Friday, September 28, 2007

More parkland for eastern Queens

Acquiring Udalls Cove "has been a top priority of funding for the Parks Department," Rosa said of the application, which called in part for "an amendment to the city map involving the establishment of a Park addition" and the elimination of 43rd Avenue between 246th and 247th streets. "You have the unqualified support of the borough president on this."

Save Udalls Cove: Civics

The men have pressed the city to acquire more of the 14-acre ravine in light of recent developers' interest in building single-family homes at the site. Joseph Atarian of the Queens Village-based Atarian Realty, who in February expressed a desire to build three two-family homes and one-family home, has opposed Parks' acquisitions, but has been outflanked by civic groups, Community Board 11 and state Sen. Frank Padavan (R-Bellerose).

Wow, the city, borough president, area civic associations, the community board and local politicians united against a developer, and it looks like they're going to get their way. This is how it should be. Contrast this with Maspeth, where you have one group fighting to save a neighborhood landmark vs. everyone else on the list who either want to see it destroyed or believe there should be "compromise". Maybe if Maspeth was a wealthier community, things would be different. And that is the sad reality of Queens.

38 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well Maspeth, you are miles ahead of Astoria and Long Island City which lies in the heart of darkness.

Just about everyone in a position to do something has a perfect excuse to turn their back.

For Shame! For Shame! For Shame!

Anonymous said...

There are very clear differences between the two situations. The majority of the buildings surrounding the Maspeth church property are industrial. It is questionable whether resources should be spent for a park in such a location. Most of Udall's Cove is already owned by the city, state or village. Acquiring the remaining property will not incur future costs to develop or maintain parkland, like maintaining the St. Saviour's property would.

Christina Wilkinson said...

"The majority of the buildings surrounding the Maspeth church property are industrial."

The church is surrounded on three sides by houses. The other side is the railroad yard. Anyone who ever bothered to visit the site would know that. So you are misinformed. And if you want to take a broader area, then the entire Maspeth area is underserved by parks, and is mostly residential. This has already been admitted by the Parks Department. On top of that, the Industrial Business Zone, created by the city last year to preserve industrial zoning, left most of the M1-1D district, which this is in, out of the equation, so the factories could eventually be turned into residences. So the city needs to plan now for the future and should create a park while there is still open land available. And the St. Saviour's buildings can be maintained in a public-private partnership just as many other parks are maintained. There are already people offering to donate their services free of charge to fix the buildings and others who would like to donate trees.

Anonymous said...

I have driven there plenty of times. I have friends who work nearby and I have eaten at the Clinton Diner many times. You shouldn't assume things. It is ridiculous to say that this location is not an industrial area. There are some houses interspersed there, but go three blocks in any direction and it is 75% industrial. Everything completely west of the site is industrial. Just about everything directly north of Maspeth and Maurice Avenues by this site is industrial. You can even look at any aerial satellite map from Google or Yahoo and see it.

Christina Wilkinson said...

There are about 30-40 factories in this vicinity and more than 200 houses. On top of that, if the park is open during daylight hours, it will benefit the workers in the factories who in the past have used the spot to relax as well as the people who live in the area. Also, the organizations involved with Newtown Creek are interested in making the spot a site on a bike path from Brooklyn to Queens, so people from other parts of the city will visit it. Start opening your mind to the possibilities.

Anonymous said...

I live in Maspeth by 61st Street and would visit this site every day if it were saved. It's within 10 minutes walking distance from my house, too.

Anonymous said...

By #2's logic, the city should not waste resources on industrial or "blighted" (in your mind?) areas. This reminds me of that right wing group who years ago proposed that NYC was a mess because there were too many poor negros here and the best solution would be to cut off services, water, electricity, and let those areas die.

So should we do that in maspeth? Close fire houses? Cut off the water and power? Maybe then all these horrible people that want to make their neighborhood better will leave for the morons to pave it over, right?

The simple fact is that area is the only one without a decent park in NYC, and it is just plain wrong to destroy a 150+ year old church just to make way for more ugly houses that no one wants.

taxpayer said...

What are the Commissar's spokesman's objection to industrial workers? They drink beer and eat hot dogs and hamburgers? No cocktail parties?

They are not worth spending any tax money on?

Then why doesn't the Commissar refund all the taxes collected from these workers and their employers?

eeeeeeeeeek!

Oh, NO!!! That money is for the Precious People who drink cocktails and are sensitive to the plight of the hard working ... . Oh, yeah. You know that's a lie.

Anonymous said...

