Downtown Flushing Development [Archive] - Page 2

sunnyguy

November 2nd, 2007, 05:25 PM

Flushing boom fades
By Stephen Stirling
10/11/2007

The demise of the ambitious RKO Keith's redevelopment project may be a harbinger of things to come in Flushing, with plans for the Municipal Lot 1 complex nearly dead and mounting delays threatening the city's vision for Willets Point, City Councilman John Liu (D-Flushing) warned in recent days.

During a speech to members of the Queens Chamber of Commerce Friday, Liu said the $500 million planned redevelopment of Municipal Lot 1 may be a lost cause and the city's expansive plans for redeveloping Willets Point may also be in jeopardy.

http://oascentral.zwire.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/www.poweronemedia.com/300X250.html/@Topx http://bannerads.zwire.com/bannerads/bannerad.asp?ADLOCATION=4000&PAG=461&BRD=2676&LOCALPCT=50&AREA=410&VERT=16497&NAREA=471&barnd=6289 "I think in the next month or so you're going to see a redefining in the set of priorities within the Bloomberg administration, and naturally some things are going to be dropped," Liu said. "As the 2008 election nears, priorities are going to continue to shift and the probability curve is dropping fast [for these projects]," he said, alluding to the mayor's rumored presidential ambitions.

Earlier this month, Liu and Borough President Helen Marshall were informed by Brooklyn-based Boymelgreen Development, which bought the site of RKO Keith's in 2002, that it planned to put the property up for sale, officially ending its redevelopment bid.

Liu said Boymelgreen is breaking apart its partnership and will be liquidating its assets, thus forcing the company to sell the property. But he is hopeful another developer will revive the project because the plans have been approved by the city.

"That's like a ghost haunting all of Flushing," he said. "We do need to bring the RKO site back from the dead."

Liu was less optimistic about Municipal Lot 1, and told the chamber the plans being developed by Flushing Commons LLC were all but hopeless in their current form.

"I honestly don't think anything will happen on Lot 1," he said. "Perhaps we can resurrect it, but unfortunately 'resurrect' is the word you have to use now."

In an interview with the TimesLedger Monday, Liu elaborated, saying there is no compelling reason for the Flushing community to get behind the Muni Lot plans, which originally called for a mixed-use development featuring 500 residential units, 350,000 square feet of retail space, a 50,000-square-foot youth center and 2,000 below market rate parking spaces.

"This is a project that is not pursued by the Flushing community," he said.

Liu said the original plan had promise, but changes proposed by the developer earlier this year that cut about 400 spaces from the parking plan, reduced the size of the youth center by nearly half and raised the proposed parking rates above what are currently available on the lot, left little incentive for Flushing residents.

"The developer seems to think it doesn't need to deliver on the promises it made two years ago. That's at best a woeful miscalculation and at worst just pure greed," Liu said.

Liu's current position is a far cry from what it was a few years ago, when standing alongside Mayor Michael Bloomberg and top brass from Flushing Commons LLC, he said the project would "set the tone and direction for Flushing for years to come."

Liu's more recent sentiments were echoed by state Assemblywoman Ellen Young (D-Flushing).

"If the community doesn't need this project, it shouldn't be pushed," Young said.

Reached for comment, Flushing Commons LLC spokesman Jamie Van Bramer rejected the Flushing officials' claims and said the Flushing Commons project is very much alive.

"We have been working diligently with our partners in the New York City Economic Development Corporation to work out the details on a development plan that we are confident both respects our original Flushing Commons vision and is wholly achievable within this ever-changing economic environment," Van Bramer said.

Van Bramer said the developer hopes to release a revised plan in the near future. Flushing Commons LLC is a joint venture between Flushing-based TDC Development and Construction Corp. and Rockefeller Development Corp.

Liu said, however, that Bloomberg's priorities may not align with those of Flushing Commons.

Liu said the mayor has made it clear that the proposed multibillion-dollar redevelopment of Willets Point is a higher priority for the city, plans which are also in flux. The public approval, or ULURP, process was scheduled to begin this fall but has yet to materialize.

Unveiled by Bloomberg in April, the redevelopment project for Willets Point is expected to include 5,500 residential housing units and 1.7 million square feet of retail space and will likely cost in excess of $3 billion.

Neither EDC nor the mayor's office returned calls for comment about when they hope the Willets Point public approval process will begin.

Liu said while he does not think the project is necessarily dependent on Bloomberg, it may be dependent on the New York Mets' Citi Field, which is expected to open in the fall of 2009.

"If that new Mets stadium is finished and there's still not much headway made on Willets Point, then the focus and excitement will just peter off and the Willets Point idea will suffer the same fate it has for decades," he said, referring to previous attempts to develop the hardscrabble 60-acre site.

But former Borough President Claire Shulman, who has been lobbying hard for the development of Willets Point in recent months, said getting the project off the ground during Bloomberg's tenure is crucial.

"We want to get so far along by the time Bloomberg leaves office that there's no possibility of reversing [the plan]," Shulman said. "You never know where support is coming from."

Reach reporter Stephen Stirling by e-mail at Sstirling@timesledger.com or by phone at 718-229-0300, Ext. 138.

http://www.timesledger.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18907115&BRD=2676&PAG=461&dept_id=542415&rfi=6

ASchwarz

November 2nd, 2007, 08:11 PM

The "reporter" claims "Flushing boom Fades" but doesn't have a single point to back up the allegation.

The one holdup is because a real estate firm is being reorganized; the other holdup is a politican-developer clash. Neither have anything to do with Flushing's relative viability for high-end residential.

submachine

November 5th, 2007, 11:00 PM

the redevelopment project for Willets Point is expected to include 5,500 residential housing units

Since when? The plans I saw didn't include residential units, and what I read the environmental concerns of the Iron Triangle will prevent residential zoning.

investordude

November 5th, 2007, 11:23 PM

We can't condemn properties unless we are sure the buyer is serious about redevelopment. Eminent domain is an extraordinary power. It should only be used when the benefits are unequivocal and really going to happen.

Having said that, it would obviously be great to see an environmental cleanup of that area.

ramvid01

November 5th, 2007, 11:27 PM

investordude

November 27th, 2007, 07:41 PM

This is how you know we're in Queens - http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2007/11/27/2007-11-27_flushing_commons_changes_spur_outrage_by-1.html

When a developer is blocking 800 million worth of renovations for a SUBSIDIZED larger parking lot in an area with congested pricing. That's right - its not enough for the developer to build parking spaces in an over congested area - but they must also subsidize the parking spaces. Its inverse congestion pricing.

ramvid01

November 28th, 2007, 12:24 AM

^^ Did you read the right article? The developer isnt renovating anything, he is instead building a complex. The problem came about because they lowered the amount of parking the area residents wanted. Hence they forced the developer to up the amount of parking on the site but for that to happen they need it to be subsidized.

Regardless I don't see this as completely evil. Either way there is going to be parking. If this project doesn't go through Flushing will be stuck with that parking lot or if anything is going to get built they will ask for a large parking lot so there isn't much leeway on what you'll get.

Also unless they decide to build more subway lines further into Queens (because the buses are a mess) then there is no other real option aside from driving. I would rather they park and ride instead of driving straight into the city.

investordude

November 28th, 2007, 07:57 AM

I think I just didn't phrase my rant well. My gripe is with the city on this. It's a POSITIVE that the developer no longer wants to subsidize the parking. I don't get why people in Queens don't get that. (yes, there needs to be some parking, but they are already building more at the Flushing Town Center site which is a better place to put parking than right in the heart of main street).

NewYorkDoc

December 2nd, 2007, 04:47 PM

I took the #7 train to Flushing on Thursday and something bugs me. I can't stand seeing a huge parking garage being built as I'm riding right beside it on a train.

ramvid01

December 2nd, 2007, 06:03 PM

^^And a prefabricated one at that.

The only consolation is that you will never see it again once the building starts going up around it.

antinimby

December 3rd, 2007, 06:02 AM

I don't get why people in Queens don't get that.You've got to understand that the average New Yorker aren't very knowledgable or savvy when it comes to what's good or bad urban planning and development.

They don't know about the advantages that building denser, more mass transit-oriented developments contribute to less traffic, sprawl, environmental damage, lower housing costs and so on, as we do.

That's why you have these community people actually fighting residential, commercial, transportation projects that are actually good for the city.

They just don't know any better other than they just don't want changes/more people in their backyards regardless of whether that may be a good thing or not overall for themselves, the city and the planet.

ramvid01

December 3rd, 2007, 09:50 AM

^^Thats too broad of a generalization. The reality is this is not Manhattan.

The MTA has no interest (read money) to build more subway lines in Queens. Also, the 7 train is just HORRIBLE, there is always track work it is always slow going towards Flushing and it is extremely full going towards Manhattan. It is a line that is at it's capacity during rush hour.

Unless the MTA makes some effort to alleiviate this situation, cars will be an important part of this area of Queens.

antinimby

December 3rd, 2007, 09:57 AM

Broad generalizations are not, New York is all about NIMBYism. If I remember correctly, the MTA wanted to extend the subway line through Astoria to La Guardia but the NIMBYs fought it.

I'd bet you if the MTA announce plans to extend subway service lines somewhere, similar community uproar would ensue. Like I said, your average New Yorker don't know much but just enough to be a hinderance to smart projects.

antinimby

December 3rd, 2007, 10:07 AM

I also forgot to add that there were also community resistance to the JFK AirTrain. Let's face it, New Yorkers (not only Queens residents, so don't get all offended ramvid) are not the most progressive-minded people right now.

ramvid01

December 3rd, 2007, 10:09 AM

The reason that the LaGuardia link was killed off by the NIMBYs was because it would serve no real benefit to the area and the fact that it would be elevated on it's way to laguardia through a mostly 2 story house area. The reality is they live right next to Manhattan and getting there isn't hard for them. Also they weren't/aren't clamoring for more public transportation.

Flushing on the other hand desperately needs more mass transportation and it would probably be below ground so there would be less of a chance of serious NIMBYism.

antinimby

December 3rd, 2007, 10:17 AM

ramvid, you are sounding more like an apologist coming up with all sorts of excuses for essentially, just narrowminded NIMBYism. How can a mass transit line not be beneficial to Astoria?

While we may not know how many cars it would have taken off the road to and from La Guardia, we do know that it would at least taken some off. Don't you think this would affect Astoria in some way, like reduced traffic and pollution, just to name a few?

Second of all, raised subway tracks going through lowrise neighborhoods occur throughout Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx for many years. Another poor excuse.

You are now splitting hairs with the Flushing and Astoria arguments but I was talking about New Yorkers in general. As for Flushing, it isn't short on shortsighted NIMBYism either.

Underground or not, if the MTA do proposed subway extensions there, I'm sure someone will find something to gripe about.

ramvid01

December 3rd, 2007, 12:24 PM

I am not a NIMBY apologist, in fact I am for development. I am only stating the reasons that killed the LaGuardia link.

Your argument that raised tracks going through neighborhoods have been happening for many years is a poor argument. When was the last time an elevated line has been built in this city? The last one I can remember is the A train in the rockaways, but the ROW existed from prior LIRR tracks. Heck I live next to the 7 elevated line built in the 20's when Queens was but swamp for the most part.

The reality is elevated lines in today's day an age are just not going to be accepted by the public in general. Who wants to see hulking steel grid in front of their 2 story house. I doubt there would be few people. Maybe in the past people were more willing (or lets say the government was more iron fisted) to build these elevated rails but in today's day and age where NIMBYs are everywhere you turn it isn't possible.

As for the pollution bit, I doubt the few hundred cars it would take off the street would help much considering that 60% of the city's power is generated by power plants in Astoria.

And yes I am splitting hairs between Astoria and Flushing, but you know what you'll find NIMBYism in any part of the city. That's just the way it goes.

antinimby

December 3rd, 2007, 12:29 PM

All the reasons you are citing are exactly what NIMBYs use to kill projects. I don't even know why we are in this debate because in a way, you are basically saying that NIMBYism is partly responsible for transportation projects not getting built.

Yes, there are other factors but even you have to admit that even if you overcome those other obstacles, NIMBYism will always rear its ugly head. That unfortunately is what is this city has become and Queens is not the only place where it occurs. It's pretty much a city-wide thing.

"Yes, you can build it, just not in my backyard." Unfortunately, every part of the city is someone's backyard so essentially you can't do much without some kind of fight.

investordude

December 3rd, 2007, 12:51 PM

Money doesn't grow on trees, and I think the reason the La Guardia link was cancelled is that it costs money and the JFK and Newark links were more essential because those are the airports were travel time to the airports is unreasonable. If you told me you found a few billion dollars for this project, I'd tell you I'd rather have a second 7 extension station, a rail link to Stewart Airport, or a JFK downtown direct rail line. I'd tell you not even to come back and discuss the La Guardia train until those projects are finished.

antinimby

December 3rd, 2007, 12:58 PM

First of all, NIMBYs don't care about money or priority. They opposed it not on those grounds, eventhough they probably would use them in their arguments as well if it works out for them. No, their reasons are more selfish and revolves around their own little world, not the city's, the MTA's or anybody else's well being.

Second, why would you build a rail to Stewart from the city instead of to La Guardia? They are essentially serving the same purpose (assuming Stewart catches up to speed) and La Guardia is much, much, much larger and is within city limits?

investordude

December 3rd, 2007, 02:07 PM

here's why: La Guardia is at capacity and probably can't be expanded. Furthermore, buses are already probably faster or comparable in speed to midtown. For Stewart, to make that airport a viable reliever, we need a high speed option to midtown and rail can be made fast. Plus, you could probably add rail to Rockland county and reduce a lot of unnecessary car traffic in the region.

antinimby

December 3rd, 2007, 02:12 PM

Buses are not a comparable alternative to trains. If that was the case, why build the expensive SAS, or even the 7 train extension? Just run buses then. Oh I forgot, they do. Still just not good enough I guess.

Fact is that you'll get more people out of their cars if you have rail to the airports. You cannot have one of the largest airports in the country and the world in a supposedly world class city and not have it connected to some kind of rail transit. It's shameful actually, if you were to mention it to other people.

As for Stewart, it is seen and has always been a way to steer people from the Upstate counties from using the already crowded city airports. It wasn't intended to bring city folks up there. Why would you as a city resident want to go all the way up there when you've already got three (or four if you include LI's MacArthur) closer?

By the way, I think we should go somewhere else if we want to talk more on this Stewart airport business.

submachine

December 7th, 2007, 06:29 AM

I took the #7 train to Flushing on Thursday and something bugs me. I can't stand seeing a huge parking garage being built as I'm riding right beside it on a train.

You would have a point except for the fact that the parking garage is at the last train stop.

ZippyTheChimp

December 7th, 2007, 12:08 PM

Second, why would you build a rail to Stewart from the city instead of to La Guardia? They are essentially serving the same purpose (assuming Stewart catches up to speed) and La Guardia is much, much, much larger and is within city limits?Stewart is already larger than LaGuardia, with the capacity to expand. LaGuardia has always been small by international airport standards, and has no room to grow.

