Monday, September 22, 2014

Major crappification comes to Elmhurst green space

This spot on 57th Avenue in Elmhurst, just east of 80th Street, was a green oasis for decades. It was a mapped street for a very long time, owned by the city. I personally used to play in that lot when I was a kid, even though it probably wasn't a good idea. But it was open space, and friends and I loved running around in it. Unfortunately, the city demapped the property and sold it.
And this is what is there now. The entire property has been denuded of trees and is in the process of crappification.
I expected 2 or 3 family homes, but it's worse than that. There will be seven 4-family houses here (which means there will likely be 5 or 6 families in each).
The green space was owned by the city, and it wouldn't have killed them to allow neighborhood kids to turn it into a community garden. But as someone here points out regularly, we're in Queens, we can't have nice things.

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yet I'm sure those hundreds of thousands of people who marched yesterday against climate change would applaud this loss of green habitat because it provides housing to the non-rich.

Anonymous said...

If I recall correctly, this is the site where some of the Manhattan Project ran tests and stored atomic bomb parts back in the '30s and 40s. So I hope the city gave this area a clean bill of health before allowing dozens of families to live here.

Anonymous said...

This is what happens when you do not have a civic culture, fill your communities with clueless immigrants and or emigrants, hollow out every institution that disagrees with you with funding games, and have show elections that install third rate hacks to manage the community ... for developers.

Queens is hopeless and it should be taken over by City Hall as a dependency of Manhattan. As the British brought India out of medieval times so Manhattan rajs can bring Queens out of the Dark Ages.

Anonymous said...

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/JobsQueryByNumberServlet?requestid=2&passjobnumber=420467710&passdocnumber=01

81-17 57 Avenue

Anonymous said...

If I recall correctly, this is the site where some of the Manhattan Project ran tests and stored atomic bomb parts back in the '30s and 40s. So I hope the city gave this area a clean bill of health before allowing dozens of families to live here.

Everyone knows the Queens waterfront is one of the most toxic brownfields in the nation, as well as fronting an open sewer but they get angry (tho they really don't know why) every time it gets mentioned.

Anonymous said...

First the land near the mall is turned into two chain restaurants. Then Pan Am is turned into homeless shelter. Crime is up. Now a great pece of nature is destroyed and sold off to 4-5 family homes. Something doesnt sound right. Elmhurst looks and is being used a dumoing ground to make money and in a negative way for the community and residents. When is anyone doing to call out Daniel Dromm the councilman who is in his second term for being a liar, useless and shady politician. I mean he really does nothing good for Elmhurst, I wouldnt be surprised if money is coming his way to allow all this crap happening in Elmhurst. We need to speak up and demand better for Elmhurst.

Anonymous said...


This city is going to the shits.
Less and less green areas in an already overcrowded place. Those trees are irreplaceable already.

Greedy bastards those developers.

Anonymous said...

Anon crimes is down around pan am, not up.

Anon environmentalists might prefer that people live on this lot than in a suburb 30 miles out, but they'd rather you keep the green space and upzone further in areas. No reason the village can't have taller buildings for instance. There they wouldn't buy as many cars.

Anonymous said...

That spray on eurofucco will be peeling off after one NY winter and never repaired properly.
All this cookie cutter computer designed eastern block Ukraine-Chinese ghetto barracks is hideous and should be banned. To add, with no subway in miles where are the parking spaces for all those people ?
A motel design apt building would have looked better.
See:
http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/a9/59/61/hotel.jpg

Anonymous said...

"hope the city gave this area a clean bill of health"

What will end up living in that place simple wont care or will will have 3rd world sickness far worse then radiation and poisonous isotope concerns.

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry but if you people believe that crime is down in Elmhurst because police stats said so, then there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'll sell you.

And there is a very good reason why the Village can't have tall buildings. it has to do with the bedrock being submerged very deeply in that area of Manhattan, similar to above 125th Street.

Anonymous said...

