Tuesday, December 15, 2015

City Council desperate to have mall built on parkland

From Capital New York:

The New York City Council, which often sides with Mayor Bill de Blasio, is breaking ranks over a planned development at Willets Point in Queens.

The Council plans to vote on Wednesday on a resolution that would authorize it to file an amicus brief defending the plans, which were initially approved by the Council, as land-use applications must be.

The amicus brief itself has yet to be written, and the resolution gives the Council six months to file it in court, but the legislative body will side with the developer in arguing that a mall should be built on existing parkland outside Citi Field.

The Queens Development Group, a partnership of the Related Companies and Sterling Equities, is appealing a decision from earlier this year that would have banned the construction of the mall. The state Court of Appeals last month decided to consider the developer's case.


The Council seems to have no problem disregarding clear public sentiment since 2012, exemplified by Queens Civic Congress being a plaintiff in litigation opposing the Willets West mega-mall on parkland. The Council may be soliciting this vote of its members based on a misrepresentation, as council never considered or voted to approve the mega-mall. (All the council did approve was a special permit to temporarily use Willets Point as a parking lot.) Council must solicit this vote based upon the facts, not upon Queens Development Group's inaccurate revisionist history.

I guess we should be checking campaign contributions in a few months?

30 comments:

Anonymous said...

No mall on parkland! That's insane. You can always revert a parking lot to parkland but once that mall gets built you can't go back. These council people better hear what their constituents have to say.

(sarc) said...

They are hearing kaching, kaching in campaign cash!!!

Anonymous said...

QUEENS DOES NOT NEED ANOTHER MALL! Traffic. Pollution. Crime. Will BP Katz fight this as fervently as she is the planned weeklong concert that wants to takeover FMCP??? Any bets?

Anonymous said...

I predicted that the Wilpon's and their toadies would not give up. They will have their way and the people of Queens be damned. The idiots in the Council will do the bidding and some judge will rule that the parkland is not really parkland.

Anonymous said...

When is a park not a park?

When it's Flushing Meadows Corona Park.

Anonymous said...

The last thing the area needs is a mall.
Have they no shame?

Skeets37 said...

Boggles the mind with all the existing areas that could use improvement they like to choose park land. Doesn't make any sense for the community and is such a wrong idea to eat away at Park alnd

Alfredo Centola said...

Amicus

Latin for???

Whose exactly?

Not the people that vote thats for sure.

Anonymous said...

And where are all these cars to enter, park, exit and navagate ?
A daytime Met game alone is a traffic disaster. This is like placing 10 pounds of shit in a 1 pound bag. We also need our junkyards and auto repeir shops, not everybody can afford a brand new leased car, afford $200hr dealor repair prices and dealor list price on parts. This is what WILL happen if you put all those repair shops out of buisness and STEAL that land.

Anonymous said...

How many times can you say no to these assholes, and they still keep trying the same crap?

Anonymous said...

The Van Wyck Expressway is a 24/7 parking lot as it is!

Anonymous said...

Just to add, the area is super congested already. The new apartment buildings in Flushing plus the shopping center makes driving in the area a nightmare.
Anybody tried to reach to BJ's or Target by car? Good luck!
From Northern Blvd no left turn onto Main Street, only buses.
Left allowed onto Prince Street. Need to say more?
Who are the planners who come up with this shit?

In order for the new Mall to happen, traffic studies, environmental studies and impact needs to be performed.
Or just envelopes under the table?

Anonymous said...

>How many times can you say no to these assholes, and they still keep trying the same crap?

THIS

>Anybody tried to reach to BJ's or Target by car? Good luck!

Take College Point Blvd. They finally repaired that street after decades of us begging the city.

Anonymous said...

Take College Point Blvd. They finally repaired that street after decades of us begging the city.


Hahahaha good one!
Try it.
See how long it takes you to reach Roosevelt Avenue and make a right then a left to the stores.

Or for that matter try the Target on 20th Avenue. On a Saturday.

Anonymous said...

So let's all call Councilman Vallone and tell him!!!!718-428-7285

Anonymous said...

No, silly. You just make a left on the block before Roosevelt Ave and that takes you to the bottom level of the parking lot.

It's still slow because traffic in Flushing sucks, but it's still must faster then taking Main St (especially now that it's down to one lane of traffic!) or braving Roosevelt Ave.

Anonymous said...

No, silly. You just make a left on the block before Roosevelt Ave and that takes you to the bottom level of the parking lot.

Depends where you coming from correct? From the opposite direction is not an option.
As I said before urban planning is non existent.
More condos, malls, apartment buildings will make the already messy situation a true nightmare.

(sarc) said...

Remember the SCOTUS case Kelo v. City of New London

The decision said the government can take private land and give it to a private developer to develop for public use, including shopping and entertainment.

