Pro-overdevelopment CB7 cancels member appointed by Donovan Richards

 

Queens Eagle

A Queens community board moved forward with efforts to remove one of its members from its ranks Monday night. 

Queens Community Board 7 voted 42 to 3, with one abstention, to take the next steps to expel board member John Choe, who’s been accused of various acts of misconduct by the board’s executive committee. He’s denied all allegations against him.

It was the first time in the board’s history that expulsion proceedings were initiated. 

Chuck Apelian, the board’s vice chair, began the process by reading the charges against Choe, which range from unauthorized postings to Facebook to violations of the City Charter. 

“This is something that’s been going on for a while,” Apelian said. “Every time we tried to work things out, it didn’t seem to go away.”

After a brief spat between Choe and Eugene Kelty, the board’s chair, the accused board member was given a few minutes to defend himself. 

“This is an embarrassment to the entire community board system,” Choe said. “I think this whole charade is a huge, huge embarrassment to the community board and I object vehemently to this entire process. It's absurd.”

In order to proceed with Choe’s removal, two-thirds of the board had to vote in favor – over 90 percent supported the motion. 

“I think that’s a very loud comment,” Apelian told the Eagle after the vote. “I knew we had overwhelming support but that’s a pretty resounding number – that’s pretty telling.”

Choe received support from both a handful of community board members and several members of the public, who were given an opportunity to speak after the vote had taken place.

“I just see this as an abuse of authority,” said Cody Herrmann, a board member, who added that she thought the charges against Choe were “misconstrued.”

Herrmann voted against the proceedings, as did members Harpreet Singh Wahan and Choe. 

“I do not believe that any of this is fair or justified,” said Laura Shepard, who spoke in support of Choe during the public comment period. “This whole thing is nonsense and shame on all of you who voted for it.”

The board’s executive committee, made up of members Warren Schreiber, Frank Macchio, Lei Zhao, Kelty and Apelian, voted unanimously to take the action against Choe last month. On May 26, Kelty issued Choe with a letter notifying him of the proceedings against him. 

Choe, who’s running for City Council in District 20, said he hadn’t been contacted by the board after receiving the letter. 

“No one has explained to me the process or what my rights are,” Choe told the Eagle prior to Monday’s meeting. “We've tried to contact the borough president’s office and it seems like they're tacitly allowing this to happen, even though there's really no credence to any of these allegations.”

Queens Borough President Donovan Richards has refrained from commenting on the removal proceedings, despite having appointed Choe to the board against the recommendation of City Council member Peter Koo earlier this year. 

“The Queens Borough President’s office will let this process unfold and not interfere,” a spokesperson for Richards told the Eagle earlier this month. 

While the executive committee and Choe have clashed for years, their disagreements came to a head in the lead up to the vote to approve plans to develop the Flushing waterfront in December 2020. Choe, who stood in stark opposition to the plan, called out Apelian for what he alleged to be a conflict of interest. 

Apelian, who also serves as the board’s Land Use Committee chair, worked as a paid consultant for the development group behind the project. Apelian recused himself from the board’s vote on the matter and accused Choe of slander. 

On Monday, Choe repeated his allegations to Apelian in front of the full board. 

“You are not only embarrassing yourself by doing this, you are actually promoting the corruption that’s going on in this community board by taking money from developers,” Choe said. “I cannot be silent on that.” 

 

Steamrolling Flushing Creek hyper-development plan doesn't include a hospital

NY Post

A $2 billion development along toxic Flushing Creek will pollute the neighborhood with gentrification, critics say.

Affordable housing activists, unions and mom-and-pop shops have packed public hearings on the waterfront proposal, pushing back against more luxury apartments and designer stores.

And as livid as they are about the revitalization, they are just as angry about the government-approval process — claiming Community Board 7 and ex-Borough President Claire Shulman have steamrolled the project through. After wrapping up 15 years as beep, Shulman set up a nonprofit that makes private investments like the Flushing Creek venture possible.

Three developers — F&T Group, United Construction and Development Group, and Young Nian Group, in a partnership called FWRA LLC — want to transform 29 mostly unused acres into 3.4 million square feet of 1,725 apartments, a hotel, retail shops and offices that would generate a projected $28 million annually.