Take a look at pollution levels in NYC and then out on LI and tell me that it doesn't make sense to live out there. They have things like trees, grass, nature where we destroy every trace of it and pave it over. Buildings cause 75% of the pollution in NYC yet environmentalists want more of them.

Anonymous said...

Make way for yet more third worlders.

Queens Crapper said...

I like how they try to fool you into thinking that their staircases will be green space.

Anonymous said...

No they don't have tall buildings in the village because of zoning. Construction would be more expensive there, but given the massively elevated price of housing in the area it would be profitable to put up significantly taller buildings.

Anonymous said...

The zoning fits the construction capability. You can't build on bedrock that's not there.

Anonymous said...

Queens is shit and only getting worse, just plan to move out of it, that's it folks! And what up with the Ahole with his/her comment of British india?? Where did get your history lessons from???

Anonymous said...

I'm selling the house even if I have to take a huge loss, F_this. NYC will be a bankrupt east LA slum in under 5 years !!

The mayors of NYC, Shitcago, and LA are gonna let these illegals vote in local elections promising them all sorts of free stuff, special privileges and protections with my tax dollars.
These shit liberal progressive mayors are repeating the same "COME AN GET IT" from the 1960s Lindsay/Johnson era!
Read:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/mayors-push-for-immigrants-to-become-citizens-1410919766

Anonymous said...

The bedrock is there. Just deeper. And that's not why there is a skyscraper gap.

http://observer.com/2012/01/uncanny-valley-the-real-reason-there-are-no-skyscrapers-in-the-middle-of-manhattan/

"What the economists found was that some of the tallest buildings of their day were built around City Hall, where the bedrock reaches its deepest point in the city, about 45 meters down, between there and Canal Street, at which point the bedrock begins to rise again toward the middle of the island. Indeed, Joseph Pullitzer built his record-setting New York World Building, a 349-foot colossus, at 99 Park Row, near the nadir, as did Frank Woolworth a decade later.

By studying historical construction data, the researchers were also able to determine that at the extreme, the most a deep bedrock could add to the costs of a building is about 7 percent, and therefore negligible when it comes to the economics of construction. “Compared to the cost of land in Manhattan, that amount is miniscule,” Mr. Barr said."

Queens Crapper said...

R6 zoning, which is what most of the Village is, allows for 13-14 story buildings. The reason there are none is because of landmarking. Because people in that area determined that neighborhood character was a priority for them and fought for it. Take a lesson from them.

Anonymous said...

Or realize that limiting the heights of buildings there is pushing people into queens where many of them buy cars and clog the roads. There are nice neighborhoods with good character that have taller buildings than the village.

Anonymous said...

gotta cram in the illegals in somewhere, right?

Anonymous said...

And there is a very good reason why the Village can't have tall buildings. it has to do with the bedrock being submerged very deeply in that area of Manhattan, similar to above 125th Street.

---------------

That's a myth.

Ever see Chicago? That entire city is marsh landfill.

Anonymous said...

"Or realize that limiting the heights of buildings there is pushing people into queens where many of them buy cars and clog the roads. There are nice neighborhoods with good character that have taller buildings than the village."

HA HA HA people from the Village are moving to Elmhurst and buying cars? Yeah, okay.

Richard Burns said...

The address on this site was 80-41 57th Avenue. Before the LIE was built there was a goat farm across the street.
The property was very interesting.
The house had two parts one was originally a two room farm house, the other a box like extension added in the '20's. A total of 5 rooms! There was also a rumpled three car garage. There was a vegetable garden to the left and a flower garden to the right. In the '50's the strip at the curb was a spectacular display of flowers.
Many trees were in the front yard obscuring the house from the street. Multiple hammocks were strung among the trees. Hurricanes in 1954 and 1960 knocked them down.
My aunt and uncle lived there. It was my favorite place to visit as a child and young adult. My extended family would gather there for Thanksgiving.

Richard Burns said...

Sorry anonymous, the Manhattan Project didn't run tests here in the '30s and '40s. It was the home of my Aunt & Uncle (and cousins who are still alive). It was my favorite place to visit through out my childhood.
Some of the property was taken by eminent domain when the LIE was built.
I've tons of memories of 80-41 57th Avenue! I've watched the changes here over the decades.