While a rail link to LaGauardia is desirable to reduce city congestion, at this point it would do nothing to alleviate air traffic congestion. Also, a subway line is not the ideal mode for air travellers.

f I had to choose between the two, I would pick a high speed rail link to Stewart.

antinimby

December 7th, 2007, 01:31 PM

LaGuardia is larger in terms of passenger volume and that was what I was talking about.

LaGuardia serves 26 million passengers and Stewart, 900,000. Stewart is projected to grow to 3 million in five years but still pales in comparison.

The debate was more on automobile traffic rather than air traffic. Stewart's potential for growth and expansion have no bearing on the fact that there is still 26 million people at LaGuardia that have no other viable transportation option other than cars.

Imagine how many cars are taken off the road if there was some kind of subway or rail service to LaGuardia. Keep in mind also, that all that traffic unlike Stewart, is within the city's borders, where traffic is already a big problem.

While high speed rail to Stewart is necessary for it to grow, I think rail to LaGuardia is just if not more urgently needed.

ZippyTheChimp

December 7th, 2007, 02:27 PM

The present passenger volume of the airports is not the issue, since the idea is to increase air traffic capacity. LaGuardia is at capacity, while Stewart is underused. Therefore, it would be more effective to solve that problem by building a rail link to Stewart.

I realize the debate here is about intracity transport, but you brought up the point about the wisdom of a Stewart link vs a LaGuardia link.

A subway link would reduce auto traffic to LaGuardia, but that link should be measured against other subway alternatives in Queens. As I already mentioned, getting on a subway with luggage is not very appealing - personally, I would still hop a cab. If the choice this time were a subway extension to LaGuardia or extending the #7 into Whitestone, I think the latter would be more beneficial.

antinimby

December 8th, 2007, 09:22 AM

Building subways to Whitestone, a mostly low density, residential area comprised mostly of one or two family homes is more urgent than taking some of those 26 million auto trips off the roadways around Queens?

Personal preferences aside, there will be a significant portion of those LaGuardia users that will not mind taking the subway to/from the airport. For one thing, it will be cheaper and during stifling midday rush hour on the bridges and tunnels, you might even get there faster.

Of course, there will be ways to operate the specially designated airport trains, that will skip local stops and that will make it even more faster as well as having less hassles when it comes to airport riders having to deal with non-airport riders.

ZippyTheChimp

December 8th, 2007, 10:11 AM

If you want to look at it as an airport problem, then a LaGuardia subway link is inferior to a Stewart link.

As a city problem, you can take a pencil to almost any place on a subway map and have a positive result. I lived in Whitestone for months after 09/11, and made the daily commute to Main St. The area is clogged with auto traffic. Many just avoid the hassle and take the GCP into Manhattan.

If I had to choose one place to spend money on subway improvement, a link to LaGuardia would be low on the list. Bigger bang-for-the-buck elsewhere, and you'd end up with airport transit that pales compared to other cities.

If I had to choose two out of three:
A Stewart
B LaGuardia
C #7

A and C. Just my opinion.

antinimby

December 8th, 2007, 10:29 AM

Well, you can guess my preferences will always favor the city over non-city projects anyday even if Stewart will serve city folks also.

So, I would go with B with C close behind and the Stewart rail thing handed over to the state or the Port Authority to worry about.

Back to Whitestone for minute. While I can understand your personal experience having lived there briefly, I would say that you are the exception rather than the norm. Most of the #7 line are used by Flushing people and not so much Whitestone residents.

If you are going to extend the 7, I wouldn't go to Whitestone but rather further east into Flushing. The folks in Whitestone are mostly caucasian drivers (I hate to bring race into this but that's how I see it) anyway, whereas the subway riders are mostly Asians and hispanics.

While I don't have data, I suspect just from perception the Whitestone commute might have a significant percentage going to Long Island rather than Manhattan.

By the way, I lived in and around the Flushing area for a couple of years also.

ZippyTheChimp

December 8th, 2007, 10:45 AM

Most of the #7 line are used by Flushing people and not so much Whitestone residents.That's the point. Whitestone is one of the places where a high percentage of people car commute into Manhattan. For years, a friend of mine drove from Whitestone to Lower Manhattan. The only thing that stopped him was when the cheap parking lot where 101 Warren now sits closed.

How New Yorkers get to work (http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/transportation/20040115/16/837)

antinimby

December 8th, 2007, 11:09 AM

I'm assuming you are referring to this map:

http://www.gothamgazette.com/graphics/Map_2.gif

Isn't it interesting that there are other places such as eastern Bronx and even south central Staten Island that fall into the same category as the Whitestone area? The same argument can then be made to extend service to those areas but I don't think it makes sense to build more subways there given our priority.

Furthermore, I would caution that just looking at this map can be misleading because a large percentage of a small number is still a small amount of riders. To incur so much costs as subway extensions, it should be to be serve the greatest number of people and the greatest need.

I guess when you say Whitestone, I assume that you include neighboring College Point and Bayside as well since Whitestone itself is quite small.

In any event, I don't know the exact head count as far as those places are concern but I suspect they are relatively sparsely populated in comparison to other parts of Queens is concern. Just not worth it I don't think.

ZippyTheChimp

December 9th, 2007, 01:10 PM

The same argument can then be made to extend service to those areas but I don't think it makes sense to build more subways there given our priority.I did note that you could numerically improve the overall situation by extending subway surface anywhere, but I didn't make an argument for those other areas, did I.

I guess when you say Whitestone, I assume that you include neighboring College Point and Bayside as well since Whitestone itself is quite small.I just used 'Whitestone' to set the location. The subway extension would benefit all of CD7.

but I suspect they are relatively sparsely populated in comparison to other parts of Queens is concern. Just not worth it I don't think.Appearances can be deceiving.

CD7 population: 242,000
Density: 19,000/ sq mile

Queens density: 20,000/sq mile.

Even the less dense (12,000/ sq mile) CD11 (Bayside) at least has the LIRR.

**Reminder: I'm not advocating this extension as a #1 priority in NYC, just a better option than a LaGuardia link.

ASchwarz

December 10th, 2007, 12:54 AM

I have heard through a source at the MTA that the LGA link is again on the front-burner, and it is likely we will hear something soon. While there is presently no funding, the MTA wants to revisit the issue, and this time bury part of the extension.

Even if the extension is buried, it would supposedly be pretty inexpensive compared to the MTA's other projects.

Last time the extension was opposed by NIMBYs who didn't want to see elevated rail in their neighborhood. 9-11 occured and the extension was forgotten.

antinimby

December 10th, 2007, 01:17 AM

Don't worry, they'll find some other reason to oppose it again. Besides, hearing through a source isn't reliable and is probably just hearsay although as you know, I hope you are right.

antinimby

December 10th, 2007, 01:29 AM

Zippy, I'll just add this and then I'll wrap it up because I think we have both made our cases clear.

My experience with the outlying areas of the outerboroughs is that even with subway access, it just isn't used as much as those places closer to Manhattan.

For instance, there is less ridership in Bay Ridge than say Park Slope, even within the area but particularly to Manhattan. Understandably the longer distance and traveling time is probably a major factor.

With this in mind, it just doesn't make sense to extend service to those areas while an airport larger (passengers) than many major city's main airport have no rail link.

ASchwarz

December 10th, 2007, 02:20 AM

Don't worry, they'll find some other reason to oppose it again. Besides, hearing through a source isn't reliable and is probably just hearsay although as you know, I hope you are right.

My source is in the Communications Dept. at the MTA and a friend of mine.

He's relatively new to the organization, so he isn't completely in the loop, but I believe him when he says it is again under discussion.

ramvid01

December 10th, 2007, 02:23 AM

I know this has nothing to do with Flushing but I would like to see that dual contract line from Roosevelt Ave south into Maspeth and Middle Village built.

It would serve the greatly mass transit challenged South Central Queens and link it with the rest of Queens as it is currently being separated by a mirage of cemetaries.

They have the station built and a few hundred feet of tunnel already dug out, I wonder how feasible it is to build it now?

ZippyTheChimp

December 10th, 2007, 02:31 AM

For instance, there is less ridership in Bay Ridge than say Park Slope, even within the area but particularly to Manhattan. Understandably the longer distance and traveling time is probably a major factor.Coney Island, Sheepshead Bay, and Canarsie are all farther away from Manhattan than Bay Ridge.

Two of them, Coney Island and Sheepshead Bay have a lower percentage of car commute - they have subway access. Canarsie is high - it has no subway access.

Of the four areas, Bay Ridge is the easiest car-commute, and that would better explain why it's percentage is higher.

antinimby

December 10th, 2007, 02:32 AM

ramvid, everything is feasible as long as you got...

1) the dollar$
and 2) no community opposition.

submachine

December 10th, 2007, 09:59 AM

Re: Whitestone to Manhattan, many take the two express buses in the area.

Building subways to Whitestone

The LaGuardia extension would go to Whitestone? :confused:

antinimby

December 12th, 2007, 04:46 PM

Well regardless of the fading boom the 2 projects on the river are very busy. The Sky River View (Flushing Town Center) has some steel going up on the river side of the garage. The garage seems to be about 2 weeks from completion at least the section they are working on. As for the River Blue the site has been demo'ed and they seem to be flattening out the dirt.
Yup.

mgc1005 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/50734824@N00/2105426161/) - December 12, 2007

(Click on pics to enlarge)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2368/2105426161_203ede40ee.jpg?v=0 (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2368/2105426161_203ede40ee_b.jpg)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2203/2105425923_7d9fca70c8.jpg?v=0 (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2203/2105425923_7d9fca70c8_b.jpg)

antinimby

December 12th, 2007, 06:09 PM

Here's the first look at The River project:

http://www.levrealestate.com/imageserver/b-2-7.jpg

...^ not that good but at least it's a vast improvement over this earlier version:

http://www.denardis.com/resimage/h-images/roosAsmall.jpg

ramvid01

December 13th, 2007, 12:59 AM

I just realized that the councilman from Flushing, John Lui, who wants more parking for Flushing Town Center, is head of the transportation commitee in the city council...Yikes.

antinimby

December 13th, 2007, 09:27 AM

Not a surprise. Most of the City Council are made up of clueless people that have no iota of knowledge on the things that they're suppose to be in charge of.

ablarc

December 13th, 2007, 07:07 PM

Most of the City Council are made up of clueless people that have no iota of knowledge on the things that they're suppose to be in charge of.
The price you pay for amateur government.

Professional government brings you Moses and Haussmann.

devinkc

December 15th, 2007, 07:19 PM

Here's the first look at East Lake Plaza project at 42-33 Main St. (corner of Frankline Ave.)

http://www.harvestinternational.net/listings/lease_eastlake.html

antinimby

December 15th, 2007, 10:26 PM

Pretty nice. Very modern day Asian and will fit in well in the new Flushing. That retail base will provide a very strong anchor for that busy corner.

Every major boulevard in the outer boroughs should follow this formula. Highrise and midrise residentials over a retail base. No more single story stores with nothing above. All that air space wasted at a time when the city is running out of developable land.

As you know, I took a pic of the site a few months ago. I wonder how much progress has been made since then.

42-33 Main St. @ the NE corner of Franklin Ave.
A new 66-unit condo @ 17 stories.
Let's hope it looks good. The architectural firm looks to be local and Asian so we don't know what to expect.
This site used to be home to a popular, Chinese seafood restaurant and a small parking lot out front. No loss as the base of the new tower will be retail so this will be a great development.

http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/1412/img0026tc9.th.jpg (http://img174.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img0026tc9.jpg)

ramvid01

December 15th, 2007, 10:36 PM

I have been wondering what was going to go up on that site. I used to pass it everyday on the bus, seems they were pouring the foundation walls.

nyterp

January 1st, 2008, 09:47 PM

Has there been posted recently a list of new developments in the flushing area? Hard to keep track of the name changes and on/off again nature of developments...

antinimby

February 1st, 2008, 11:36 AM

Eastern Consolidated to market dormant Flushing theater

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/3857/RKO_Rendering.jpg
RKO Plaza rendering

By David Jones
Updated On 01/31/08 (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/8831) at 05:16PM

Eastern Consolidated has been named the exclusive agent to market the site of the long-dormant RKO Keith theater in downtown Flushing.

The site has already been rezoned for a 16-story, 390,000 square foot mixed-use project that could house Flushing's tallest building.

The rezoning allows for up to 200 residential units, 10,175 square feet of retail space, a senior center and 229 parking spaces. A glass facade would be built around the theater's landmarked lobby and foyer.

Community Board 7 officials say redeveloping the site is long overdue, and that the Main Street and Northern Boulevard intersection is a critical piece of Flushing's development.

"There is a 500,000 percent interest in getting this site developed," said Marilyn Bitterman, the Community Board 7 district manager. "Every meeting we go to the question comes up: when are we going to see some development at the RKO Keith's?"

The prospective sale comes amid a development boom in Flushing, where Muss Development is building Sky View Parc (once known as Flushing Town Center), a mixed-use development with a luxury condominium on College Point Boulevard near Flushing Meadow Park. That development will include big national retailers, including Target and Home Depot, Bitterman said.

At the RKO site, Boymelgreen Developers gave up on its big plans and decided to sell the property after a dispute with the community. In 2007, Community Board 7 approved a mixed-used project with 250 condominium units and retail and commercial space. However, after the approval Boymelgreen said it wanted to develop the residential units into lofts for home businesses.

Originally built in 1928, the RKO Keith's theater was considered one of the crown jewels of New York City's entertainment scene. The theater hosted big vaudeville acts, and operated for years as a movie house before it was sold for $3.4 million to developer Tommy Huang in 1986. Huang had planned to develop the site into a hotel and shopping center complex, but the site remained dormant for years.

Huang later pled guilty to charges that he allowed heating oil to spill into the RKO Keith's basement and tried to hide the damage. Boymelgreen bought the property from Huang for $15 million in 2002.

© 2008 The Real Deal

antinimby

February 9th, 2008, 07:39 PM

Backing for a Behemoth

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/03/realestate/03post-450.jpg
RESIDENTIAL SPACE ATOP RETAILING Sky View Parc in Queens is privately
financed, as Lefrak City was.

By C. J. HUGHES
Published: February 3, 2008 (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/realestate/03post.html)

IN the 1960s, the LeFrak family reached into its own pockets to create Lefrak City, the rambling complex of 4,700 apartments and millions of square feet of commercial space on 40 acres in Corona, Queens.

Typically, though, most mega-scale mixed-use developments there in the last four decades — whether Rochdale Village in Jamaica or Queens West in Long Island City — have needed the help of union or public financing.