Their plan — the land is on the opposite side from the infamous junkyards near Citi Field — includes privately maintained roads and public access to the waterfront after an environmental cleanup of the area, polluted for decades by industrial waste.
“We believe this is the poster child for future waterfront development, and a legacy project for the owners who live and work in the community,” said their attorney, Ross Moskowitz, who pointed out supporters have turned out in big numbers at the public hearings — alongside the protesters.

“You can disagree with the project, but to say it has been steamrolled is just not right,” he said, adding the owners have followed the city’s statutory timeline for both land use and environmental reviews. “Already, he said, the owners have spent about 18 months on the reviews.

But opponents still think the process has been shady. As evidence of shenanigans, they point to Chuck Apelian, CB7’s first vice chair and land use committee chair, acting as a paid consultant to the developers and to Shulman, who received more time to speak during a Feb. 10 public hearing that turned so nasty cops were called. At times, demonstrators shouted “Shame” and “Let us speak.”

CB7 wants seat at the Willets Point table

From the Queens Tribune:

The city has been “delinquent” in its discussions with Community Board 7 on the future of the troubled Willets Point development, according to the board’s First Vice Chairman Chuck Apelian. And at Monday night’s quarterly meeting with the project’s stakeholders, Apelian put the city and developers on notice.

“I want to be very clear,” Apelian said. “We expect to be involved.”

The future of Willets Point has been uncertain since a June ruling by the Court of Appeals halted a major part of the proposed development, a mega mall known as Willets West, because it was planned for a parcel of land connected to nearby Flushing Meadows Corona Park. Building the mall on public parkland would require approval from the state legislature, the court said.

And while Willets West was only part of a larger development plan that included hundreds of affordable housing units and environmental remediation, the developers maintained that the mall was the “economic engine” that would make the project possible. Now, the developers and city are deciding whether to pursue a long campaign for state approval or make changes to their plan. But changes to the project could concern Community Board 7, which approved the most recent proposal in 2013.

“If the original concept has been now modified, that’s not what this board voted on,” CB 7 Chairman Eugene Kelty said on Monday.

Nate Bliss, of the city’s Economic Development Corporation, said that, regardless, the city plans on being a partner with the community on the process. Apelian expressed hope that this was true. If the parkland was not alienated by the state legislature and Willets West was abandoned, he expects the project could change “dramatically.”

No high school for Linden Place

From the Times Ledger:

City Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña has decided the city Department of Education will no longer be placing a high school inside its building at 30-48 Linden Place after significant community opposition to the proposal, elected officials and community leaders said Friday.

After receiving confirmation in July from DOE staff that the site would be used for a high school for more than 450 students, City Councilman Peter Koo (D-Flushing) met with Farina to express his opposition to the proposal due to student safety and traffic congestion concerns.

Koo made the announcement at a news conference in front of the building Friday afternoon, along with state Sen. Toby Stavisky (D-Flushing); Arlene Fleishman, president of the Mitchell-Linden Civic Association; and Chuck Apelian, first vice chairman of Community Board 7.

“Maybe the chancellor realized this is not a good place to put a high school,” Koo said.

At the meeting, Fariña told Koo the plans to build a high school would no longer go forward. Koo’s office received written confirmation from DOE staff.

CB7 unhappy with municipal lot plan

From the Queens Chronicle:

The city announced Tuesday plans for 208 units of affordable housing — 60 of those for senior citizens — in a Downtown Flushing municipal parking lot, but it does not have the blessing of Community Board 7.

The project, called One Flushing, was brokered by the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, which members of the community board say left them out of the planning process.

In a letter dated April 24 to board members, Chuck Apelian, CB 7 vice chairman and head of its Land Use Committee, wrote that HPD “refuses to meet and include input before a developer is selected” for the project.

Apelian added that a meeting was held in March at the Borough President’s Office with HPD, but that the agency’s presentation “was extremely guarded, confusing and perfunctory, designed to limit our participation.”