Udalls Cove abuts Douglas Manor.....
home of those proverbial
all powerful "doctors, lawyers and Indian chiefs"....
lawyers (the Mattones), judges etc.

They already have everything
(i.e. a landmark district etc.) .....
but they still want MORE....MORE.....MORE....and MUCH MORE !

How about giving a little something
back to "the little guy" also ?

NO ?......Instead NYC government
(hello Mr. Doctoroff !) has chosen to RED-LINE
his area and deny him the same city services
that the more PRIVILEGED
eastern neighborhoods enjoy in spades !

By the city's refusal to save St. Saviour's.....
its officials.......
begining with Bloomberg, Doctoroff ,
Gallagher and the CAU....
have already told Maspeth
what they consider its residents to be......
working class GARBAGE !!!!!

Anonymous said...

if a residential area like Maspeth has factories in it that makes all the more reason why it should have parks, to offset the industrial encroachment. Humans are biological beings, if our politicians haven't noticed, that need green space, open areas, and trees for the good of their physical and mental well being.

Anonymous said...

Christina,

I wish you could understand that reasonable people, particularly our city officials, can differ on this issue and not because of any ulterior or dastardly motivations. The differing opinions on the issue of whether or not to spend taxpayer funds on a park in this location are both rational and defensible. City officials have a responsibility to balance priorities and spending for the entire city. They are not failing to do their jobs if they differ with you on the best way to prioritize city spending. Hasn't money been spent by this administration on the park by the LIE and 69th street, on the gas tank park, on street improvements along Grand Avenue, and on Maurice Park. My point is that the constant attacks and attitude in dealing with the city on this matter has hurt your cause more than helped it. You would have gotten better results with more civil, responsible and professional negotiating tactics.

Julie said...

So because money has been spent on Grand Avenue and Elmhurst got a new park, we are supposed to let St. Saviour's go? That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

Christina Wilkinson said...

"City officials have a responsibility to balance priorities and spending for the entire city."

Yes, and last time I checked, West Maspeth was part of the city and the residents of this community need a park.

Harry said...

"My point is that the constant attacks and attitude in dealing with the city on this matter has hurt your cause more than helped it."

According to you, it's stupid to spend taxpayer funds on a park in this area, and that is why the city has decided not to do it. If they have written off the idea then what difference does it make how they are treated at this point? When they don't listen to respectful pleas for help, which it seems the JPCA has been trying to do for more than a year, then I say it's time to kick a little ass.

Anonymous said...

What constant attacks? They held rallies 3 times to focus attention on this property. The 4th time, they denounced the cutting of the trees, which by the city's inaction, was allowed to happen. After repeatedly being ignored is the civic assn just supposed to grin and bear it?

Queens Crapper said...

"You would have gotten better results with more civil, responsible and professional negotiating tactics."

Really? What exactly should have been the approach used by this group and what would the city have done differently? Please respond quickly. I look forward to having my laugh of the day.

Anonymous said...

You would have gotten better results if you had outspent the developer's contributions to your elected officials.

Anonymous said...

C.W. is hard to figure. Thought she was on our side, now I'm not sure?

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...
Christina,

I wish you could understand that reasonable people, particularly our city officials..."


scratch that last remark of mine. When I saw C.W.'s name I thought the comment below it was hers. Pretty embarassing. Now to make a speedy exit.

Anonymous said...

Northeast Queens is forever crying
that it has no bread
(in this case it wants more parks)
yet it owns the bakery!

How about throwing a few crusts of bread,
alms or funding at Maspeth to create
a much needed park at the St. Saviour's site?

We're asking......begging.....
now is that "polite" enough for you?

Oh...hang it....these self serving political bastards
don't seem to give a flying f--k !

Anonymous said...

Did somebody just say "hang it"?

There goes that pesky "noose cartoon" again!

Anonymous said...

Right, and everyone reacting to the nooses in Jena and in the Suffolk County police station just don't get the humore . . .

Anonymous said...

Except that the nooses in those cases were racially motivated. That wasn't the case here.

jerry rotondi said...

Next time I might consider using a Guillotine
as an alternative image to the hangman's noose
in my next political cartoon.....
if that's OK with my "critics" ?

And.....NO .....
I'm not suggesting or inciting a revolution.....
French style or otherwise !

I'm not that talented.

Anonymous said...

a Guillotine?

Wait till Nazli here's of this!

Anonymous said...