Today, private money is back — at least at Sky View Parc, a $1 billion complex rising on a 14-acre former parking lot in Flushing, where College Point Boulevard meets Roosevelt Avenue. To offset the costs, its creators are relying heavily on 800,000 square feet of retail space they are including in the project.

All told, the 3.3-million-square-foot site, huddled around a four-acre private park, will include six towers with about 1,100 apartments atop the retail space, which will be spread over three levels. There will also be garages midblock.

Sky View Parc will go up in two phases, says Jason Muss, a principal of the Forest Hills-based Muss Development, the builder, whose partner is Onex Real Estate Partners, a Canadian fund. The first, scheduled to wrap up by the end of 2009, will create 448 luxury condominiums across three towers, from 575-square-foot studios to 2,000-square-foot three-bedrooms.

Though the granite-and-glass project may evoke Lefrak City’s ambition, it doesn’t necessarily share its middle-class price points: units will range from $375,000 to $2 million, Mr. Muss said, adding that sales start this week.

Who will buy? “We think there’s a large number of people with single-family homes in Queens and on Long Island that would be very happy to trade up and move here,” he said.

Below the condos will sit the Shoppes at Sky View Parc, which are 65 percent leased, to Home Depot and other big-box tenants, though contractual issues prevent Mr. Muss from naming them, he said; rents average $65 a square foot annually.

Making sure those lease revenues offset the project’s huge cost was a challenge for the architect, Carl W. Ordemann, a principal at Perkins Eastman, who took steps to increase the project’s retail square footage by creating its distinctive full-block pedestal-style base.

If stores had simply been clustered at the ground floor of stand-alone towers, as they are in many developments, the site would have yielded just 250,000 square feet — about one-quarter the amount he ended up including.

“Retail was the big financial driver for this project,” Mr. Ordemann said.

Aware that developments of this scale can transform a neighborhood, Mr. Ordemann also hopes to tie the project in to a linear park that the city has discussed for the eastern bank of the Flushing River, which flows nearby.

There’s hope among some in Queens that projects like Sky View Parc could generate help for the Flushing River, which is generally considered polluted.

Thomas Lowenhaupt, a Jackson Heights resident and member of Queens Community Board 13’s Flushing Bay Committee, which works to improve water quality, admits he “hadn’t even heard there was a Flushing River till a couple years ago.”

But, he said, “projects like this could definitely help raise awareness.”

Sky View Parc could fuel development interest in this north-central section of Queens, say community leaders, who note that Citi Field, a stadium for the New York Mets rising on the river’s bank, is aiding that cause, too.

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Monumental

February 10th, 2008, 09:26 PM

submachine

February 11th, 2008, 03:03 PM

But being a life-long resident of Flushing, I cant help but ask myself:

Who's going to pay to live six feet from the landing gear of airplanes every couple of minutes? .

Good question. If you want a high-rise with actual nightlife theres Manhattan, and if you want a $500k home you could buy an actual house in the surrounding areas (Whitestone, Bayside, Bay Terrace, College Point). This seems to be what most of the areas Asians with money are doing, so I really don't get the market for this.

Even the shopping area is in the middle of congestion, whereas you have another Target and two other Home Depots less than a few minutes away, and traffic-free.

antinimby

February 11th, 2008, 04:29 PM

Will you two eat your words when they sell this place out?

There's a reason why these developers are millionaires and the doubters here are sitting in front of their computers talking about them.

antinimby

February 11th, 2008, 05:08 PM

Just happen to run across this NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/fashion/10suburbs.html) from today basically talking about the environmental friendliness of various different housing styles.

Here's the graphic that summarizes the point of that article:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/09/fashion/green.graphic.large.jpg

As you can see, Sky View Parc is better environmentally than those "actual houses" in the surrounding areas. Which means this city should be promoting more dense developments like Sky View Parc (minus the excessive parking of course) and against any more of those single family houses.

Like Mr. Muss said in that article, there will be enough buyers from Queens and Long Island that will be interested.

Buildup

February 11th, 2008, 06:02 PM

Hi Wired New York.

First post though I've been trolling for a while.

I live in Flushing and pass this site every day. The progress is astounding. But being a life-long resident of Flushing, I cant help but ask myself:

Who's going to pay to live six feet from the landing gear of airplanes every couple of minutes? The noise and vibrations get horrible the farther west in Flushing you go and presumably its incredibly loud on higher floors. Just walking around on the street the noise of the jets is stupendous, so I cant imagine who would want to live on a 12th floor by the airport and have their whole apartment convulse every few minutes....

Hey guys. My first post as well. In regards to your post Monumental, I am like you, lived in Flushing most of my life. Id just like to inform you that people are paying these prices for residential units in downtown Flushing.

You are right in the fact that most buildings over 13 or so stories are extremely close to air traffic. Close enough that when standing on the roof or balcony, one could not hear another persons scream standing right next to him/her as a plane is preparing to land @ LGA. However this is where quality comes into play. Ive been to quality built units where I can literally throw a baseball and hit a passing plane. However standing inside a well built unit with soundproofed walls, floors, and windows, I couldn't hear the plane nor feel the vibrations that I would have otherwise felt in a cost friendly unit.

Ive been trolling for a while as well =P Thanks Antinimby for the updates :).

antinimby

February 11th, 2008, 06:12 PM

You're welcome and welcome aboard.

I'd just like to add also that twelve stories in Flushing is still further from the planes than say College Point, which is literally a stone's throw from the runway at La Guardia.

Monumental

February 11th, 2008, 10:18 PM

^
Will anyone be allowed to walk around on the nice little elevated park there or is that just for residents? I'd like to take a stroll up there and maybe view Flushing's beautiful future convention center :rolleyes:

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 03:02 AM

Will you two eat your words when they sell this place out?

There's a reason why these developers are millionaires and the doubters here are sitting in front of their computers talking about them.

Developers don't use computers?:rolleyes: Talk about the "millionaires" who developed Arverne by The Sea, not just a financial failure but hated by the community as well.

Back to the subject, who will pay half a mil to live in this Muss development instead of a house in Bay Terrace or an apartment in Manhattan? Or a coop 5 minutes away in Jackson Heights for 25% the price?

ASchwarz

February 13th, 2008, 04:15 AM

Submachine, try again. I'm sorry, but I don't think you know the first thing about Queens real estate.

Arverne is a huge success. Resales are three times purchase prices.

And what do you mean by "hated by the community"? It IS the community. There were no residents in this portion of Arverne.

As for Flushing new construction, if you really think most people would prefer to live in something old and crappy way out at Bay Terrace (far from Manhattan and subways), then why are property values so much higher in Flushing? Sales prices and rents are much higher in Flushing, which is booming as much as basically any neighborhood in the city.

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 03:29 PM

Developers don't use computers?:rolleyes:Developers use computers but to further their business. Doubters like yourself use it to badmouth them. One makes loads of money, the other doesn't and just comes across as bitter.

Still don't get it?

Talk about the "millionaires" who developed Arverne by The Sea, not just a financial failure but hated by the community as well.Financial failure? I guess not.

This is New York. Anything large scale and new will generally be hated by "the community." The community doesn't know or care about what's good for the city. They just don't want anything in or near their backyards.

Unfortunately, the whole city is always someone's backyard so something has to give.

If left up to the community, this city will would never grow, prosper, compete and or get anything done.

Back to the subject, who will pay half a mil to live in this Muss development instead of a house in Bay Terrace or an apartment in Manhattan? Or a coop 5 minutes away in Jackson Heights for 25% the price?Like I said, there'll be plenty of people lined up to buy the units here. They probably can't build enough units fast enough to meet the demand.

There are plenty of people in Queens and Long Island that are getting tired of the suburban lifestyle of constantly having to drive everywhere, do constant maintenance work on the house and yard and are ready to move up to a multi-unit building where mass transit and shopping is within walking distance.

Furthermore, comparing these new units to an old, coop in gritty Jackson Heights is like asking why anyone would want to buy an expensive new Mercedes-Benz when they can buy a much more affordable, used 1995 Ford Focus instead. Silly.

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 06:16 PM

There are plenty of people in Queens and Long Island that are getting tired of the suburban lifestyle of constantly having to drive everywhere, do constant maintenance work on the house and yard and are ready to move up to a multi-unit building where mass transit and shopping is within walking distance.

You sound like a Muss ad copy. You think people from Long Island, Bayside, Whitestone are moving to Flushing? lmao! Everyone in Flushing is moving out of Flushing, if they can afford it. And if they cant afford it, they certainly can't afford a brand new condo.

Furthermore, comparing these new units to an old, coop in gritty Jackson Heights is like asking why anyone would want to buy an expensive new Mercedes-Benz when they can buy a much more affordable, used 1995 Ford Focus instead. Silly.

Using your silly car analogy, the new Benz is Manhattan, the Ford Focus is Jackson Heights, and the Ford Focus with a new paintjob that costs as much as a Benz....is Flushing.

Next.

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 06:39 PM

You sound like a Muss ad copy. You think people from Long Island, Bayside, Whitestone are moving to Flushing? lmao! Everyone in Flushing is moving out of Flushing, if they can afford it. And if they cant afford it, they certainly can't afford a brand new condo.Okay, let's put an end to this once and for all.

They are not building new condo buildings for no one. Those new condo buildings, both built and under construction are not and will not be sitting empty. They are being bought and occupied. If they were financial failures as you have claimed, then why are they building more of them? Your example of a financial failure, Arverne-By-The-Sea, is moving onto their FOURTH (as in 4) phase. See here (http://www.arvernebythesea.com/). Do you see the words "SOLD OUT" there?

As for people moving out of Flushing, I think you once again have embarrassed yourself there. See this (http://osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/june06/062906.htm).

Using your silly car analogy, the new Benz is Manhattan, the Ford Focus is Jackson Heights, and the Ford Focus that with a new paintjob that costs as much as a Benz....is Flushing.Yes, my analogy is "silly" but you comparing a new product in Flushing to an old co-op in Jackson Heights is right on the mark. Yeah, okay.

By the way submachine, why are you so worried on whether anyone will buy these units and on whether the developers here will fail financially or not?

What does it matter to you that someone will or will not lose out in their business venture?

ASchwarz

February 13th, 2008, 06:47 PM

Submachine, you don't know the first thing about Flushing.

Flushing home prices are actually higher than that of Long Island. I don't doubt some people are moving out to Long Island, but it's usually because they can't afford Flushing.

Long Island is barely growing, while Flushing is booming.

And Bayside and Whitestone are basically just more suburban versions of Flushing. They definitely aren't more expensive.

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 07:23 PM

Flushing home prices are actually higher than that of Long Island.

You are clueless, I doubt you've ever even been to Flushing.

"Flushing" is many different areas. Flushing North and Whitestone are like Bayside, with large single family and 2-family houses.

That has nothing to do with "Downtown Flushing" where these condos are, which makes Jackson Heights look like Soho.

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 07:29 PM

you comparing a new product in Flushing to an old co-op in Jackson Heights is right on the mark.

I think most people would choose the coop in Jackson Heights than to live in Downtown Flushing, let alone pay four times more to do so.

In order to defend Muss, you claim people want to move from the suburbs back to high-rise apartments.

In order to defend Muss, you claim that people who want a high-rise and shopping would choose Flushing over Manhattan.

Really, whats your agenda here? You seem really concerned on whether anyone will buy these units and on whether the developers here will fail financially or not? What does it matter to you that someone will or will not lose out in their business venture?

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 07:35 PM

As for people moving out of Flushing, I think you once again have embarrassed yourself there. See this (http://osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/june06/062906.htm).

You just proved my point.

I said everyone in Flushing is moving out of Flushing, if they can afford it.

And that link you posted is exactly the reason why.:)

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 07:47 PM

You are clueless, I doubt you've ever even been to Flushing.I have lived in Flushing. I find what you say to be more clueless than anyone here.

"Flushing" is many different areas. Flushing North and Whitestone are like Bayside, with large single family and 2-family houses.Okay, so what's your point. Who said anything to the contrary about that?

That has nothing to do with "Downtown Flushing" where these condos are, which makes Jackson Heights look like Soho.Jackson Heights looks like Soho? submachine, I'd like to know what you are smoking.

ASchwarz

February 13th, 2008, 07:50 PM

You are clueless, I doubt you've ever even been to Flushing.

LOL, I've been there many times, which is completely irrevelent.

Go to a Flushing R.E. agent and ask to see a 500k house in Flushing. They will laugh you out of Queens.

Then go to a Long Island R.E. agent and ask to see a 500k house. Outside of the Hamptons and a few fancy North Shore enclaves, you will have tons of options in virtually all communities.

ASchwarz

February 13th, 2008, 07:52 PM

You just proved my point.

I said everyone in Flushing is moving out of Flushing, if they can afford it.

The link shows that you are completely wrong.

People are moving out of Flushing if they cannot afford it!

People aren't moving from Flushing to East Hampton or Soho. They are moving to cheaper places in Queens or Long Island.

ASchwarz

February 13th, 2008, 07:58 PM

I think most people would choose the coop in Jackson Heights than to live in Downtown Flushing, let alone pay four times more to do so.

Well you'd be wrong (wouldn't be the first time). Flushing is more expensive than Jackson Heights. As for how much more expensive, Jackson Heights does not yet have comparable highrise luxury new construction towers.

In order to defend Muss, you claim people want to move from the suburbs back to high-rise apartments.

You aren't arguing with us, you are arguing with the U.S. Census, which shows that Flushing is growing rapidly, while the suburbs are barely growing.

In order to defend Muss, you claim that people who want a high-rise and shopping would choose Flushing over Manhattan.

Noone claimed this. Flushing is much cheaper than Manhattan. Muss' development would easily be twice the price in Manhattan (three times more if in a super-prime area of Manhattan).

What does it matter to you that someone will or will not lose out in their business venture

You are the one making this claim in the face of a mountain of evidence that condos are, in fact, selling. Queens is enjoying the biggest building boom since the postwar era.

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 07:58 PM

I think most people would choose the coop in Jackson Heights than to live in Downtown Flushing, let alone pay four times more to do so.And yes, we all know that what YOU think is what will happen exactly.

In order to defend Muss, you claim people want to move from the suburbs back to high-rise apartments.I'm not defending Muss. I am questioning your claims that people will not buy new condos there. Why makes you think this can't happen. If hadn't realize, the trend of people moving back to the city has been happening for over a decade now. Cities all over the country, even one's that were once dying, are getting revitalized.

In order to defend Muss, you claim that people who want a high-rise and shopping would choose Flushing over Manhattan.First of all, where did I say people would choose Flushing over Manhattan?

Second of all, yes there are people that would choose Flushing over Manhattan. Manhattan like any other place is not for everybody. There are plenty of people that will like Manhattan over Flushing and there are also people that will like Flushing over Manhattan. You can't categorize EVERYONE into the same category because you think everyone has the same mindset as you.

Really, whats your agenda here?My agenda here is to counter the false and fearmongering of someone like you and your agendas. Now's my turn to ask you, what is YOUR agenda?