He said the community board has “great concerns” about proper development “on this very narrow and complicated site” that is adjacent to the Long Island Rail Road.

Pretty much everyone is opposed to Edgestone plan

From the Queens Chronicle:

A long-delayed construction project has Whitestone residents, elected officials and Community Board 7 furious at the developer for trying to change plans from 52 single-family houses to 107 townhouses.

The Edgestone Group recently met with CB 7’s Land Use Committee to discuss its plans to build the townhouses with 203 units on the waterfront at 151-45 Sixth Road.

At the recent meeting, representatives told committee members that the development of remediation plans with the state Department of Environmental Conservation to move the contaminated soil took longer than expected.

“The owner has been flip-flopping for two years and now they say they don’t have to build the waterfront park,” said Chuck Apelian, committee chairman. “They have no credibility.”

CB 7 District Manager Marilyn Bitterman said Edgestone has not filed plans with any city agency and if it wants to proceed with the additional housing it will have to go through the public review process. Back in 2008, the area was rezoned from manufacturing to R3-2.

Apelian agrees, adding that he believes the developer will clean up the site and then flip it for more money to a new owner.

He noted that area elected officials are totally against the Edgestone plan and “I think the developer will listen because no one want it.”
State Sen. Tony Avella (D-Bayside) said that Edgestone “is declaring war on the community” and that it is unacceptable to challenge the pre-approved plan. “This kind of threat will not be tolerated,” he added.

He and Councilman Paul Vallone (D-Bayside) don’t always see eye to eye, but in this case they are in agreement.

“Quadrupling the amount of units and eliminating the waterfront park is a direct attack on Whitestone’s quality of life and I stand firmly with our community to call for the developers to abandon their ill-conceived plan,” Vallone said.

CB7 says no to mosque variance

Queens Tribune

From the Times Ledger:

Community Board 7 turned down an application for a mosque to be built on Parsons Boulevard and disapproved another by a manufacturer seeking to expand its facility in College Point.

The board unanimously denied an application by not-for-profit Masjid-e-Noor to build a mosque at 46-05 Parsons Blvd. on the grounds that it did not fit the character of the neighborhood amid concerns about the building’s architectural integrity. The board tabled a vote on the proposal in January.

The issue is more than just the application not matching the character of the neighborhood, according to Chuck Apelian, CB 7’s first vice chairman.

Apelian said that more congregants would be attending the mosque than the group anticipates.

“There is great doubt and concern about the integrity of the presentation and the need of their program spaces for this site,” Apelian said.

Concerns included the group’s request for bulk waivers to exceed the maximum community facility floor area allowed in the property’s zoning district, which is designated for residential housing.

The developers also sought to change the mandated floor area ratio of 0.5 in the R2 district — zoned for single-family homes — to 1.045, cut down two trees and waive the yard and parking requirements to address the property’s irregular shape.

The property is an oddly shaped 4,773-square-foot corner lot, according to an Aug. 22 statement of facts and findings prepared for the city Board of Standards and Appeals by Simons & Wright. The group anticipated the mosque would serve about 420 worshipers, 95 percent of whom live in the mosque’s 11355 zip code.

Two floors would house the prayer rooms, one for 210 men and the other for 210 women because they pray separately. On weekends, the imam or the religious scholars would hold Quranic classes to teach roughly 100 students.

Board member Tyler Cassell, a member of the land use committee, said the committee voted to deny the application, but he proposed an alternative.

The Mormon Church on 144-27 Sanford Ave., whose site contains a six-story apartment building with 13,300 square feet and a parking lot for about 25 vehicles, is moving to a different site and could accommodate the mosque’s needs, Cassell said.

CB7 votes against College Point land deal

From the Queens Courier:

S&L Aerospace Metals LLC, located at 120-22 28th St. in Flushing, is looking to purchase two plots of land from the Economic Development Corporation (EDC). One plot of land is owned by the city and the other is owned by the EDC.

The debate on whether or not to recommend allowing the sale came about because, after an asphalt company, Cofire Asphalt Corp., acquired some of the land in a 2010 land swap, Cofire did not take proper care of the plot.