Jerry, obviously assuming that you are not advocating murdering anyone, what exactly is your message when you draw cartoons of tools or weapons to kill people and you put their names on it? Are you trying to say that you are so angry at them that . . . what?

jerry rotondi said...

Like any good magician.....
an artist, author, sculptor, film maker, etc.
does not reveal the secrets of his tricks.....
or, likewise, the intent
and facilitation of the creative process.

As I have repeatedly stated
that's for ersatz "critics"....
who prefer to hide behind their comments
by signing their posts "anonymous".

Suffice it to say....
my humble drawing
appears to have been quite effective
in drawing attention to
the real issue of St. Saviour's....
particularly in assigning the blame
to those responsible for allowing
200 mature trees on that site
to be forever destroyed.

As for "anger".....
arboricide certainly doesn't make me happy.

But I've always been a gentle soul
and an advocate of keeping a cool head
and a steady hand.
Both greatly improve the quality of one's
pen and ink criticisms.

Perhaps I might be persuaded to draw
some birds, flowers and butterflies....
when the mayor finally decides to give Maspeth
their much needed park on this site.

That's all that I'll be saying on this subject......
except.....
SAVE ST. SAVIOUR'S and replant those trees !

A greener New York can begin right here.

Anonymous said...

So you want to send a message with your drawing, but you want the message to be a mysterious secret. While you are at it, you shifted the entire discussion away from the St. Saviour's cause and to discussions of how the offensive acts of you and the rally organizers have harmed the interaction with city officials.

Queens Crapper said...

The conversation wasn't on St. Saviour's to begin with. The organization was not being listened to, just ignored on the issue, with the same stupid form letters being sent from the same stupid agencies. CAU is a joke and their actions proved it.

Anonymous said...

It was "dear dumb" Natzli
(Bloomberg's very own CAU commissioner....
probably at the behest of piss ant Matt Gorton)......

that tried to SHIFT THE ISSUE from St. Saviour's
to a simple political cartoon
in a clumsy attempt to lay a smoke screen
and cover up some questionable
behind the scenes dealings.

They got caught with their pants down
(and skirts up) ignoring one of Maspeth's
most critical requests....
to save this important historic site as parkland.

Mr. Rotondi's cartoon
unmasked those villains responsible.....
and they're still and reeling from its effect.

"Good luck" in trying to slur his good name
and longstanding fine reputation
Mr. Gallagher & Co.......is it ? !!!

Anonymous said...

THERE WAS NO REAL INTERACTION
WITH CITY OFFICIALS AND THE COMMUNITY.......

MASPETH WAS MERELY BEING
"WALTZED AROUND" THE DANCE FLOOR
BY HIZZONER & ASS-OCIATES !!!

Anonymous said...

This is the new game.....
all you gals 'n guys in city government.....
so listen up carefully.

You haven't given Queens' residents
what they've been politely asking for
after many long years
of patient pleading and waiting.

So maybe you'd better
start getting used to more impolite demands
on our part.

Either way....polite or impolite
you're ignoring our borough.....
so either way we're screwed from the get go....
regardless of what tone we take with our abusers!

So what have we got to lose?

We voters are going to become
a bunch of squeaky wheels
and actually force you
to put in a full honest day's work for a change
in filling our requests!

You're here to serve us.
We're not here to be "serviced" by you !

taxpayer said...

Ah....take heart Jerry....
they're just f-----g jealous
that with some strokes of a pen....
you actually kept the St. Saviour's issue alive...
in fact....resurrected it....
after those city hall dudes methodically
tried their best to bury it and failed !

The whole dame thing backfired
in their arrogant faces.....
and they're still busy trying to wipe the shit
off their brows!

That's real democracy working for you.....
not an oligarchy of bloated buffoons
trying to crush the citizenry!

Bravo !

Anonymous said...

That cartoon's message was quite clear to me......
nothing "mysterious" or "secret" about it.
It named those responsible
for the behind the scene destruction of the trees!

And it was nicely executed......
oops, sorry....drawn.

Until that lone critic poster
reveals his name and professional credentials......
we'll just have to ignore the psycho-babble
regarding his pseudo analysis of
any lingering character traits of "anger".

I think the cartoonist is playing with you....dopey.

your lap dancing partner said...

Dennis.....
you've really got to lay off the bottle for a while....
if you intend on posting
some adult sober comments here !

Anonymous said...

the CAU should issue Jerry a personal apology.

Queens Crapper said...

Hey Jerry, great letter!

jerry rotondi said...

Thanks....Just doin' my job "Crapper."...
just like you are....and you're doin' great!