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 08:03 PM

You just proved my point.
I said everyone in Flushing is moving out of Flushing, if they can afford it.
And that link you posted is exactly the reason why.:)submachine, you are really messed up if you think that I just proved your point.

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 08:23 PM

Flushing is more expensive than Jackson Heights.

Fact: Downtown Flushing is currently not more expensive than Jackson Heights.

Question: Who is going to pay 4 times to purchase a condo in Downtown Flushing?

Muss' development would easily be twice the price in Manhattan

Again, the obvious point here is if you want luxury, you could buy a house in the suburbs for the same price as Skyview Parc. If you want a high-rise and night-life and "shopping", you move to Manhattan for the same price as Skyview Parc.

So the question remains: Who will be buying, and why?

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 08:26 PM

there are people that would choose Flushing over Manhattan.

Obviously people have been choosing Flushing and many other areas over Manhattan, because of the cost factor.

Skyview Parc removes the cost savings.

Now tell us all who would choose a high-rise in downtown Flushing over one in Manhattan, and why. For the same price. Simple question, been asked about four times, still waiting.

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 08:34 PM

Go to a Flushing R.E. agent and ask to see a 500k house in Flushing. They will laugh you out of Queens.

Considering a 2 bedroom at Skyview Parc starts at $650,000, ask an RE agent for a house at the same price. Watch them laugh when you ask them if it only has 2 bedrooms.

People aren't moving from Flushing to East Hampton or Soho. They are moving to cheaper places in Queens or Long Island.

You really must be a tourist. They are buying houses, 10 minutes away, in Whitestone, Bayside, Bay Terrace, etc.

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 08:36 PM

Fact: Downtown Flushing is currently not more expensive than Jackson Heights.Show me.

Conclusion: Who is going to pay 4 times to purchase a condo in Downtown Flushing?No one. It will sit and collect dust because that's what successful developers do.

Again, the obvious point here is if you want luxury, you could buy a house in the suburbs for the same price as Skyview Parc. If you want a high-rise and night-life and "shopping", you move to Manhattan for the same price as Skyview Parc.What if someone doesn't like to live in the suburbs or live in Manhattan? Have you ever thought of that?

So the question remains: Who is buying?The answer again is no one. It will sit and collect dust.

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 08:46 PM

Obviously people have been choosing Flushing and many other areas over Manhattan, because of the cost factor.
Skyview Parc removes the cost savings.You are assuming that Manhattan is the end-all be-all destination for EVERYONE. Has it not occurred to you that not everyone, even if given a similar cost, don't want to live in Manhattan?

With that said, I highly doubt a condo in Sky View Parc costs the same as a similarly sized apartment in Manhattan. submachine, you are making all these ridiculous assumptions that aren't even back up by a shred of evidence.

Now tell us all who would choose a high-rise in downtown Flushing over one in Manhattan, and why. For the same price. Simple question, been asked about four times, still waiting.And answered 5 times by us but just flies over your head.

submachine

February 13th, 2008, 08:48 PM

What if someone doesn't like to live in the suburbs or live in Manhattan? Have you ever thought of that?

No. But I will now.

Someone wants to spend $650,000 on a place to live, maybe their family too.

Option 1) A nice house in Bayside, Whitestone, Bay Terrace:)

Option 2) A nice coop in Jackson Heights and save $400,000:)

Option 3) A nice condo 5 minutes away from either of those places, in downtown Flushing:confused:

Option 4) A nice coop in Manhattan:)

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 08:56 PM

Considering a 2 bedroom at Skyview Parc starts at $650,000, ask an RE agent for a house at the same price. Watch them laugh when you ask them if it only has 2 bedrooms.submachine, you are comparing apples to oranges. A condo is not like a house. Even if costs are equivalent, they will not have the same square footage or even the same amenities. They are too dissimilar to make the comparisons that you are trying so hard to make. It's not about choosing between a condo or a unattached private house if they are both the same price.

People have different reasons for wanting to live in a condo over a house, some of which I have already given you like, not having to drive everywhere and home maintenance. Other factors include perhaps being closer to work or business that one may have in the area. There are about as many different reasons as there are people.

You really must be a tourist. They are buying houses, 10 minutes away, in Whitestone, Bayside, Bay Terrace, etc.And there are people buying their houses in Flushing. That is what a real estate market is. People buying and people selling. People move in and people move out. Last time I checked that's what capitalism is all about, isn't it?

antinimby

February 13th, 2008, 09:11 PM

No. But I will now.
Someone wants to spend $650,000 on a place to live, maybe their family too.
Option 1) A nice house in Bayside, Whitestone, Bay Terrace:)
Option 2) A nice coop in Jackson Heights and save $400,000:)
Option 3) A nice condo 5 minutes away from either of those places, in downtown Flushing:confused:
Option 4) A nice coop in Manhattan:)Like I said, using your laughable logic that only you take seriously, these units in Flushing will sit unsold and collect dust.

Just keep on believing and convincing yourself that as the developer rakes in the dough.

ASchwarz

February 13th, 2008, 11:55 PM

Fact: Downtown Flushing is currently not more expensive than Jackson Heights.

Question: Who is going to pay 4 times to purchase a condo in Downtown Flushing?

You keep contradicting yourself. For some reason, you (falsely) think that Jackson Heights is more expensive than Flushing, and then you offer an example (Skyview Park) that demolishes your claim. If Jackson Heights is really more expensive, then why are all the Flushing condo sales at a higher price point?

I think I'd leave the pricing to people who actually know the market.

Again, the obvious point here is if you want luxury, you could buy a house in the suburbs for the same price as Skyview Parc. If you want a high-rise and night-life and "shopping", you move to Manhattan for the same price as Skyview Parc.

So the question remains: Who will be buying, and why?

None of this makes any sense.

Why would you automatically choose the suburbs if you want luxury?

There are rich, middle class and poor suburbs, just like there are rich, middle class and poor urban neighborhoods. The worst ghettos in metro NY are in suburban jurisdictions. The most expensive properties in metro NY are in Manhattan. There are plenty of examples of both wealth and poverty both in the densest neighborhoods and in the most sprawling exurbs.

Not sure what your "highrise, night life and shopping" argument means either. I would guess for many upwardly mobile Flushing residents (especially Asian residents), the highrise, nightlife and shopping amenities would actually be better in Flushing than in Manhattan. There are much larger Chinese, Korean and South Asian communities in Flushing than in Manhattan, and there is no apartment building anywhere in Manhattan that is sitting atop this much shopping.

submachine

February 14th, 2008, 02:10 AM

these units in Flushing will sit unsold and collect dust.

Just like these units in Flushing, that sit unsold and collect dust: http://www.3830parsons.com/

And all the other overpriced units that the market is long gone for. If you can afford it, buy a coach airline ticket to Vegas and tour all the units there, unsold, collecting dust.

Your infatuation with developments (and, oddly, developers) isn't rooted in reality.

submachine

February 14th, 2008, 02:11 AM

You keep contradicting yourself. For some reason, you (falsely) think that Jackson Heights is more expensive than Flushing, and then you offer an example (Skyview Park) that demolishes your claim.

Once again, you just unknowingly proved my point, but forget Jackson Heights if its too confusing; Within eyesight of Skyview Park, in Flushing there are co-ops available at 1/3 the price.

Are you forgetting the three most important factors in real estate?

Location.

Location.

Location.

for many upwardly mobile Flushing residents (especially Asian residents), the highrise, nightlife and shopping amenities would actually be better in Flushing than in Manhattan..

Those residents have not forgotten the three most important factors in real estate, thats why when they can afford it they are fleeing Downtown Flushing and moving into houses all over Whitestone, Bayside, and Bay Terrace. But you'd already know that if you spent more than 5 minutes anywhere in Northern Queens.

antinimby

February 14th, 2008, 03:10 AM

Just like these units in Flushing, that sit unsold and collect dust: http://www.3830parsons.com/Don't you wish it was. The fact is that this project is barely finished and the Certificate of Occupany hasn't even issued yet. On that link, you can see they're having an open house this Saturday. Come back and talk to me about collecting dust a couple of months from now.

And all the other overpriced units that the market is long gone for. If you can afford it, buy a coach airline ticket to Vegas and tour all the units there, unsold, collecting dust.They may or may not be overpriced but that is not for you to say. The market will determine whether they are or not. If they are, then the price will drop, if not, then they will get sold. Don't you worry you little heart out, because as much as would like to see that they won't get sold, they will.

And it's almost laughable if it wasn't so pathetic, that you should be talking about Las Vegas. For starters, what the hell does Las Vegas have to do with Flushing? Why stop at Vegas? Maybe you should (if YOU can afford it that is) fly to Toledo, Ohio or maybe Helena, Montana, too.

Talk about getting absurd. Sounds like you may be losing it.

Your infatuation with developments (and, oddly, developers) isn't rooted in reality.Let's see...every point you have raised has been debunked and I'm the one not rooted in the reality? Seems like you are the one in need of a reality check badly.

Call it what you will but this whole forum is about development. If we were to talk about anything else, it would be considered off-topic. And what is your obsession with developments and strangely, on developers about anyway?

By the way, I have asked several questions that you haven't yet answered. Are you trying to avoid answering them?

You know if your next posts don't have the answers, I'm just going to continue to ask so there's no getting around it.

antinimby

February 14th, 2008, 03:29 AM

Once again, you just unknowingly proved my point, but forget Jackson Heights if its too confusing; Within eyesight of Skyview Park, in Flushing there are co-ops available at 1/3 the price.The only person who's confused is you. You keep on saying that we've unknowingly proved your point but I don't see any evidence of it. Time after time, we have disproved all your points, from your claim that people are leaving Flushing, to Flushing is cheap, and then a whole bunch of nonsense that isn't worth rehashing again. It's like running around in a little retarded circle with you.

Are you forgetting the three most important factors in real estate? Location. Location. Location.And the location near Downtown Flushing can't be beat so you have as you would like to say so much, unknowingly proved MY point.

Those residents have not forgotten the three most important factors in real estate, thats why when they can afford it they are fleeing Downtown Flushing and moving into houses all over Whitestone, Bayside, and Bay Terrace. But you'd already know that if you spent more than 5 minutes anywhere in Northern Queens.Forget 5 minutes, I have lived in Flushing for years and as you have seen with my photographs, I was just there last Fall so there isn't anything major happening there that I don't know about.

As for people "fleeing." That's funny. People may be fleeing downtrodden Detroit, Buffalo, Camden, etc. but with the population growth (as I have shown) in Flushing, I wouldn't exactly call it fleeing. Some people may move out of Flushing but many more are coming in their place.

That's why there's a net gain in population, just in case you don't understand simple mathematics. I know that might be hard for you to grasp so I'll make it easy for you: if one person leave and two people enter, then the net gain is one.

Buildup

February 14th, 2008, 03:05 PM

It really comes down to preference Sub. There are many different types of people and homebuyers out there. I think you are just over generalizing a bit too much in saying that absolutely nobody would want to purchase a condo home in downtown flushing and if they do, they are retarded.

Definitely there are many people who see things the way you see them when purchasing a home. Who would want to live in crowded downtown Flushing? Loud Flushing? Sometimes even stinky Flushing? Who would pay the same amount of money to buy a 2BR less than 1000 sqft over a 5 bedroom house in north Flushing or College Point etc.?

I'm actually like you, I would never pay that much for a unit so small in downtown flushing when I can invest that money into a house in a less populated area. HOWEVER, you have to look at it through other people's eyes. There are many, many people who WOULD pay that much money to live at their residence of CHOICE in downtown flushing. Young Asian Couples who enjoy the shopping/culture or just like to keep close to their roots. Families buying a retirement home for their parents(many times asian) where they are literally steps and mere feet away from the closest asian supermarket or restaurant. People who prefer a 24 hour security building with no hassle of mowing the lawn or taking out the trash. People who prefer a reserved parking space opposed to looking for parking everynight when they get home.

These are just a few things that people consider when buying a home anywhere. As far as the developers go, I dont believe any of them CURRENTLY have failed in profits at least. Overpriced? perhaps. But what Ive learned is that (and not to sound mean or messed up here haha) nothing is TRULY overpriced as long as someone is paying that price for them. As a measurement of success, I guess I look at it this way. Sometimes houses whether old or newly constructed are put on the market and take long amounts of time to sell. Some even take up to more than a year. When you look at the currently finished buildings which contain 20-50+ units and they are selling a good majority of their units within the first year, Id consider that a success.

It really just comes down to preference. As far as people not buying these condos now, Id disagree currently. But you might have a point in a few years though. As we don't know how the market will play out in a few years with all these new projects going up. Some people aren't worried, however some people are a little concerned that they might oversaturate the market. Nobody will really know for sure unfortunately :(.

PS.
*Mental Note to Self*
Don't piss off Antinimby.

submachine

February 14th, 2008, 03:15 PM

On that link, you can see they're having an open house this Saturday.

lol you aren't familiar with sales tactics yet. They have an open house every other Saturday, been on sale for about six months. Oops!

They may or may not be overpriced but that is not for you to say.

Actually it is for me to say, and this is the very thread, in the very forum, in the very website to say it: They are ridiculously overpriced. I tried to dumb it down for you and give examples of why, but you remain clueless. I have an idea. Since you're so enamored of this place, buy a 1 bedroom in skyview park for $600,000 for yourself:)or a two bedroom for $700,000:)It's practically a bargain!

submachine

February 14th, 2008, 03:22 PM

And the location near Downtown Flushing can't be beat ....with the population growth (as I have shown) in Flushing, I wouldn't exactly call it fleeing. Some people may move out of Flushing but many more are coming in their place.

Wow you really don't get it, you keep proving my point: Of course Flushing is flooded with overcrowding and traffic, the ones fleeing are the ones who can afford to escape. That is why minutes away in Bayside, Bay Terrace, and Whitestone houses are being bought up by former Flushing residents.

And the ones who stay? Skyview Park is surrounded by co-ops available at 1/3 the price.

submachine

February 14th, 2008, 03:35 PM

I would never pay that much for a unit so small in downtown flushing when I can invest that money into a house in a less populated area

Exactly. Or a similar sized unit 1 minute away at 1/3 the price. Or a similar priced unit in Manhattan.

Young Asian Couples who enjoy the shopping/culture or just like to keep close to their roots. Families buying a retirement home for their parents(many times asian) where they are literally steps and mere feet away from the closest asian supermarket or restaurant.

Finally someone offers up some actual answers. That seems to be the only possibility, but in my experience Downtown Flushing is the last place young Asians actually want to live. Their demo is by far the one doing the most home-buying in the surrounding areas, or moving to the more trendy BK or Manhattan. I think paying more to stay in Flushing is the furthest thing on their mind.

Buildup

February 14th, 2008, 04:18 PM

Exactly. Or a similar sized unit 1 minute away at 1/3 the price. Or a similar priced unit in Manhattan.