“The deal was they were going to clean it,” explained Chuck Apelian, first vice chairman of CB 7. “They were going to maintain the operations at the site…the stipulations were all part of the deed restriction. None of these took place.”

Even though the previous deal was not handled correctly, the board made it abundantly clear that they support S&L and their operation.

“I support S&L; they know it,” Apelian said. “I also explained to them why we did what we did and we think it is ultimately to the benefit of, not only the community, but to S&L and everybody that this gets done the right way.”

“We can’t approve a land sale of contaminated land that was supposed to be cleaned up five years ago,” he added.

While some members agreed with Apelian, others felt that recommending denying the sale would be punishing S&L for something they had no control over.

New Keith's plan gets CB7 ok

From the Times Ledger:

The long-delayed plans for RKO Keith’s Theater in Flushing have been approved by Community Board 7 after years of the property passing through the hands of multiple developers.

Board members unanimously passed a motion at the monthly board meeting Monday night approving developer JK Equities’ revised plan for the historic theater at 135-35 Northern Blvd. in Flushing. The company’s reworked blueprint increased the building’s height and reduced the number of rental units and parking spaces.

Chuck Apelian, CB 7’s first vice chairman and chairman of the land use committee, said the board has previously asked for a movie theater to be built in downtown Flushing, but to no avail. “We don’t have any development plans in front of us,” Apelian said. “I don’t have anybody standing here with the money to build the theater. The way it’s gone, it went from developer to developer to developer at this point. I can’t change that.”

He was momentarily interrupted by Jerry Rotondi, a member of the Committee to Save the RKO Keith’s Theater in Flushing, who insisted that plans were presented to save the theater.

Historic preservationists were staunchly opposed to the plan. In a statement, the Committee to Save the RKO Keith’s criticized former Queens Borough President Claire Shulman for not supporting the theater.

“We could have had a restored showcase theater,” said Cheshire Frager, a member of the committee.

Michael Donnelly, a New York City District Council of Carpenters representative, said the developer has not made a commitment to quality construction jobs.

“These units will now be marketed to wealthier individuals and contribute to the gentrification of the neighborhood,” Donnelly said. “The absence of a commitment in the development of high-quality construction jobs for the members of the community further enforces this impression.”

Apelian introduced a separate resolution that would consider converting the planned 16,000-square-foot space from a senior center into community facility space.

RKO Keith's plan to be altered again

From the Queens Chronicle:

The owner of the dilapidated RKO Keith’s Theatre in Downtown Flushing will go before Community Board 7 next month seeking a waiver from the previously approved plans to develop the site into condominiums.

CB 7’s decision is the first step before the city’s Board of Standards and Appeals makes the final ruling.

Jerry Karlik, who heads JK Equities, the developer who bought the Northern Boulevard site in 2013, needs the waiver before he can proceed with construction. He wants to decrease the number of condominiums from 357 to 269; decrease underground parking from 327 to 252 spaces and increase the height of the building by 15 feet for mechanical equipment.

The most controversial change involves an already-approved undulating glass curtain entrance. Karlik wants to redesign the front to provide views of the landmarked lobby.

But Chuck Apelian, chairman of CB 7’s Land Use Committee and vice chairman of the board, said Tuesday that changing the facade plan “might be a point of contention” with the board because the glass curtain is such an integral part of the original plan.

Apelian doesn’t see any problem with the extra 15-foot height since the Port Authority has already agreed to it. Buildings cannot be constructed too high in Flushing because of nearby LaGuardia Airport. The Keith’s project calls for a 17-story building on top of the 87-year-old movie house.

Apelian considers the other changes relatively minor and noted that a proposed senior center is still part of the plan as a community facility.

Is this the final nail in Flushing's historical coffin?

From the Queens Courier:

Great Wall Supermarket, on Northern Boulevard and Leavitt Street, will be replaced next year by a glass-clad, 11-story building after the supermarket’s owners decided to not renew the lease, according to city records. The proposed building’s modern, sleek look will tower next to the Civil War-era Flushing Town Hall, causing many in the community to criticize the new building for not conforming to the appearance of its historic neighbor.