This is because the public will benefit from the tax revenue generated.

44 state legislatures reaffirmed the Fifth Amendment in response to the Kelo decision and many said the takings clause is only for schools, trains parks as per the original intent of the Constitution's Bill of Rights.

You guessed it New York was NOT one of those states.
But we are in good company with Massachusetts, Rhode Islad, New Jersey, Arkansas, Mississippi...

Molan Labe said...

December 15th is Bill of Rights Day. (The Bill of Rights became law on this day in 1791, following ratification by the state of Virginia.) I encourage everyone to read the Bill of Rights

The U.S. Bill of Rights

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V
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 offence 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.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Anonymous said...

Whenever there is a game or event at Citifield, the traffic is terribly backed up around the entire area, including inside the park. How in the world can one add a Shopping Mall to that?! How are the tennis center, the aquatic/ice skating center, the Queens Museum, and the Theater in the Park going to be affected by adding a mall to that area, with thousands of additional vehicles? Does quality of life matter at all? Or is it profit for real estate developers the main thing to be ensured by our elected officials?

Anonymous said...

It is not just the proposed mega-mall and Willets Point development that will clog infrastructure. It is also the "Flushing West" development being pushed by Claire Schulman's local development corporation with $784,000 paid to City Planning for the environmental impact statement now being prepared. The public is largely in the dark about that plan, which envisions huge development all along the Flushing waterfront, between Roosevelt Avenue (where Skyview Parc is now) all the way down to Northern Boulevard. The cumulative impacts of all of that are not being studied.

Anonymous said...

Remember the SCOTUS case Kelo v. City of New London

The decision said the government can take private land and give it to a private developer to develop for public use, including shopping and entertainment.

This is because the public will benefit from the tax revenue generated.

44 state legislatures reaffirmed the Fifth Amendment in response to the Kelo decision and many said the takings clause is only for schools, trains parks as per the original intent of the Constitution's Bill of Rights.

You guessed it New York was NOT one of those states.
But we are in good company with Massachusetts, Rhode Islad, New Jersey, Arkansas, Mississippi...


This is true.

However, this only pertains to PRIVATE property.

The parkland is PUBLIC property. And, under State Law, public parkland must be decommissioned by the State Legislature.

What Bloomberg tried to do was take that acreage without having the public parkland decommissioned. This is because when this happens, the State makes the municipality (such as NYC) replace the parkland with an equal or greater amount within close proximity to the parkland being taken.

Paul Graziano

Anonymous said...

And who will get the rights to run the mall? ...someone politically connected who has their hand in every Queens politician's pocket, naturally.

Anonymous said...

WTF do we need another mall? There's already one 5 blocks away where Target and BJs are! I thought malls across America are becoming dinosaurs too.

Anonymous said...

For Dumblasio, kissing up to his real estate masters is the only game in town, unless it's kissing up to his ghetto thug idols. The heck with law-abiding decent hardworking taxpayers. Oh yeah, and the illegal invaders, another favorite of his. What do they contribute, except for more overcrowding, crime, and DISEASES?

Anonymous said...

Katz says Queens is the world 's borough.

The whole world is coming here to shop...

JQ LLC said...

Einstein's second most regarded theory applies here. With the sold out City Council and The Wilpon's (what, the recent success and potential of the Mets and their killer starting rotation won't make them enough money) expecting a different result.

If these collective of greedy and delusional worms is successful, expect the privatization of all our city parks. If it wasn't already going on with the high end events and concerts in central park.

(sarc) said...

Where will people park when they attend events at Citifield?

Don't worry, There will be bicycle racks...

Anonymous said...

@JQ LLC

Everything is being privatized. Or shall I just use the right word - STOLEN.
People not familiar with the gig, communism was about taking private property, corporatism is about privatizing public property.
Regardless what "ism" is being used, theft is theft.
They can buy politicians, vote and enact fraudulent laws, the fact remains the same.

On the other hand with the economy doing so great (100 million unemployed) we most certainly need more malls.
Heck in the old days I never seen For Rent signs in Flooshing.
Now I do.

Well even the Orientals figured it out is better to run churches, etc under the table businesses than to open stores.

So vote the bums out, vote with your valet, vote with your business.
The only way in my opinion to change things around.
And expose them on forums like this.

kapimap said...

Someone should sue on behalf of the people of nyc..

Take a drive thru the flushing meadows corona park, by the tennis stadium, what an insult to the residents of queens to feel like you are behind a frigging carnival booth, and witness the monstrosity that is the new tennis stadium. Its like a drive in the boonies, with such a industrial feel. All that parkland given away for those 2 friggin weeks in august. Its so in your face and no one cares. The corona side of the park is now nearly 1/3 usta tennis b.s.
When will people wake up!