Again thats just our preference. The people that are buying homes in downtown flushing are not wrong or dumb for investing there. More so, neither are the developers making millions answering the demand for these people. Nobody is dumb as far as I can see in a business sense here. Perhaps you can apply and state that towards the decision people make and in their preferences in light of your own preferences and decisions, however preference, like an opinion, can rarely be called dumb and insulted upon.

Their demo is by far the one doing the most home-buying in the surrounding areas, or moving to the more trendy BK or Manhattan. I think paying more to stay in Flushing is the furthest thing on their mind.

Again there may be some over generalization here. Even among young Asians, there is a spectrum. You are right in your statement when referring to young Asian Americans who were born here or brought to this country at a young age. Who live on their own, work in the city etc. etc. But there are also other groups of young Asian home buyers out there. Those who have come to the country recently with money. Those who cant speak English very well but have millions to invest in business and realty. There are those young immigrants of any race that come to this country and remain in their comfort zones or areas where English isn't really required nor is the conformity to American culture. You won't see these young investors hanging out at the newest, hippest bar in Williamsburg nor would they want to. There are so many people out there and I think its just hard to generalize when considering a product(this case real property) when not considering the full scope of the developers target consumers.

Heres another example of a hybrid of the two extremes I listed above. We have a female Asian financial analyst working for Goldman Sachs that commutes to Manhattan everyday. She just received this job and is moving from another state. Shes the only child. Her father passed away when she was young. Shes the breadwinner of the family. Its just her, her mother, and her grandparents. She has very strong family ties and responsibilities which she cant ignore. Her family weighs very heavy on her mind when making decisions. Including her new residence. Flushing, would be great for her family and an ideal choice for her and she could certainly afford it even though she doesn't speak one word of Chinese or Korean... People have limitless reasons and preferences that you cant account for when they chose a home. Preference.

Buildup

February 14th, 2008, 04:27 PM

Off topic...or rather back on topic...

Does anyone have any idea what they are doing with the property on Prince st and 38th ave? It used to be a Ford Dealership a long time ago. I know its going to be another res/com mix use but does anyone know the specs yet?

ZippyTheChimp

February 14th, 2008, 04:30 PM

I'm actually like you, I would never pay that much for a unit so small in downtown flushing when I can invest that money into a house in a less populated area

Exactly. Or a similar sized unit 1 minute away at 1/3 the price. Or a similar priced unit in Manhattan.Hey submachine, don't partially quote someone, and say he agrees with you.

I'm actually like you, I would never pay that much for a unit so small in downtown flushing when I can invest that money into a house in a less populated area. HOWEVER, you have to look at it through other people's eyes. There are many, many people who WOULD pay that much money to live at their residence of CHOICE in downtown flushing.Geez, he even tried to clue you in with an all-caps HOWEVER.

Much different with the rest of the paragraph, isn't it?

antinimby

February 14th, 2008, 05:21 PM

Off topic...or rather back on topic...
Does anyone have any idea what they are doing with the property on Prince st and 38th ave? It used to be a Ford Dealership a long time ago. I know its going to be another res/com mix use but does anyone know the specs yet?If you're talking about 37-14 Prince St., it will be 14 stories and 72 units.

submachine

February 14th, 2008, 07:08 PM

Hey submachine, don't partially quote someone, and say he agrees with you.

Hey Zippy, did you miss this part: "I'm actually like you"

Or what about this part: "Again thats just our preference"

Much different with the rest of the paragraph, isn't it?

Actually not much different or even a little different.

He agrees with me.

He just said others may not.

Which I agreed with. lol.

Thanks for the help though. :)

antinimby

February 14th, 2008, 07:20 PM

Unbelievable.

submachine, just drop it. You are embarrassing yourself.

No one really believes, other than you, that none of those units will sell, overpriced or not.

submachine

February 14th, 2008, 07:30 PM

The people that are buying homes in downtown flushing are not wrong or dumb for investing there.

Not now, since pricing in downtown flushing is pretty consistent; for a 3 bedroom coop its $250,000 to $300,000. Skyview Park starts at $750,000. Considering location (location, location), it's a horrible investment.

But there are also other groups of young Asian home buyers out there. Those who have come to the country recently with money. Those who cant speak English very well but have millions to invest in business and realty.

You really think those people would want to live across the street from a housing project? The smart money consistently moves out of apartments in Downtown Flushing, and into houses North Flushing, Whitestone, Bay Terrace, Bayside, even College Point. Ask any realtor, or any resident.

submachine

February 14th, 2008, 07:35 PM

No one really believes, other than you, that none of those units will sell, overpriced or not.

Just because you can't figure out if they are overpriced or not doesn't mean the rest of us can't.

Bottom line is money talks, and I noticed your money isn't going anywhere near Skyview Park :)

ZippyTheChimp

February 14th, 2008, 08:53 PM

He agrees with me.

He just said others may not.

Which I agreed with. lol.

Thanks for the help though. :)

"He just said others may not"

Which is pretty much the point of everyone you are arguing with.

Why do people who can't read wind up laughing at loud.

ZippyTheChimp

February 14th, 2008, 08:55 PM

Unbelievable.
I lost interest after he said that Arverne is a failure.

Hasn't a clue.

ASchwarz

February 15th, 2008, 02:28 PM

Wow you really don't get it, you keep proving my point: Of course Flushing is flooded with overcrowding and traffic, the ones fleeing are the ones who can afford to escape.

And the ones who stay? Skyview Park is surrounded by co-ops available at 1/3 the price.

Submachine, you really are 100% clueless. I think you don't even believe what you say; you are just arguing for the sake of "stirring the pot".

Bay Terrace, College Point, etc. are CHEAPER than Flushing. People "flee" Flushing mostly because they can't afford it, just like people "flee" Manhattan for brownstone Brooklyn because they can't afford it.

Yes, some people like more suburban neighborhoods, and others like more urban neighborhoods, but the FACT is that Flushing is pricier than those other neighborhoods, so that means that Flushing is more desirable than those communities. Whether or not you personally like Flushing is irrelevent.

Whether or not there are cheaper coops surrounding Skyview Park is irrevelent. Skyview Park is a condo, not a coop. For someone who claims to know something about real estate, it's pretty humorous to hear you compare condos and coops as if they were apples-to-apples.

In Manhattan, one can find properties for sale for $6,000 a foot in proximity to properties that sold for $600 a foot, so your three-to-one price discrepency claim is hardly telling in a market where ten-to-one is not that unusual.

I'm also confused by your claim that $650,000 for a two-bedroom constitutes Manhattan pricing. In much of Manhattan, you can't get a new construction studio for $650,0000. A typical new construction two-bedroom will probably run about three times the pricing at Skyview Park.

ASchwarz

February 15th, 2008, 02:30 PM

in my experience Downtown Flushing is the last place young Asians actually want to live.

Your anecdotal experience is irrelevent. The sales market shows that you are wrong.

ASchwarz

February 15th, 2008, 02:32 PM

smart money consistently moves out of apartments in Downtown Flushing, and into houses North Flushing, Whitestone, Bay Terrace, Bayside, even College Point. Ask any realtor, or any resident.

LOL, just like the "smart money" moves out of Manhattan into cheaper parts of the city. Just ask any realtor or resident.

Buildup

February 15th, 2008, 02:57 PM

On another note, I think Im gonna have lunch at the new sushi place at Queens Crossing. It looks really nice. Great makeover for the restaurants in that area. Really nice to see the new businesses improving their interior design.:) With a 14,000 sqft. overhead for rent though, I hope the prices aren't along the lines of Matsui's or Morimoto's :p

submachine

February 18th, 2008, 12:47 AM

Whether or not there are cheaper coops surrounding Skyview Park is irrevelent. Skyview Park is a condo, not a coop.

Location, location, location. The entire location is surrounded by co-ops, under 200k for a 1br, under 300k for a 3br. A condo doesn't justify tripling the average pricing, so who will buy it? I think theres an answer:

Who would want to live in crowded downtown Flushing? Loud Flushing? Sometimes even stinky Flushing? Who would pay the same amount of money to buy a 2BR less than 1000 sqft over a 5 bedroom house in north Flushing or College Point etc.?

Families buying a retirement home for their parents(many times asian) where they are literally steps and mere feet away from the closest asian supermarket or restaurant.

Agree. Skyview Park will be an Asian retirement home.

In 25 pages, no one has given any other reasons why someone would spend three times more than neighboring residents to live there.

Buildup

February 18th, 2008, 12:19 PM

Agree. Skyview Park will be an Asian retirement home.

You are quoting me out of context Sub.

As far as your repeated question of "who will buy these units at these prices?", perhaps you should stop asking us and call some of the newly constructed buildings and ask how many units they have sold. You might find your answer there. :)

This past Saturday, I went to the open house for 3838 parsons. All their C units on all floors were already sold. Their A units were almost all sold as well along with other units. Not bad for a building that recieved their CO pretty recently. So if you still don't believe that anyone will buy these homes, just go there and knock on some doors ;)

submachine

February 18th, 2008, 08:38 PM

I went to the open house for 3838 parsons. All their C units on all floors were already sold. Their A units were almost all sold as well along with other units.

Do you mean 3830 Parsons? It's less than 15% sold since the initial offering over six months ago. And they are priced $100,000 to $200,000 less than Skyview.

There was a huge condo building that went up in Corona over a year ago on 108th St, completely sold out in four months, because the price reflected the location. An increase over surrounding residences, but not a tripling or quadrupling.

sunnyguy

February 20th, 2008, 06:26 PM

It will be very interesting to see who will buy these newly built condos in Flushing.

The new condos are a little overpriced to me, but it is absurd for submachine to compare those condos to the coops nearby. For Asian, Jackson Height can not compare to Flushing.

There are two benchmark highend condo in Flushing:

1. Woodner House @ 13835 elder ave built in 80s ($500 - $ 600/sq ft)

2. Sanford Tower @ 13347 Sanford Ave built in 2000 ($500 - $ 600 /sq ft)

The price of skyview is higher than the above, but it is brand new. Will Skyview be much better than Sanford Tower to derserve a higher price? I doubt it. But if the developer can attract those people who can not afford the highend condo in Forest Hills, he might be fine.

Monumental

February 21st, 2008, 08:53 PM

Does anyone know whats going to be built on the lot across from SkyView; the one across the street also on College Point? You can see it from the seven train its a big lot and it looks like there's a lot of work going on....well...at least there's a big hole there, but that gives me cause for hope.

I would think this location would be prime for development in light of everything, but I havent heard anything about it around here.

ramvid01

February 22nd, 2008, 01:00 AM

Here's the first look at The River project:

http://www.levrealestate.com/imageserver/b-2-7.jpg

^^^You mean this?

sunnyguy

February 25th, 2008, 03:03 PM

Javits Expansion May Decamp to Queens

By PETER KIEFER
Staff Reporter of the Sun
February 25, 2008
f politicians can't agree on expanding the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Javits+Center) on Manhattan (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Manhattan)'s West Side, they may just move the project to Queens (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Queens+County).

As city and state officials clash over the fate of the land surrounding the Javits Convention Center, the 61 acres at Willets Point (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Willets+Point) eight miles to the east in Queens appear to be gaining new appeal as an alternative.

The city is finalizing its plans for a mixed-use development just next to Shea Stadium and trying to quell local opposition at the same time. The development — as laid out by Mayor Bloomberg (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Michael+Bloomberg) in May — calls for the creation of a total of 5,500 units of housing, along with 1.8 million square feet of retail space and 500,000 square feet of office space. The city's environmental review of the plan also mentions the possibility that "a convention center of up to 400,000 square feet would be developed."
"If you look at cities around the world there is a trend toward having a satellite convention center," the president of the Regional Plan Association, Robert Yaro, said. Mr. Yaro said he favors building a convention center in Queens that could act as a complement to, rather than a replacement of, the Javits Center.

Currently, Governor Spitzer is at loggerheads with Mr. Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Christine+Quinn) about the governor's plans to sell a plot of land to the north of Javits. Mr. Spitzer said proceeds from the sale, which could net $900 million, would go toward other West Side development projects, but Mr. Bloomberg and Ms. Quinn have faulted the proposed sale for restricting expansion possibilities for the Javits Convention Center. Mr. Spitzer could look to Queens to address concerns from the tourism sector and the construction industry about the halt put to Javits expansion plans. Those plans, put in place by the Pataki administration, were tabled by Mr. Spitzer.

"I think that investment in the boroughs in these key industry sectors is probably the highest rate of return on public investment you are going to get," the president of the Partnership for New York City, Kathryn Wylde, said.

Mr. Yaro said a convention center included as part of a larger Willets Point development plan makes sense on a number of levels. The area is close to two airports and has excellent transit and highway access to Midtown and its hotels.

A Queens convention center would not have to contend with the congestion and rapid business development that Javits now confronts on the West Side of Manhattan. And unlike the Sunnyside Rail Yards in Queens — another large undeveloped location that could house a convention center — Willets Point would be free of complicated issues surrounding air rights development and platform construction that is required when building over the rail yards.

"When Javits was the edge of nowhere you could get away with that but now as an extension of the central business district it is causing problems," said Mr. Yaro. "You can imagine a piece of Javits used for those in-town functions; for fashion shows and high-end conferences. But the boat shows, and those larger trade and consumer shows, could be moved to this peripheral location."

Plans for the Willets Point redevelopment were supposed to be ready for community review on February 25, but the city's economic development corporation has postponed the start by at least two weeks.

The city had originally selected eight firms as finalists to bid for the plan, including Forest City Ratner Companies, the Related Companies, Vornado Realty Trust, and Muss Development. A number of hurdles exist for the development of Willets Point, notably the opposition from the local City Council member, Hiram Monserrate (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Hiram+Monserrate), who is pressing for more "affordable" housing and for additional compensation for businesses and individuals who would face evictions by the city's use of eminent domain.

Last week, Mr. Monserrate held a meeting with the city's deputy mayor for economic development, Robert Lieber, to try to resolve their differences. Mr. Monserrate said the city's plan to designate 20% of the proposed housing units as "affordable" was unacceptably low.

"We need to do more to carve out protection for our citizens who own property and are not solely at the whim of the government," Mr. Monserrate said in an interview.

Another critic of the plan has been Councilman John Liu (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=John+Liu). Mr. Liu is in favor of developing Willets Point but has been critical of how the EDC has communicated the details.

"What was a plan that should have been flushed out more and more as time went on actually has become more of a skeleton," he said.

But Mr. Liu says that with 61 available acres, expanding the proposed size of the convention center would not be a problem. "I think that if the plan is to build a convention center at Willets Points there will be overwhelming if not universal enthusiasm," he said.

http://www.nysun.com/article/71762?page_no=1

Monumental

February 25th, 2008, 05:27 PM

All these pictures showing people strolling along the waterfront, taking in the nice viewe.