“This thing looks like it’s something out of Miami Vice,” Flushing resident Vincent Amato said. “You can kiss goodbye any sense of history this neighborhood still had.”

Despite community resistance, Community Board 7 passed a request to change the area’s zoning, allowing the building’s developer, George Chu, to move another step closer toward his goal of developing a mixed-use building with a hotel, store fronts, community space and apartment units.

Flushing Town Hall wrote a letter expressing their support of the new development, and the planned community space will be used often by Town Hall events. During the community board meeting, the board members defended their decision to allow the building to be constructed.

“We’re not granting something that’s significantly different then what could be there,” Chuck Apelian said. “None of us are negligent of the history.”

As the meeting ended, Apelian said, “This is a tragedy not just for Flushing, but the whole nation. Hundreds of years of American history will be overshadowed by this new building.”

So, Chuck is opposed to the building, but voted for its zoning change anyway? WTF?

Muni Lot 3 project may replace Willets Point

From the Queens Chronicle:

During a recent quarterly meeting with concerned parties, members of Community Board 7 demanded input in the review process for development of Municipal Parking Lot 3 in Downtown Flushing.

Bids on the mixed-income, affordable housing complex planned near the Long Island Rail Road station were due earlier this month to the city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development.

Agency spokesman Eric Bederman said a designation of the winning plan is expected in the first quarter of next year.

But CB 7 members want to offer their input before a decision is made. Chuck Apelian, board vice chairman, said it’s not enough to review the project when it comes up for a public Uniform Land Use Review Procedure hearing. “It’s a done deal by then,” Apelian said.

The site is located on 41st Avenue near Main Street. The 43,200-square-foot location abuts the LIRR and has 156 parking spaces. Plans call for an equal amount of parking to be retained.

The city envisions affordable housing across a range of incomes and community and retail space. It wants to rezone the area R7X, which allows for greater height and bulk, usually in a nine- to 13-story building.

The project was first announced in 2010 by former Borough President Claire Shulman as a Transportation Opportunity Development project to make the LIRR more accessible to affordable housing.

As part of the project, the LIRR will add elevators and modernize the station next year.

The city has since linked the project with Willets Point to find an alternative site for affordable housing since it has been delayed at the Iron Triangle.

About 872 affordable units were planned for Willets Point, but they will be delayed for years and may never be built at all.

Is anyone surprised at the bait and switch? Willets Point was *never* about affordable housing.

Never ending variance goes down in flames at CB7

From the Times Ledger:

After a couple hours of yelling, confusion and chaos, Community Board 7 voted Monday night to extend a variance for an Auburndale business on Northern Boulevard, preserving the conditions of a previous agreement.

At issue was an application by Utopia Realty, at 167-04 Northern Blvd., to renew its variance, which has been based on a 10-year term, to last forever and to remove a provision which requires the owner to consult the board if he is considering selling the property.

The board’s Land Use Committee had already unanimously rejected the request and instead voted in support of renewing the existing variance for another 10 years.

Around 20 civic leaders and residents attended the meeting to voice their support of the committee’s recommendation.

Chuck Apelian, vice chairman of CB 7, was one of the lone dissenting voices to the Land Use Committee’s recommendation, arguing the 10-year variance put an unfair burden on the business.

“There seems to be some kind of hysteria that we’re rezoning all of Queens. We’re not,” he said. “It’s a small business. It’s half of what’s allowed.”

After a heated discussion, the board voted 31-4 in favor of extending the variance with the prior conditions.

Apelian and Vallone support never ending variance

Dear Civic Leaders:

The Station Road Civic Association is asking for your help in opposing a variance renewal request for Utopia Realty located at 167-02 Northern Blvd. The matter is on the CB 7 meeting calendar for Monday September 8, 2014 at 7:00pm. (at the Union Plaza Care Center located at 33-23 Union Street) The variance request is for extension of the term of variance for a one story building that is occupied as a real estate office. The April 18, 1990 extension included a provision that states “there shall be no change in ownership or operating control without prior application to and approval from the Board”. The provision was continued in the 1999 variance renewal. The applicant now requests that this provision be removed. We have been informed that the provision was inserted due to the location of the property within an area covered by the Rickert-Finlay covenant.

