Saturday, July 7, 2007

St. Albans-Hollis rezoning

During the highly emotional debate over the rezoning, residents at the June 20 meeting shouted at Councilman Leroy Comrie (D-St. Albans) and officials from the Department of City Planning expressed anger over a variety of issues - including illegal building and a spike in foreclosures - they said were plaguing southeast Queens.

Comrie and Spigner at odds over zoning

As in other neighborhoods across Queens, one-family homes in St. Albans and Hollis are constantly replaced by three or four housing units because of out-dated zoning rules.

Most of the area included in the rezoning will be downzoned, but commercial corridors along portions of Hollis Avenue and Farmers, Merrick and Linden Boulevards will be upzoned to allow for greater residential density.

Then they went to the borough president:

Hollis residents slam rezone

Residents of St. Albans and Hollis told aides to Queens Borough President Helen Marshall last Thursday they are concerned that a city proposal to allow seven-story buildings to be built along Linden Boulevard will put added stress on the area's already overburdened schools and transportation infrastructure.

"We see a lot of people and a lot of cars," said Cardinal Sandiford, chairman of Community Board 12's Land Use Committee. "We don't think we can possibly tolerate 70-foot buildings on our main corridors."

Meanwhile, Laurelton still awaits their rezoning:

Young brought a letter from Amanda Burden, the city planning commissioner, to Councilman James Sanders (D-Laurelton) that stated the city's intention to finish a review of the area's zoning by the end of 2007.

But residents were not mollified.

"By that time we could have the Empire State Building out here," said Vernell Bennett, the president of the 224/225 Block Association.

Spigner, Comrie spar over zoning

Laurelton Residents Confront City Planning On Zoning Delay


In other area land use news, CB12 voted in favor of a variance in order that Thomasina's may expand.

Photo from


Taxpayer said...

"Most of the area included in the rezoning will be downzoned, but commercial corridors along portions of Hollis Avenue and Farmers, Merrick and Linden Boulevards will be upzoned to allow for greater residential density."

"Greater residential density". Now, how's that for bureaucratic claptrap? Let's call it what it is: Jamming as many people as possible into the smallest space. A developer's dream. A community's nightmare.

Developers love to build cheap, soviet style repulsive "affordable housing" (whatever that is); the officials - elected and appointed - have orgasmic dreams of the kickbacks to be collected.

They all walk away. Then, the community is left to clean up. Schools, police, fire, sanitation, parking all suffer. Overcrowded communities then suffer the pathologies of the loss of peace and quiet. Drugs, prostitution, high crime, street drunks are the norm. Taxes rise to fix things. No fix works.

So, why, when a community says "no" do the officials persist? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$!!!

Anonymous said...

Wow, someone made a mistake in appointing that community board. They may have to be sent over to CB1 for a refresher course on what they are supposed to do and whose interests they are supposed to serve.

Anonymous said...

It is a shame that the sorry lot that passes for weekly newspapers in Queens are further divided into sections so that the folks in western Queens have no idea what is going on in places like St Albans.

Of course the clubhouse and their handmaidens in city government knows, right boys?

he he he he

Anonymous said...

Funny how they give you downzoning then take it away by sneaking in upzoning somewhere else.

Then they grant spot variances in the downzoned area, or better yet, just ignore the overbuilt parts (complaints just don't register until the building is up then its a fait accompli right?)

The downzone accomplishs a feel good feeling to the public, but the developers and their political stooges get what they want anyhow.

Isn't politics the art of the possible?

Anonymous said... it's to be a variation on Biblical scripture:

"The (L--d) giveth (down zoning in one area) and the (L--d) taketh away (by proposing up-zoning in another area) " !

Naughty....naughty.....naughty !

Lying is a mortal sin !