In reality the waterfront is a disgusting brown trickle penned in by highways on all sides (not to mention the train). Will anything be done about this cesspool of a creek?

I for one dont intend to do much strolling under the highway

submachine

February 28th, 2008, 06:04 AM

City Council member, Hiram Monserrate (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Hiram+Monserrate), who is pressing for more "affordable" housing and for additional compensation for businesses and individuals who would face evictions by the city's use of eminent domain.

Last week, Mr. Monserrate held a meeting with the city's deputy mayor for economic development, Robert Lieber, to try to resolve their differences. Mr. Monserrate said the city's plan to designate 20% of the proposed housing units as "affordable" was unacceptably low.

Exactly four years ago:

"Hiram Monserrate, the city councilman representing the area, said he recognizes the need to clear out the Iron Triangle.

''Clearly there is a better usage for that land, that would benefit the residents,'' he said. ''No one would want to build anything that is going to overlook those junkyards.'':p

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0CE7D9133FF937A35750C0A9629C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

brianac

March 5th, 2008, 07:55 AM

Pool complex in city park draws raves

BY DONALD BERTRAND
Daily News Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 4th 2008, 4:00 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2008/03/04/amd_swimmers.jpg Cairo for News
The Townsend Harris swim team takes the plunge at new aquatic center in Flushing Meadows Corona Park.

It has a name befitting its $66.3 million price tag and the grandeur it displays - Flushing Meadows-Corona Park (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Flushing+Meadows+Corona+Park) Natatorium and Ice Rink.

Nearly seven years in the making, the gleaming new center finally opened Friday to raves from young and old who came to celebrate the unveiling of the largest recreation building ever constructed in a city park.

"This is just beautiful. And what a view of the park," said Donald Patterson (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Donald+Patterson), 72, of Springfield Gardens (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Springfield+Gardens), a member of the Senior Dolphins from Roy Wilkins Recreation Center. "I must say, this is first class."

"This is gorgeous," said Elena Gulotta (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Elena+Gulotta), 17, a senior and a swim team member at Townsend Harris High School (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Townsend+Harris+High+School), city champs for the past three years and Queens (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens+County) champs for 18 years running.

"Everything here seems perfect," added fellow Townsend Turtle Pamela Guzman, 18.

City officials were not at a loss for accolades either.

Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Adrian+Benepe) called it "the most beautiful building ever built in a city park" and an "out-of-this-world facility." Deputy Mayor Robert Lieber (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Robert+C.+Lieber) called it a "fantastic addition" to the park.

"It is simply awesome," said Troy Legg (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Troy+Legg), president of USA (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/United+States) Pools, which will manage the pool under contract with the city.

The company operates some 500 pools nationwide.

"This complex is in the top tier," Legg said.

Ground was first broken on the project in June 2001, and it was originally set to be completed in late 2002.

But work was halted in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The project was later put back on track as part of the city's 2012 Olympics bid.

Inspired by the 1939 and 1964 World's Fair pavilions, a cable-supported canopy roof is suspended over the 110,000-square-foot building, Benepe said. The design allows for the walls to be removed to accommodate temporary bleachers.

The 50-by-25-meter Olympic swimming pool can be divided by movable bulkheads to provide different swimming and diving areas, and will use 1 million gallons of 80-degree water.

On Friday, the divisions included an area for youngsters where a movable floor kept the depth at about 2 feet.

The 85-by-200-foot NHL-regulation hockey rink is nearing completion at the site; the job is slated to be finished with a yet-to-be-announced concessionaire, officials said.

The rink is scheduled to open this fall, a Parks Department spokeswoman said.

Once the rink is opened, the park's current rink, which shares space with the Queens Museum (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens+Museum), will close and the museum will expand to incorporate that space.

dbertrand@nydailynews.com (dbertrand@nydailynews.com)

Copyright 2008 The New York Daily News.

antinimby

March 11th, 2008, 01:34 PM

Developer of $1B Sky View Parc condo is bullish on Flushing

http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2008/03/11/amd_collegept-condos.jpg
Muss Development's Sky View Parc condo
project in Flushing.

BY DONALD BERTRAND
daily news staff writer
Tuesday, March 11th 2008 (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2008/03/11/2008-03-11_developer_of_1b_sky_view_parc_condo_is_b.html), 4:00 AM

A $1 billion mixed-use project in Flushing doesn't seem to be suffering from the foundering economy.

In the first 10 days its sales office was open, Muss Development's Sky View Parc sold 40 apartments, company officials said last week.

"If you are building a product that is well-priced, has incredible amenities and a great location, it is still going to sell," boasted Jason Muss, a principal of the family-owned, Forest Hills-based development company.

A total of 1,100 condominiums in six towers are scheduled for the 14-acre site at College Point Blvd. and Roosevelt Ave. Apartments include studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom units priced from the $400,000s to more than $2 million.

Even though the economy might be in bad shape, "mortgage rates [at Sky View Parc] are pretty low," Muss noted.

The first phase is 448 apartments in three towers above a three-level, 800,000-square-foot shopping center. The amenities include a pool, tennis and basketball courts, a putting green, a health club and spa and childrens' play areas.

"Amenities like this you usually don't find all in one place," Muss said.

Location is a big selling point also, the developer said. It is just blocks from both the 7 train and the Main St. LIRR station.

It also has easy access to nearby major highways and is close to both LaGuardia and JFK airports.

The retail space will include major national retailers, a large supermarket and more than 30,000 square feet of restaurants. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2009, at about the same time that the towers open.

However, two non-Muss projects in downtown Flushing are not faring as well. Plans for the redevelopment of the former RKO Keith's site are dead, with the property for sale.

And Flushing Commons, slated to be built on what is now Municipal Parking Lot 1 on Union St. between 37th and 39th Aves., is mired in a squabble between the developers and the community.

"As far as we are concerned, it is just a matter of time before both of those projects are completed," an optimistic Muss said about Flushing's development potential.

© Copyright 2007 NYDailyNews.com

brianac

April 11th, 2008, 05:08 AM

Will the City's Willets Point Plan Ever See Liftoff?

byEliot Brown (http://www.observer.com/2007/author/eliot-brown) | April 10, 2008

http://observer.cast.advomatic.com/files/imagecache/article/files/aerial%201-%20illustrative%20plan-WEB.jpg EDC
The city's Willets Point rendering

As a new lawsuit and a press conference loaded with critics yesterday suggest, things don’t seem to be going all that great for the city at Willets (http://www.observer.com/2008/willets-point-development-waterloo)
Point.

The clock is ticking for the Bloomberg administration’s agenda, and officials are eager to realize its dreams of ousting the chop shops and industry by Shea Stadium for a multi-billion dollar mixed-use community.

But like an airplane leaving from Newark Airport (http://www.nj.com/business/index.ssf/2008/02/newark_among_worst_airports.html), the project has been stuck on the taxiway for far longer than planned or scheduled, unable to take off as of yet.

Liftoff for the project would mean a rezoning of the 61-acre area, the first major approval needed. Property acquisitions, the possible use of eminent domain, and the selection of a developer would follow.

However, there apparently hasn’t yet been enough support for the city to start the seven-month rezoning approval process, which would end with a City Council vote. The city was days away from starting that process in February when local council members, led by Hiram Monserrate, became vocal (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008/02/15/2008-02-15_willets_point_plan_loses_key_backer-1.html) in opposition to the project as planned. The city then backed away from its late February start date and now it’s been almost two months since the council members spoke out, with no new date set to start the rezoning.
Yesterday, even more council members climbed into the criticism camp.

David Weprin, Diana Reyna, Eric Gioia, Leroy Comrie Jr. and James Sanders Jr. joined Mr. Monserrate and Tony Avella at a press conference yesterday to criticize the plan for its effects on the business and landowners, with many expressing outright opposition to any plan that included the use of eminent domain (Mayor Bloomberg has strongly supported the potential use of eminent domain in the project.)

Local council members often weigh in very heavily in rezonings, and if the Council were to go against their will, it would likely need substantial arm twisting by Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who has yet to stake out a public position on the matter.

The major landowners’ group for the area yesterday sued the city for not providing basic services to the area (there aren’t sewers there, for one), an action that seems highly unlikely to be the last lawsuit should the plan move forward. The group’s attorney, Michael Gerrard, was involved in the defeat of Westway (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/07/05/040705ta_talk_finnegan), and worked to oppose the West Side Stadium.

All of this comes amid the withering economy, criticism from advocacy groups for a lack of affordable housing specifics, and negotiations between the city and unions, who are seeking wage guarantees and other concessions.

Of course the plan does have its supporters—U.S. Representative Joseph Crowley, Borough President Helen Marshall and Assemblyman Mark Weprin (David Weprin’s brother) among them. But it is the Council that has the final say, so until the Bloomberg administration feels confident it can survive a vote, it seems unlikely that the rezoning will proceed.

A spokesman for the city’s Economic Development Corp. said in a statement that the city is working with the business and landowners for relocation options, as the whole site needs to be cleared for remediation.

Copyright 2008 The New York Observer.

brianac

April 11th, 2008, 05:17 AM

Businesses in Potholed, Sewerless Queens District Sue the City

By RAY RIVERA (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/ray_rivera/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: April 10, 2008

Business owners in Willets Point — the district near Shea Stadium known mostly for its auto repair shops and potholes — filed a federal lawsuit on Wednesday accusing the city of depriving the neighborhood of services so property values would fall, easing the way for the land to be taken through eminent domain.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/04/10/nyregion/10willets-650.jpg (http://javascript<b></b>:pop_me_up2('http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/04/10/nyregion/10willets_CA0.ready.html', '10willets_CA0_ready', 'width=720,height=600,scrollbars=yes,toolbars=no,r esizable=yes'))Robert Stolarik for The New York Times
Willets Point, a district in Queens nicknamed the Iron Triangle locally, is known for auto parts and repair shops, and potholes.

The lawsuit, filed in United States District Court in Brooklyn, is another salvo in the business owners’ fight to stop the city’s $3 billion redevelopment plan for the area. The plan calls for razing the 61-acre business district — which is not to be confused with the Willets Point peninsula on the East River at Fort Totten — and replacing it with 5,500 units of housing, a hotel and convention center and 2.2 million square feet of office space, restaurants and retail shops.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/michael_r_bloomberg/index.html?inline=nyt-per) has said the plan would turn “one of the most heavily polluted” places in the city into a “dynamic center of life.”

But business owners say the city has been shy on details about property appraisals and other parts of the plan, and they object to the city’s threat to use eminent domain to acquire property.

The plan, which would displace some 250 businesses employing 1,300 workers, needs approval from the City Planning Commission (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/city_planning_commission/index.html?inline=nyt-org) and the City Council.

The suit seeks to force the city to provide sidewalks, adequate road repairs, sewers, fire hydrants, snow and trash removal and other basic services that the owners say the city has withheld for more than 40 years. It is also asking for unspecified damages for past neglect.

Supporters of the plan, however, say the suit is just another attempt by business owners to stop development proposals, a battle over various proposals going back to the days of the master planner Robert Moses (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/robert_moses/index.html?inline=nyt-per).

Mayor Bloomberg’s office deferred questions about the suit to the city’s Law Department. Connie Pankratz, a spokeswoman for that agency, said in a statement, “We have not yet received the legal papers, but will review them thoroughly upon receipt.”

Jeff Roberts, a spokesman for the city’s Economic Development Corporation, said the city could not build a sewage system with the current businesses in place. As for the other services the owners said they were not getting, Mr. Roberts said: “I don’t know that that’s accurate. We are trying to look into exactly what is being done. I believe the F.D.N.Y. and all the other city agencies have been serving the area.”

About 100 business owners and workers joined Queens lawmakers at a rally at City Hall on Wednesday, carrying poster-size photos depicting barely paved streets riddled with craters and flooded by rainstorms.

“Some of the photos you see behind me — you see floods, you wonder if this is New York City in 2008 or Baghdad after a few mortar rounds,” said Councilman Hiram Monserrate of Queens, whose district includes the area.
Councilman Eric N. Gioia, also of Queens, said the threat of eminent domain, even as a last resort, was “like walking into a negotiation, putting a gun on the table, and saying, ‘I’d like to strike a fair deal; I’ll only use the gun if I have to.’ ”

The landowners say that if the city repaired the roads, installed storm drains and put in a sewage system, development would follow on its own.

“We essentially have no essential services provided for us there, no snow removal, no grass cutting,” said Anthony Fodera, president of Fodera Foods Inc., one of the plaintiffs. “The streets — I’ve been there for 35 years; I have yet to see them fill a pothole.”

Copyright 2008 The New York Times.

sunnyguy

April 18th, 2008, 05:37 PM

Real Estate Weekly (javascript:void(0))

Muss Development LLC announced that after only 10 days, it has already sold 40 apartments at Sky View Pare, its $1 billion, 3.3 million-square-foot, mixed-use project in Flushing, Queens.

Its state-of-the-art sales office opened in February and is located just across from the site, which is being constructed on 14 acres at College Point Boulevard and Roosevelt Avenue.

"Selling this many units so quickly proves that this really is among the most spectacular residential developments in the history of Queens County," said Jason A. Muss, a principal of Muss Development.

"Everyone who has visited the sales office has been blown away by our 9'x14' model of the project, which shows the 4-acre rooftop park, the amazing range of amenities and beautiful residential buildings."

According to Muss, buyers have included a wide array of people from all across the Metropolitan area. The development will feature six residential towers, and a rooftop park set atop a three-story, 800,000 s/f retail area.
The nearly four-acre elevated park and 448 condominium units in Phase 1 will ultimately feature an outdoor pool, two full-sized tennis courts, a health club & spa, a basketball court, running track, two children's play areas, golf, valet parking, 24-hour doorman and remarkable panoramic views of Manhattan, Flushing Meadows Park, major bridges and the Long Island Sound.

The retail space, which will include major national retailers, a huge supermarket and more than 30,000 s/f of restaurants, is scheduled to open in the summer of 2009. Phase 1 condominium occupancy is scheduled for July 2009. Sky View Pare will also be eligible for a 15-year tax abatement.

Sky View Pare offers studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom homes priced from the $400,000s to more than $2 million.

antinimby

April 18th, 2008, 07:51 PM

^ That's actually old news. I posted something similar over a month ago, in post #386 further up this page. ;)

(NY Daily News fresher than Real Estate Weekly)

antinimby

April 18th, 2008, 08:47 PM

Business, condos, new stadium fuel growth in downtown Flushing

http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2008/04/18/alg_sky-view-parc.jpg
A rendering of the private 4½-acre outdoor amenity for residents of Sky View Parc.

By JASON SHEFTELL
DAILY NEWS REAL ESTATE CORRESPONDENT
Friday, April 18th 2008 (http://www.nydailynews.com/real_estate/2008/04/18/2008-04-18_business_condos_new_stadium_fuel_growth_-1.html), 4:00 AM

Powered by a monstrous upscale mixed-use condominium development and a brand-new stadium, downtown Flushing rivals any civic construction and neighborhood betterment program across the five boroughs.