The current operator of Utopia Realty is the son of the owner of the property, Paul Luciano. He has no ties to the community and currently lives in Sag Harbor. Though he professes no intention to immediately sell the property or business, the sale will undoubtedly occur within the next few years. He is looking to the removal of this clause and the renewal of the variance for as long a time as possible as a means to maximize his inheritance.

We believe the restriction should be maintained to give the community a means of control over the next occupant and to make that occupant aware of and accountable for the restrictions placed on the property from the inception of their occupancy/ownership. We do not oppose the granting of a 10 year extension so long as the clause remains.

The opposing argument, proposed by Chuck Apelian, is that the cost of a variance is a burden on a property/business owner and should be a one- time event, that once obtained, continues in perpetuity. This variance renewal would be that one time event. We estimate the cost of a variance over its entire duration is about $100/month.

Why the Community Board vice-chair is concerned with the financial welfare of an heir or a successor owner, who if due diligence is done before the purchase will know that the property comes with the extra expense of a variance is beyond logical reasoning.

There is no reason why the Community Board, Borough President or the BSA should be willing to give up their power to regulate and oversee businesses to make them better community members. Once one applicant receives such a “forever” variance, every other applicant will want one too.

Hypothetically, once a business obtains a “forever” variance it is a small step to then request a change in zoning. The theory would be that I have a perpetual variance, so why not just change the zoning to make it legal, there really would be no difference, except for the opportunity to change the type of business and size of the premises, which is actually a really big difference. Mr Apelian contends that the businesses coming in want the re-zoning so they will exist in an area with a commercial overlay. It is a back door way to negate the zoning changes that were approved by the Community Board, Borough President and City Council only a few years ago.

This is a step that would have catastrophic consequences for northeast Queens and the entire city. The entire area along Northern Boulevard from 162 Street to 192 Street and beyond in both directions would be vulnerable to dramatic up-zoning that would render the area unrecognizable over time. Any increases in building size and density would then be requested by owners in adjoining areas.

To date we have met with Assemblyman Braunstein and Senator Avella and have spoken to Paul Graziano, all support our position and will attend or send representatives to the Community Board hearing. Councilman Vallone has not agreed to meet with us prior to the hearing.

Please support our position at the September 8th meeting. Please attend and sign up to speak. It is time for Northeast Queens civics to unite as one voice to acquire greater political clout. It is the only way we will be able to retain the physical integrity of our communities and our way of life against the onslaught of real estate development interests.

Thank you.
Rhea O’Gorman
Station Road Civic Association

The Vallone banner in the top photo has now been replaced by a John Liu banner. And this sign is in their front door:

John Liu's questionable filings

"I was looking at John Liu's filings and I noticed something weird with regard to Chuck Apelian. Chuck's occupation is listed as a Sales Executive at Irene Hermann Incorporated/Prestone Printing.

If you notice, the corporation and Chuck have the same address. The biggest question is why is the corporation getting $5K for consulting twice when it's a printing company?

Irene Hermann Incorporated got $5,000 for consulting on July 21st and the address is 145-30 29 Road which is Chuck's address.

On August 11th, "Irene Hermann Incorporated" was reimbursed $420 for buttons and it's Chuck's home address again.

Then 7 days later, Chuck gets reimbursed over a thousand dollars for office supplies at the same address.

On August 21st, Irene Hermann Incorporated got $5,000 for consulting fees.

I am confused who exists at 145-30 29th Road, Chuck or the corporation or both? This is a single family home." - Sad about the state of Queens

(Ha! And the Vice Chair of Queens CB7 running a political campaign isn't a conflict-of-interest or anything.)

But wait, that's not all! Let's see who else Johnny has on his payroll:

Sharon Lee, who agreed to turn state's evidence against Jenny Hou and Oliver Pan in return for immunity.

Chung Seto, who ran his shady campaign - and his office as an unpaid staffer - a conflict of interest.

