focused on the problem of overdevelopment in the borough of Queens in the City

"Over development" in this case meaning residential, specifically "McMansions".

The site has certainly focused on the UNDER development of the upkeep of parks, rightfully so.

And in the case of Willets Pt, it is, currently, the epicenter of all crap in Queens. Any development is an improvement, and certainly won't be "over" development. Same with the Flushing River, for decades it has exuded a vile stench. Recent costly "developments" have begin to filter it, clean it.

Against development? Throw your computer away. And move to Kansas.

Tony said...

Just to prove how stupid he/she is, the last poster ended his comments by saying that if you don't like development, then "move to Kansas." The midwest is one of the most rapidly developing areas of the country.

This site is mostly not about "McMansions," but rather multiunit pieces of crap that replaced low-scale homes. So please get yourself some reading comprehension classes.

Queens Crapper said...

And with that, this thread is closed.