Anonymous said...

No anon they are moving to Astoria, Long island city, Williamsburg, and other parts of Brooklyn and queens where luxury housing is showing up. They use cars more there than they would in Manhattan. Some residents of those neighborhoods then get priced out to Elmhurst and the like where again, they use more cars.

Queens Crapper said...

This would make sense except for the facts that Astoria is denser and is packed with cars.

Anonymous said...

Astoria is denser than what?

Yes Astoria is packed with cars, some of those would be in Manhattan instead if adding housing there was legal, but the ubiquitous nature of cabs would let more people get around without bothering to buy one, so there would be fewer cars.

Queens Crapper said...

Astoria is denser than Elmhurst.

Anonymous said...

So? Rents are rising in neighborhoods like Astoria. Some people living there would be in Manhattan if they could afford it. If places like the village weren't landmarked and zoning allowed higher densities they would be able to afford Manhattan. Those higher rents mean some people get priced out of Astoria and the like. They might have been able to afford to stay, or to move to Astoria in the first place if they weren't being out bid by the residents of all the luxury buildings. So delandmark and upzone places like the village and those people don't get priced out. Controlling for income I'm pretty sure Elmhurst has a higher car ownership rate than the waterfront neighborhoods with generally better transit. Some people who get priced out of Astoria who could be using the subway now drive around in Elmhurst.

Queens Crapper said...

Elmhurst has 5 subway lines. Astoria has 4, soon to be 3, once the Q gets re routed up 2nd Ave.

What better transit does Astoria have?

Anonymous said...

BMT Broadway is underused. That's why they built the 63rd street line in the first place. 60th street has two tracks, broadway has four.

Plenty of room for the W or whatever letter to Astoria, or to increase frequency on the N. No reason for Queens to have fewer trains after phase one of SAS opens. You hear nothing about the W because the MTA, like all other government and pseudo government agencies in NYC, is incredibly opaque. Every now and again a pol realizes their documents say the 'Q' to 2nd and freaks out so there's a story about Astoria losing subway service. Those pols have no interest in reforming the MTA, their only end game is to get their name in the paper, feigning interest in transit service gets them that.

What are the boundaries of the two neighborhoods, so that we can talk about the same places?

Do you think Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Avenue is in Elmhurst? Should they change the name of the stop?

The number of subway lines might not be the best way to think about it. Distance to stops, how walkable the streets are, frequency of service, and trip length are all important.

Queens Crapper said...

Yes and I dare say that there are parts of Astoria that are much further from a subway than any part of Elmhurst is.

74th St-Roosevelt is where Woodside, Elmhurst and Jackson Heights all meet.

Anonymous said...

Should find out which politicians voted to take park land away from us - so much for Queens being a place of culture.

Name names!

Anonymous said...

This development site is on an unbuilt extension of 82nd Street. Why wasn't that street connected to 57th Avenue? What stood in the way?

Anonymous said...

I was wondering what was taking so long in developing this lot but this is bigger than I expected.In my 65 years I can only remember a house with a big yard and a garage.As kids we cut through the yard as a shortcut to PS102 and when we played.
About thirty years ago my friend family rented the house. We called it the "Crooked House" because the floors were uneven and the doorways were so low and there was steps to go through the rooms. It was a nice old house that needed work.
My friends had to leave when the house was sold.Shortly after there was a fire from vandals and the house was taken down.Yes this is a sad development.

Queens Crapper said...

The dead end on 82nd Street is at the top of a steep hill, and only a step street would have been feasible.

Queens Crapper said...

This is from the dead end.

Judy Goldberg said...

I grew up in Elmhurst (now Middle Village) on the other side of the LIE and always wondered about this property.

Thanks for sharing Rich B.

More kids in local schools which are already overcrowded is my concern.

I hear the Pan Am shelter kids are already causing problems in Maspeth schools. Meaning, behavior, lack of manners, way below grade level, etc.