Mei Hua Ru, a former aide to John, who likes using mafia terms.

But I'm sure John Liu would bring a breath of fresh air to Albany if elected...

CB7 says no to basement apartments

From the Times Ledger:

Community Board 7 gave a resounding no to Mayor Bill de Blasio’s proposal to consider looking at legalizing basement apartments at a meeting Monday night.

The board unanimously voted to support a non-binding resolution declaring its opposition to the idea.

“This is out in the forefront right now,” board member Tyler Cassell said at the meeting. “We have to let them know we strongly oppose this.”

CB 7’s neighbor to the east, CB 11 passed its own resolution denouncing the possible legalization of basement apartments in April. CB covers Flushing, Whitestone, College Point and Bay Terrace, while CB 11 covers Bayside, Douglaston, Little Neck and part of Auburndale.

De Blasio included the policy as part of his plan to build 200,000 units of affordable housing. His Housing Department commissioner, Vicki Been, recently stressed to a Queens Borough Board meeting the administration has not committed to anything concerning legalizing basement apartments other than taking a look at the possibility.

Board members scoffed at the idea, saying it would do nothing to address affordable housing problems and that it would lead to violations of the neighborhood’s zoning laws.

“The reason you can’t rent out [your basement] is the same reason you bought the house in the first place: It’s a single-family detached house,” CB 7 Vice Chairman Chuck Apelian said.

College Point tow pound was relocated from Maspeth

From the Queens Chronicle:

A meeting arranged by state Sen. Tony Avella (D-Bayside) with the NYPD on why the agency had moved its tow pound to the College Point Corporate Park without notice was canceled last week with no new information released.

Avella was not given a reason for the cancellation or told when another session could be held. He and Community Board 7 officials are puzzled and angered by the move.

The senator learned in September that the NYPD had moved its tow pound from under the Kosciuszko Bridge in Maspeth to a site at College Point Boulevard and 31st Avenue without notifying anyone. The corporate park is specially zoned and any change needs to go through the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure process.

The location is owned by Ares Printing, which is subleasing the site to the police. Chuck Apelian, chairman of CB 7’s Zoning and Land Use Committee, said Monday he does not know if the subleasing is legal.

The city’s largest tow pound was originally located in the corporate park at a different site nearby, bounded by Ulmer Street, College Point Boulevard, 28th and 31st avenues.

The city took over the tow pound property in 2010 to build the new Police Academy. It is expected to be completed later this year.

The ousted tow pound was supposed to move to a location at Kennedy International Airport but that did not work out. The Maspeth site was then the only tow pound in Queens; now it’s in College Point.
Avella said Tuesday “the whole thing smells,” and noted that the original tow pound in the corporate park was supposed to be temporary and lasted 20 years.

CB7's Willets Point cave-in like deja vu all over again

From the Daily News:

A proposed mega-mall next to CitiField might have gone down to defeat Monday night but for a bottom-of-the-ninth set of promises from the developer to skeptical Community Board 7 officials.

The board’s land-use committee had already rejected the city’s plan for a 1.4-million-square-foot shopping mall on what is currently the baseball stadium parking lot, but the committee changed its vote — and the full board followed suit hours later — after Deputy Mayor Robert Steel and the developer, the Queens Development Group, promised in writing that the board would get increased oversight over the project.

“I changed my vote because of the papers in front of me,” CB7 Chairman Eugene Kelty said of the promises. “We have people in place that have signed letters and I’m comfortable with it.”

If Kelty and Land Use Chairman Charles Apelian — who voted down the mall at the committee level last week — held their stance, the board would have been deadlocked.

If this sounds like something you heard back in 2008, it is. Back then, CB7 voted "yes" with almost the same set of conditions. The EDC never gave CB7 additional oversight and never came through on any of the other promises.

From 2008:

CB7 bends over backward to approve Flushing Meadows shopping mall

Well, well, well. We suspected it was too good to be true, and it was. CB7's hastily called Buildings Committee voted 10-6 in favor of the Willets Point West project last night. You have to wonder why no one on the board thought it was wrong to take a re-vote when the original vote was cast after giving the developers and the City more than ample opportunity to make convincing arguments. Then, after hours of public testimony, the full board voted 22-18 in favor of it. The vote may have gone the other way if some board members hadn't conveniently left the meeting before the vote was held.

