Bayside’s Community Board 11 rejected a developer’s request Monday night to build a parking lot on a pristine patch of land that runs along 77th Avenue after neighborhood residents banded together to stop the destruction of open space protected under decades-old zoning.
Oakland Gardens resident John Hatzopoulos spearheaded a grassroots effort since early February to save a piece of land that residents say gives the neighborhood its charm.
“We put a lot of hard work into spreading the news that they were trying to bring the trees down,” Hatzopoulos said. “But it was worth it. So many people came out to save the trees.”
The property owner, Windsor Oaks Tenants Corp., built a complex of co-ops in the 1950s along with a city agreement that they would leave a strip of land undeveloped. The land separates the co-ops from residential homes on 77th Avenue, where Hatzopoulos and his fellow troop of tree lovers live.
But the corporation tried to renegotiate its deal with the city in an attempt to turn the land into a community building and a parking lot, according to the request they submitted to Community Board 11.
18 comments:
Good for them but they need to stick together on this issue because those developers are very persistent and usually end up getting their ways eventually.
No worry. BSA will approve it anyway.
The rat bastards won't rest until they've got their filthy lucre.Find out where they live and shsme thrm in their own "community".
The rulings of a community board are pure window dressing. Their votes are advisory and carry no real weight. The BSA can easily override CB11's position. Make way for a parking lot.
Can a co-op board really proceed with a BSA request when so many of its shareholders come out to speak against the proposal?
So what was the quid pro quo in the 1950's that made Windsor Oaks Tenants Corp. agree back then not to build on the strip?
It's a short article. Asking that question sort of seems obvious to me.
I'm looking at a satellite map and there are lots of places in windsor oaks to put extra parking spaces..
Lots of wasted green lawn space in front of the buildings that people dont use, go pave it over 5-10 cars here and 5-10 car spaces there....problem solved..
Losing "wasted" green lawn space is solving a problem, Richard? I trust that this is an attempt at humor.
The article is misleading. It is actually a proposal to build a 5000 sf clubhouse in the green space. The 98 parking in garages and open space are actually for that building.
In order to build on the land which was zoned for one-family homes in 1950, part of the mandate by BSA was that:
...that the area shall be planted for a depth of 100 ft. from the southerly line with grass, trees and shrubs and existing trees shall be retained where possible; that a chain link fence along the lot lines of this portion of the premises shall be erected on a masonry base for a total height of not less than 5 ft.; that the planting in the area shall be suitable and shall be maintained at all times in good condition: that an additional 50 ft. similar planting shall be maintained except where residential buildings, garages and parking areas are shown; that there shall be no playground of picnic grounds and no benches or similar facilities within the strip 100 ft. in width adjoining the southerly lot line; that the driveway as shown from 217th Street, within the 100 ft. landscaped area, may however be constructed, provided this driveway is properly fenced and screened with planting so as to preclude the parking or storage of motor vehicles on any portion of the space at the south between the existing driveways, garages and buildings within 150 ft. from such southerly lot line;
No actually i am being serious if windor oaks thinks trees are useless and need to be cut for parking well why not start in their own front yard....look at that useless land on on 217 st between 73-75 ave its a long walk to those buildings you could easily create another 2 rows and fit 50-75 cars there
------Losing "wasted" green lawn space is solving a problem, Richard? I trust that this is an attempt at humor.
The "community building" will be rented out every weekend both day and night for bar mitzvahs, engagement parties, birthday parties, etc., etc.
The residents will then
be screwed because the guests will usurp the parking.
It's all about the cash.
The residents don't have a parking problem. If there was the roads there are wide enough for angled parking to add spots.
All underutilized space in this crooked borough is in danger of being developed. Queens weakness is that each little town stands apart from each other. There is no unity. Bayside doesn't talk to Long Island City . They think their shit is ice cream, for instance. And so on and so forth. See what I mean folks? Back in the day of our grand revolution in the 1700s, who was it that said, "We must hang together or we will all hang separately"! Isolationism has been the practice of many Queens neighborhoods in the past, and continues to be. What does not pertain to your yard will do so in the future.
Yeah, take that last note to heart, Broadway Flushing Homeowners Association. Isolationiism saved your buns in the past, but you had better stand with other civic groups on their issues. Your nabe does not lead a charmed life. What goes around may eventually get around to you.
This is just unbelievable, there is nothing sacred in this city. If that's the law then these developers should just accept it, but because in the past they have gotten their way, they are allowed to act this way and cry like babies if they don't get their way. Things need to change, Queens and NYC is way too soft.
Sorry New York but your politicians are corrupt to the core.. They all need ten years just like the great Pagan.
Good! If this were CB7 it would have gotten approved.
Post a Comment