With a growing population of 180,000 people, 39 banks and average local salary increasing annually since 2000, Flushing needed this makeover. The downtown area competes with Times Square for crowded streets. Retail on and off Main St. continues to push into the second and third floors, where mortgage brokers and dentists set up shop above restaurants and banks. There's so much signage for tarot cards, acupuncturists and massage parlors, the area feels almost decadent. Not an inch of space gets wasted here.

Five blocks from the hordes of people on Main St., Flushing mellows as curved and slanted streets break free of any grid system. Residential housing includes large apartment complexes and six-story brick buildings with courtyards and columns dating to the 1930s.

Further inland, 1920s single-family houses, some mansions, contend with imposing new all-brick developments trying to beat a pending zone change. Making for a peaceful alternative to the urban core of downtown, Buddhist temples neighbor new developments and these historic homes.

The history: Flushing prides itself on predating the U.S. Constitution when it comes to advocating religious tolerance. The Flushing Remonstrance was a petition given to Colonial New York Gov. Peter Stuyvesant, stating that Flushing citizens would not uphold his ban forbidding Quakers from worship.

Dating to 1657, the Remonstrance is one of the oldest documents regarding religious freedom signed in what would become the United States. Since then, Flushing has welcomed all religions, including the early Russian Orthodox, several Buddhist sects, and recent Korean Episcopalians.

On Sundays, church vans usher the neighborhood elderly to their respective religious services. A quiet side-street house dressed up with 20-foot- tall stone statues doubles as a Korean temple. The Flushing Freedom Mile is a multilocation tourist trail honoring Flushing's role in the Underground Railroad.

Sky View Parc: A key part of Flushing's modern history is Sky View Parc, a six-tower, 3.3 million- square-foot, two-phase condominium complex built upon a base of national retailers. Purchased by Muss Development in 1983 in a land-swap deal with Con Edison, the land would become the site of an 1,100-unit development, highlighted by an elevated 4½-acre private park available to residents only.

http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2008/04/18/amd_klein-muss.jpg
Sales director Toby Klein and developer
Jason A. Muss stand on top of the future
Sky View Parc.

A zoning change in the late 1990s ignited the current transformation of this previously manufacturing area.

With two tennis courts, a jogging track, a children's park, swimming pool and outdoor park area, the amenities add a lifestyle component that surpasses high-end Manhattan projects that don't have this amount of land to play with.

Sources in Flushing say the retail mix includes Home Depot, Target and Best Buy. In all, the project will add 2,000 ongoing jobs to the area. Phase one of the project will be completed in the summer of 2009. Early buyers include local Flushing residents.

"The quality of the materials used really attracted me," says Bo Chen, a mortgage banker with Wells Fargo in Manhattan, who has lived in Flushing for the past five years. Chen and his wife bought a 1,065-square-foot two-bedroom within the first week of sales. "The 9-foot ceilings were important. You won't find anything that high in Central Flushing."

Units range in price from $400,000 for a 525-square-foot studio to $2 million for 2,000-square-foot penthouses with views to the new CitiField, Flushing Bay and the Manhattan skyline. The development sold 40 homes in its first 10 days of sales.

To buy or rent: Medium-size one-bedroom co-ops in Central Flushing can cost from $190,000 to $230,000. A 950-square-foot one-bedroom in a 1927 six-floor condominium building was on the market for $299,999. Two-bedroom two-bath co-ops list for around $300,000. All of these apartments are walking distance to schools, shops, transportation and local parks.

One-bedrooms in brick apartment buildings a few blocks from the shopping district go for $1,100 per month. A two-bedroom one-bath on a quiet street ranges in price from $1,400 to $1,700, depending on size.

"Rentals have gone down slightly," says Judie Chiu of Flushing's Apple Wealth Realty. Chiu has a listing for a $1.38 million five-bedroom 1920s home with a doctor's office. "The sales market is still slow here. People are looking for good prices, and things are still a little high-priced."

The Waldheim neighborhood: As peaceful as Flushing's Main St. is hectic, this suburban neighborhood with large single-family Arts and Crafts houses dates back 300 years to the early Dutch settlers. In the early 1980s, the neighborhood was denied landmark status, beginning a period of overdevelopment that's persisting today.

"Developers have come in here and torn down trees, shrubs and flower bushes and laid concrete in front of these brick Taj Mahals with silver railings," says Constance Link, a retired nurse from Flushing Hospital who has lived in the neighborhood for 41 years. "It's been insidious, slow growth that has hurt a once-proud neighborhood."

Last Sunday, people strolled the quiet streets of the Waldheim section, eying the few cherry blossom and magnolia trees that remain in the neighborhood. On one corner, a flat, white Buddhist temple, designed by a Japanese architect in the early 1980s, looks futuristic, like a mini-airline terminal. The skeleton of a half-finished eight-story development looms tall across the street.

"You can't fight real estate," says Stephanie Janis, a board member of the Waldheim Neighborhood Association. "We know that. But we're concerned about traffic flow and the lack of trees. Our trees have been taken away by developers. We're willing to work together with builders, but it's important they take responsibility and give back to the community where they can."

Getting there: Take the train to Main St. in Flushing from Penn Station or points east on the Port Washington line of the Long Island Rail Road. Tickets cost $5.25 each way from Penn Station. The ride takes 19 minutes. It sorely needs a new downtown LIRR station. Right now, it's a measly set of stairs and a small office.

The 7 train from Grand Central also goes to Main St. From Grand Central, the express takes 22 minutes, with the local running about 35 minutes.

Most Queens buses pass through Flushing. The Q14, Q20A, Q25, Q34, Q44, Q65 and Q66 buses all stop on Main St. A taxi from downtown Flushing to Greenwich Village costs $35. By car, Flushing is accessible via the Van Wyck Expressway and the Long Island Expressway.

© Copyright 2008 NYDailyNews.com

devinkc

June 7th, 2008, 11:03 PM

BY JOHN LAUINGER
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Friday, June 6th 2008, 4:00 AM
While the Bloomberg administration pushes its Willets Point (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Willets+Point) redevelopment plan by attempting to acquire businesses in the gritty industrial zone, it also has begun touting efforts to retrain workers who may soon lose their jobs.
But two Queens (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens+County) City Councilmen who have opposed Mayor Bloomberg (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Michael+Bloomberg)'s Willets Point vision faulted the timing of the job training program - and questioned the city's commitment to the roughly 1,700 Willets Point workers.
Last December, LaGuardia Community College (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/LaGuardia+Community+College) won a bid to operate the $2.5 million Willets Point Workforce Program, part of the city's proposal to transform the so-called Iron Triangle into a modern residential and commercial megacomplex.
The program, expected to launch in late September or early October, is the largest and most comprehensive workforce training project ever included in an Economic Development Corporation redevelopment project, said agency spokesman Jeff Roberts (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Jeff+Roberts).
As planned, the program will include English language and computer literacy classes, training for construction and automotive jobs, and assistance in landing internships and job interviews.
Even though the EDC doesn't expect to ink a deal with LaGuardia until the end of the month, Seth Bornstein (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Seth+Bornstein), LaGuardia's assistant dean for economic development, discussed the program publicly for the first time at a Flushing Chamber of Commerce (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Flushing+Chamber+of+Commerce) luncheon on Tuesday.
"We understand there are people who rely on Willets Point to bring home bread every day for the table," Bornstein told the Daily News in a previous interview. "We can't just say, 'Go away!'"
Yet Councilman Tony Avella (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Tony+Avella) called the program a crafted response to a recent letter in which 29 Council members refused to back the Willets Point plan unless "significant" changes are made - including providing help for displaced workers.
"To me, it's window-dressing," said Avella (D-Bayside). "It's an attempt to give some Council members some cover, so they can say, 'Oh, they are taking care of the workers.'"
Bornstein said workers will receive stipends and MetroCards (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/MTA+MetroCard) to travel to LaGuardia's Long Island City (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Long+Island+City) classrooms.
The EDC also is looking to secure an operations base at Willets Point for the project.
However, Councilman Hiram Monserrate (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Hiram+Monserrate) questioned why the city would advance the program before the City Council has approved the overall Willets Point plan.
"The City of New York (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/New+York+City) does not own property at this site," said Monserrate (D-Jackson Heights (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Jackson+Heights)).
"If we haven't even had a contract of sale, how is it that we are moving forward in this way?"

Tectonic

June 8th, 2008, 02:13 PM

Has construction started on the actual condo sections of Sky View Parc?

antinimby

June 15th, 2008, 02:20 AM

6/1/2008 - Sky View Parc

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2392/2552318147_7762ab8026.jpg?v=0 (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2392/2552318147_7762ab8026_b.jpg)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3274/2552317239_b90c8befd2.jpg?v=0 (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3274/2552317239_b90c8befd2_b.jpg)
AllWaysNY (http://flickr.com/photos/allwaysny/with/2552318147/)

Tectonic

June 15th, 2008, 06:12 PM

Nobody was able to answer my question, but from what I was told by someone on the site those sections you see under construction are the retail areas. The actual condos haven't started rising yet.

antinimby

June 16th, 2008, 01:23 AM

One step at a time. Anything above the third floor will be the residential portion.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/03/realestate/03post-450.jpg

Tectonic

June 16th, 2008, 10:15 PM

I understand what you're saying but I was told what we see on the southwestern end of the site will become a Home Depot and..... Target I think?

antinimby

June 17th, 2008, 02:26 AM

Target, maybe. Home Depot, no. There's already one a couple of blocks away just off College Point Blvd.

ramvid01

June 17th, 2008, 02:31 AM

^^ Home Depot is moving here AN. It has been stated in many articles regarding this building. I am pretty sure the one they are at now will be closed down when this is open.

antinimby

June 17th, 2008, 03:05 AM

What are they gonna do with the Home Depot site?

ramvid01

June 17th, 2008, 04:21 PM

Who knows. It is quite a big lot, and only 2-3 blocks down from this development. Maybe they'll sell their lot and some developer will build an apartment block on the lot. :confused:

antinimby

June 18th, 2008, 03:25 AM

I'm glad Home Depot is moving to a mixed-use site like Sky View Parc. This will open up their current site for redevelopment.

Having a big box store taking up a huge plot of land in this city with nothing above it, is an inefficient use of land and a waste.

NYC4Life

June 18th, 2008, 05:43 PM

From: The Real Deal

http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/city-signs-deals-with-two-willets-points-land-owners

Updated On 06/18/08 at 04:24PM

City signs deals with two Willets Points land owners

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/26716/willetspoint_midsize.jpg

By Adam Pincus

The city Economic Development Corp. has signed its first agreements to acquire property from landowners in the gritty Willets Point section of Queens, it announced today in a statement.

The two property owners who agreed to sell their property in the so-called "Iron Triangle" were Sambucci Bros Inc. Auto Salvage, with 52,000 square feet, and BRD Corp., with 22,000 square feet.

The news comes a week after several unions (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/14/nyregion/14willets.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin) agreed to support the Bloomberg administration's $3 billion plan to redevelop the 62-acre site because the project will create union jobs.

The city has been battling community groups and legislators over a massive mixed-use redevelopment planned for the area next to the new Mets stadium. The public review process has begun, and Community Board 7 in Queens will hold a public meeting tonight

The remaining landowners remained defiant, said Daniel Feinstein, president of Feinstein Iron Works and a member of the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association, which is fighting the mayor's proposal. He called the announcement that two out of 260 businesses would sell their property was a sign of desperation.

"We believe the people have had enough of the administration's attempts to bully" the property owners, he said.

In April, the association and 10 large property owners announced they were suing the city (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/willets-point-property-owners-suing-city), which they claimed "has been waging a campaign of intentional neglect to create and perpetuate an eyesore for the eventual justification of the use of eminent domain."

NewYorkDoc

June 27th, 2008, 09:13 PM

What an intriguing picture to look at! It reminds me of a commercial street in a developing country.

NYC4Life

June 28th, 2008, 02:50 PM

The neighborhood itself will be "developing" soon :)

NYC4Life

July 1st, 2008, 05:25 PM

From: Crains New York

Community board backs Willets Point plan

The 21-15 vote is a big boost for the Bloomberg Administration, but business owners vow to continue fighting the city's plans for housing, office, hotel and convention space.

http://cnimg.sv.publicus.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=CN&Date=20080701&Category=FREE&ArtNo=4855261&Ref=AR&maxw=319&border=0

Daniel Massey (http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcs.dll/personalia?ID=69)

A divided community board gave the Bloomberg administration’s vision to redevelop the potholed streets of Willets Point a boost early Tuesday, voting 21 to 15 in favor of the plan to build housing, office space, a hotel and convention center on 61 acres in the Iron Triangle.

The advisory vote by Queens Community Board 7 followed more than five hours of testimony and debate among board members, business owners, city and elected officials, affordable housing activists and union members in a jam-packed, sweltering community room in Flushing.

“This is a historic moment,” said Tom McKnight, senior vice president of the city’s Economic Development Corp., just before the vote. “This is a chance to put Willets Point on a new map.”

The vote came just days after Deputy Mayor Robert Lieber sent a letter to the board’s chairmen addressing issues that came out of several Willets Point committee meetings. Board members had expressed concern over the city’s willingness to use eminent domain to seize property, wanted more affordable housing, and asked to remain involved in the development process beyond the land use review.

In his letter, which was read at the meeting, Mr. Lieber wrote that the city “recognizes the significance of [the board’s] concerns and [is] committed to working with you in the future to resolve them.” He wrote that the city will only use eminent domain as a last resort after all negotiations have been exhausted, promised to look into the possibility of more affordable housing; and guaranteed the community board an continuing role.

“We will work with the City Council to arrive at a process for post-ULURP oversight,” wrote Mr. Lieber, referring to the city’s land use review. “The community board will be part of that process.”

The letter from Mr. Lieber was enough to sway Board Chairman Eugene Kelty and Land Use Chairman Chuck Apelian to support the project. The 15 opponents remain concerned that the Bloomberg administration may use eminent domain to seize property if negotiated settlements cannot be reached. The city has negotiated just two land deals thus far with owners, leaving about 75 more to be reached. City Councilman Hiram Monserrate, D-Queens, addressed the meeting and said he would not support the project as long as eminent domain remains on the table.

Some board members were particularly touched by an impassioned plea by G.L. Soni, owner of House of Spices, one of the largest landowners in Willets Point, who grew emotional as he addressed the board. “I’m at the end of my rope,” he said. “Negotiations are a two-way street. You cannot say ‘take it or leave it.’ That is not negotiating.”

Following the vote, business owners vowed to continue their fight against the city’s plan.

“We’re going to forge ahead,” said Thomas Mina, owner of T. Mina Supply Co., a plumbing and sewer supply business that has been in Willets Point for 21 years. “It’s a long horse race. We’re just getting out of the gate.”