A shameful sham.

Lipstick on a pig

UPDATE: Chuck Apelian has called a CB7 Buildings Committee meeting for 5:30pm tonight.. Also, a multi-agency task force is sweeping through Phase 1 closing down businesses.

Reliable sources say that Queens Community Board 7 – whose Building and Zoning Committee voted last week 7-2 to deny the Willets West mall/Willets Point ULURP application – has contacted members of that committee and instructed them to set aside time beginning at 5:30PM this afternoon, Monday, May 13, in case the committee needs to convene again for an emergency meeting prior to the CB7 public hearing to be held tonight at 7:00PM.

If such an emergency committee meeting occurs, it can only mean one thing: That powers-that-be do not accept last Wednesday's "No" vote to deny the Willets West mall/Willets Point application, and want a last-ditch opportunity to strong-arm the committee into re-voting to approve the application with "conditions" prior to the start of the public hearing. The seeds for this were planted during last Wednesday's committee meeting, when board members who voted in the minority discussed with committee Chair Chuck Apelian the possibility of continuing discussions with the City and the developers, and possibly re-convening the committee prior to Monday's public hearing.

Last Wednesday's vote was duly taken after the committee had convened four separate times for a total of roughly 13 hours, during which the City and the developers had carte blanche to present whatever information they wished in support of the project. Having heard everything, the committee then voted to deny the application. If the committee does convene again on Monday, the application certainly will be unchanged, so there would seem to be no legitimate basis to solicit a re-vote, when a vote has already been taken. Doing so anyway would be just another example of project proponents stopping at nothing, as they have done before, to shamelessly push this Bloomberg legacy project.

With the CB7 committee having done its duty and made its decision, why should there be any interest in facilitating a reversal? Well, you should all know that Harry Giannoulis, a lobbyist for the Parkside Group (as well as former TLC Commissioner), has had private discussions with Chuck Apelian after committee meetings regarding Willets Point. Interestingly, neither Wachtel, Masyr & Missry, LLP nor Parkside have  listed Community Board 7 as a lobbying target as required by law. This document shows that people who lobby community boards must register as lobbyists. And once registered, the requirement is to disclose the "targets" of the lobbying on the periodic reports, which are filed 6 times per year. Check Flushing Willets Point Corona LDC's 2008 reports to see correct disclosure of "targets", including Apelian and Kelty. If Parkside is lobbying CB7, then everyone is entitled to an honest disclosure of that fact -- not more concealment, as Claire Shulman did during 2008. (Shulman's records were audited and corrected after Willets Point United shed light on her shenanigans.)

In addition, I have been informed by multiple CB7 members that there have been a series of clandestine meetings between a lot of them and Parkside lobbyists at the North Flushing Senior Center, a non-profit founded and funded by late State Senator Leonard and current State Senator Toby Stavisky, parents of Parkside co-founder Evan Stavisky. Hello, conflict of interest?

If this isn't enough proof that the EDC, Parkside and the Wilpons are cooking something up behind the scenes, then how about this: The Real Deal posted an accurate story on their website last Friday about the outcome of last Wednesday's CB7 committee vote, and then the next day deleted it and replaced it with a line of B.S. from "a spokesperson for the project" stating that the CB7 committee "voted to not vote" and did not vote on the project itself, which is patently false. A CB7 member rebutted the ridiculous assertion in the article's comments section and now The Real Deal has egg on its face.

I guess the bottom line here is that last week's vote seemed too good to be true...and we'll find out tonight if it was.

Prediction: Either there will be a hastily called committee meeting prior to the full board meeting to discuss conditions for voting yes, or Chuck Apelian will pull a list out of his pocket after the public hearing and make a motion to vote yes on them. The latter would be in blatant violation of the Open Meetings Law, but that never stopped him before.

With all this crap going on it begs the question:

WHERE THE HELL IS THE FBI????

I'll allow the project opponents to have the last word: