Thursday, August 28, 2008

Kew Gardens quaking over overdevelopment

From Urbanite:

Despite its historic significance, Kew Gardens lacks landmark protection -- an issue that frustrates local residents and preservationists. Residents have on eye on Richmond Hill, Kew Gardens' sister neighborhood, and fear that the insensitive development there might soon encroach upon their turf. Requests for rulings before the Landmark Preservation Commission have gone unheeded, but civic leaders aren't ready to give up.

12 comments:

Miles Mullin said...

Thats it, keep knocking your head against the wall.

The fact of the matter is as a taxpayer you deserve city services as a right.

If the community is for it, apply for it. If its denied, more to overturn the law. It will save you time and money.

Then make sure that a new law is written that works.

italian girl said...

What an elegant, beautiful tree-lined street!

Anonymous said...

Many local home owners oppose landmarking.

italian girl said...

Anonymous...
"Many local home owners oppose landmarking."

I think that's tragic. I wonder if the one's in opposition are thinking in terms of $$$ as far as what their property is worth to a developer. It's probably worth more if it's not landmarked.

Anonymous said...

wouldn't all these problems pretty much stop if they passed a law that showed that houses had to both be in scale and in-the same style, proportions etc, as more than 50% of the homes in the neighborhood? in other words no houses more appropriate for the Kyzyl Kum or Karakum desert

Of course this would also mean that the city government would have to recognize the boundaries of the distinct communities that make up queens county. that might be a big kettle of fish in and of itself.

Anonymous said...

I have communicated with some of those local homeowners, and the majority are pro-landmarking. It is the Landmarks Preservation Commission that's ridiculing Queens and manipulating the Landmarks Law.

Jason in Kew Gardens said...

"Many local home owners oppose landmarking."

Nonsense. If you've been to any neighborhood meetings, you will find nobody who is outright opposed to landmarking. There are only a few skeptics, most of whom have their concerns addressed and leave with a more comfortable stance on the issue.

Anonymous said...

Attempt to save your community before Saint John's University decides to built an unsightly dorm in the midst of your lovely residentail community.

Anonymous said...

Many local home owners oppose landmarking.

-------
After the newspapers and politicians get done with you, almost everyone will oppose it. Look at all the lies they spread through Sunnyside Gardens. The community is still divided.

Of course if the preseration community would get off their ass and start a public program, like the waterfront and bike lobbies, things would be different.

But they got what they want and they dont give two shits for the rest of us.

Overturn the landmarks law and send 'em a message!

Anonymous said...

Maybe Pratt and Hunter will do a study of this problem.

Maybe HDC will have a seminar on this.

Anonymous said...

This whole area will go the way of Flushing!

It's too close to the subway
and adjacent to Queens Blv'd. and its high rise development!

Never live in, as used to be said,
a one fare zone if you're seeking longer term stability in your real estate investment.

An exception being Manhattan.

Anonymous said...

I thought that "4 burros" group was
trying to save it.

Ha, ha, ha!
(Formerly Furman's Folly)!