With the community board’s approval, the project now moves on to Queens Borough President Helen Marshall for review. A hearing is scheduled for July 10, although Ms. Marshall is likely to support the plan. The land use review will conclude in November with a vote by the full City Council. http://www.crainsnewyork.com/images/diamond.gif

NYC4Life

July 22nd, 2008, 08:56 PM

Updated On 07/22/08 at 04:00PM
City acquires fourth Willets Point parcel

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/43674/willets_articlebox.jpg (http://ny.therealdeal.com/assets/43674)
Willets Point

By Adam Pincus

A Willets Point property owner with 4,000 square feet of land within the proposed 62-acre development site has become the fourth business owner to agree to sell to the city and relocate.

Flushing Towing owner Carlos Canal said his company will relocate from 126-28 35th Avenue to a property in Flushing that is vacant and zoned for industrial uses but not owned by the city. Neither Canal nor EDC would comment on the price.

The city's Economic Development Corporation is pushing a $3 billion mixed-use project at Queens' so-called Iron Triangle, near the Mets new stadium, CitiField. Three other companies owning a total of 95,500 square feet signed agreements with the city over the past two months. The deals are contingent upon approval through the city's land-use process.

"I am happy with the deal I am making," Canal said. "I want to move out of here. Every single day we have a problem ... You can't work in these conditions."

Canal, who has worked in the area for 18 years, said he lacks plumbing for a bathroom and must use a portable toilet.

Patricia Jones, a spokeswoman for the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association, which is fighting the plan, said she was unimpressed by the city's deals.

"It is truly meaningless," she said. "Four out of 260 businesses in four years, that is not impressive, especially when we are growing."

The other businesses (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/city-signs-deals-with-two-willets-points-land-owners) that are selling to the city are: Sambucci Bros Inc. Auto Salvage, with 52,000 square feet; BRD Corp., with 22,000 square feet; and Met Metals with 17,500 square feet.

Her group announced last week that it added five businesses to its coalition, which now represents about half of the land still in the hands of private owners.

The business owners group opposes the use of eminent domain in the development process. It believes the area could be rehabilitated for industrial use with improved infrastructure at a fraction of the city's planned cost, Jones said.

The city's EDC was not immediately available to comment.

The city's plan would create 5,500 apartments, a hotel, a convention center, and a school, as well as retail and office space. The local community board (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/board-backs-willets-point-plan%20) approved the proposal, but local Queens council members Hiram Monserrate (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/monserrate-draws-donations-from-willets-point-opponents), John Liu and Tony Avella have opposed it.

ramvid01

July 31st, 2008, 01:36 AM

So I took the train to FLushing today and saw the Progress on Flushing Commons (or w/e its called). They have yet to start on the tower and yet to build out on the whole site (at least the base).

However I will say that they are putting up the wall facing the river and I must say it is as ugly as it can get. No windows just mass of precast god knows what, but it ain't brick. I hope they put ads or something there because it looks nasty.

antinimby

July 31st, 2008, 01:50 AM

Did you mean Sky View Parc? Flushing Commons is still a parking garage and not near any rivers.

ramvid01

July 31st, 2008, 02:54 AM

^^ Yea that one.

antinimby

July 31st, 2008, 03:09 AM

Where you able to look at other projects in Flushing? How about the one on Main St. and Franklin Ave.?

ramvid01

July 31st, 2008, 11:53 AM

Yea I walked by that one and it is still a hole in the ground.

antinimby

July 31st, 2008, 07:06 PM

Damn it. Wrong location to be leaving it as a hole for this long.

NYC4Life

July 31st, 2008, 10:07 PM

The New York Observer

Queens Beep Marshall Endorses Willets Point Plan

by Eliot Brown (http://www.observer.com/2007/author/eliot-brown) | July 31, 2008

http://www.observer.com/files/imagecache/vertical/files/helenmarshall.jpg

As expected, Queens Borough President Helen Marshall on Wednesday gave her conditional endorsement of the Bloomberg administration's plan to redevelop Willets Point, the 61-acre industrial area by Shea Stadium.

"There is no doubt that the existing businesses and people who work there provide valuable services and goods," she wrote. "However these activities are no longer compatible or appropriate to the progress of the communities and institutions that have grown around Willets Point."

Her endorsement [PDF] (http://www.observer.com/files/Marshall.pdf) comes as part of the city's seven-month public approval process for a rezoning of the area, which requires approval from the City Council by November. The local community board gave its conditional endorsement (http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/bloomberg-wins-early-endorsement-community-willets-point) to the plan a month ago, though neither that nor Ms. Marshall's endorsement is binding.

Responding to the endorsement, the main landowners' group in Willets Point put out a press release denouncing the move and announcing that two new members joined their organization, the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association. The group's press release also included a statement from local Councilman Hiram Monserrate that criticized Ms. Marshall's endorsement.

Ms. Marshall called for 50 percent of the development's housing—the plan calls for up to 5,500 units total—to be below market rate, with 30 percent for middle income and 20 percent for low income. The city has said it intends to require 20 percent of the apartments to be below market rate, a number that will likely increase in negotiations with the Council.

ramvid01

July 31st, 2008, 10:49 PM

Wrong location to be leaving it as a hole for this long.

Well as bad as having it as a hole is, it is pretty much at the end of the commercial strip for Main Street. Two blocks down are the Botanical Gardens on one side and a park that escapes me, then Main Street becomes a sleepy small town road.

antinimby

July 31st, 2008, 11:52 PM

That is precisely the reason why it's important for the site to be up and running as soon as possible: it's the "gateway" for the commercial stretch of Main St. to the north.

NYC4Life

August 5th, 2008, 10:10 AM

Crain's New York

Willets Point relocation deal in trouble (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/willets-point-relocation-deal-in-trouble)

Aug 05, 2008 08:40 AM

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/11527/willetspoint_midsize.jpg

The city's biggest deal so far to relocate a Willets Point business owner could collapse. The Economic Development Corp. had reached an agreement to relocate Sambucci Bros. Inc. Salvage, a 52,000-square-feet auto parts business, to the College Point Industrial Park. But the site is located within an Urban Renewal Zone that excludes salvage yards. The EDC said it would honor the deal, but didn't explain how it would get around the site's exclusion of salvage yards. The city has reached deals with three other business owners as plans for a massive redevelopment.

devinkc

August 8th, 2008, 06:16 PM

NEW YORK (Map (http://www.examiner.com/map.cfm?latlong=40.7500 -73.9967&dateline=NEW YORK)) - - Units at Flushing Project Selling Beyond Expectations -

NEW YORK, July 31 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --Muss Development LLC opened up sales at the second residential tower at its highly acclaimed Sky View Parc project at an event that drew 120 eager potential buyers to its Sales center. More than 100 units have already sold in the first tower.

http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/ibs.exfran.ros/;kw=jivox+display;sz=1x1;ord=38744975?

"While we were confident there would be a high level of interest in such a high quality project with a previously unheard of collection of outdoor and indoor amenities, the brisk pace of sales has continued unabated," said Muss Development Principal Jason A. Muss. "We didn't imagine we'd be opening up the second tower for sales quite this soon."

Muss said that Sky View Parc shows that people will flock to quality product, especially when it is priced right. He attributes the project's success to other factors as well.

"Everyone who has visited the sales office has been blown away by our 9'x14' model of the project, which shows the four-acre rooftop park, the amazing range of amenities and beautiful residential buildings. In addition, our five 60" flat screen monitors, mounted on a wall in the background of the model, make it extremely easy to select an apartment."

Sky View Parc's location is another major attraction for buyers. Itis located in the heart of downtown Flushing, two blocks from Main Street and the #7 train, which is a 22-minute express ride to Grand Central Station. Penn Station is a 17-minute ride via the Long Island Rail Road, also two blocks from the site. Located between LaGuardia and JFK airports, Sky View Parc is within walking distance of sports and recreation venues, including the Mets' brand new Citi Field, the USTA National Tennis Center and Flushing Meadows-Corona Park. Sky View Parc will also be eligible for a 15-year tax abatement.

According to Muss, buyers have been active with all sized units and in all price points.

"We have sold everything from $400,000 studios to a three bedroom penthouse at $1.36 million. Our one and two bedroom sales have been extremely strong and have appealed to all segments of the market," said Muss.

Sky View Parc describes the uniqueness of the project, which will feature elevated living in six residential towers and a rooftop park set atop a three-story, 800,000-square-foot retail shopping experience. The nearly four-acre elevated park and 448 condominium units in the three Phase 1 buildings will ultimately feature an outdoor pool, two full-sized tennis courts, a health club & spa, a basketball court, running track, two children's play areas, golf, valet parking, 24-hour doorman and remarkable panoramic views of Manhattan, Flushing Meadows Park, major bridges and the Long Island Sound.

The retail space, which will include major national retailers, a huge supermarket and more than 30,000 square feet of restaurants, is scheduled to open in the summer of 2009. The space is already more than 60 percent leased. Phase 1 condominium occupancy is scheduled for July 2009.

Sky View Parc offers studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom homes priced from the $400,000s to more than $2 million.

For more information, please visit www.SkyViewParc.com (http://www.skyviewparc.com/) or call (718) 886-8899.

About Muss Development LLC:
Muss Development, LLC (www.muss.com (http://www.muss.com/)) is a fully integrated real estate company that handles all aspects of the development process, including zoning and approvals, sales and marketing, construction and management. In business in New York City since 1906, Muss is deeply involved in the local community and has an unrivaled track record for producing a quality product and satisfied customers.

Over the past 10 years, Muss has built over 5 million square feet of space, including several office and retail buildings, almost 1,000 hotel rooms and over 1,500 residential homes, and has been recognized far and wide as one of the finest real estate companies in the United States.

ramvid01

August 12th, 2008, 01:27 AM

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/5113/12825f8cb3c5ut7.th.jpg (http://img170.imageshack.us/my.php?image=12825f8cb3c5ut7.jpg)

A picture of the monstrocity.

NYC4Life

August 22nd, 2008, 05:54 PM

Updated On 08/22/08 at 02:55PM
Willets Point critic may miss Council vote

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/43506/hiram_articlebox.jpg
Hiram Monserrate

By Adam Pincus

City Council Member Hiram Monserrate has led the charge against the Bloomberg administration's $3 billion plan to redevelop the gritty section of Queens known as Willets Point. But in the end he may not get a chance to vote on the proposal.

Monserrate might no longer be a council member by the time the Council votes on the controversial plan, most likely in mid-November. That's because the two-term Democrat, whose district includes Willets Point, is running unopposed to fill a vacant state Senate seat in northern Queens.

The senate district does not include the industrial area. Election Day is November 4.

Monserrate said it's unclear if he would be sworn in shortly after the election to fill the vacancy or in January when the new crop of Albany lawmakers take office. The timing depends on an unrelated Brooklyn election case scheduled to be heard on August 26 by the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals.

That case will determine whether the winner of a November election can be immediately sworn in to fill a vacant seat, or whether the victor must wait until January.

Monserrate said he will continue to be critical of the Willets Point (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/city-acquires-fourth-willets-point-parcel) plan, regardless of what post he holds.

"I think whether I am a senator or council member I will still take a very active role in what is happening in Willets Point," he said.

In a letter sent last week to the City Planning Commission that was signed by 32 council members, Monserrate demanded changes to the Economic Development Corporation's plan, including more affordable housing and the removal of the threat of eminent domain.

The city reached a deal to buy out a fifth Willets Point landowner (http://www.yournabe.com/articles/2008/08/20/queens/doc48ac7a369d5fc848822958.txt) this week when Crown Container Corporation, a waste hauling company that owns 23,000 square feet and rents another 15,000 feet of land in the so-called Iron Triangle, signed a contract August 20 to move to Maspeth, pending the Council's approval of the plan.

Crown would move to a 56,000-square-foot parcel owned by the city, company president Gerald Antonacci said.

"They offered me a good deal and they are relocating me," he said.

Antonacci would not disclose the sales price.

The city's plan would create 5,500 apartments, a hotel, a convention center, and a school, as well as retail and office space. The local community board approved the proposal, but Monserrate and council members John Liu and Tony Avella have opposed it.

NYC4Life

August 29th, 2008, 02:20 PM

NY Daily News

Willets Pt. summit stirs new city & biz negotiation

BY JOHN LAUINGER
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Thursday, August 28th 2008, 7:06 PM

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/47692/smith_malcolm_headshot_articlebox.jpg

A new round of talks is shaping up between the city and some of the largest businesses at Willets Point (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Willets+Point) after State Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith (D-St. Albans (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/St.+Albans+(New+York))) helped kick-start stalled negotiations, the Daily News has learned.

Smith arranged a closed-doors summit at his Manhattan (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Manhattan) office this month that brought together top city officials and a dozen representatives of the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Realty+Association), a league of 16 of the largest businesses at the so-called Iron Triangle.

Smith - who could become one of Albany (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Albany)'s most powerful figures if Democrats take the Senate from Republicans this fall - urged both sides to return to the bargaining table, according to sources at the meeting.

"Basically, he asked that everybody work out their differences and at least talk to each other," said Anthony Fodera (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Anthony+Fodera), whose family has run a baking goods distribution business out of Willets Point since 1930.

Since the Aug. 6 powwow, the city has scheduled meetings with Fodera and about a dozen other businesses in the group, city officials confirmed yesterday.

Last week, the city reached a verbal agreement to acquire one of the association businesses, Crown Container, and move the operation to Maspeth (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Maspeth), said owner Dave Antonacci (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Dave+Antonacci). However, the city would not confirm the deal.

Andrew Brent (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Andrew+Brent), a spokesman for Deputy Mayor Robert Lieber (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Robert+C.+Lieber), said the Smith-brokered meeting was "helpful." He added that Smith recognizes that "honest discussions between the city and the businesses that have to be relocated are critical."

A spokeswoman for Smith, who is in Denver (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Denver) for the Democratic National Convention (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Democratic+National+Convention), confirmed the meeting about Willets Point took place but would say only that the senator "is a big proponent of economic development across the state."

The city already has inked four confirmed deals to acquire land at Willets Point, part of Mayor Bloomberg (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Michael+Bloomberg)'s plan to transform the gritty industrial area into a gleaming megadevelopment.

But those deals amount to only a sliver of the 62-acre site, and the approval clock is ticking on the controversial redevelopment plan.
The City Council is expected to take a critical vote in November.

"That puts pressure on both sides," said a source in the business group. "We are all watching that clock carefully."

brianac

September 9th, 2008, 06:32 AM

A Dilapidated Tract of Queens, and a Fight to Control Its Future

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/09/09/nyregion/09willets.600.jpg Richard Perry/The New York Times
The Mets’ new stadium, Citi Field, was built across from the auto body shops that are so prevalent in Willets Point, Queens.

By FERNANDA SANTOS (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/fernanda_santos/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: September 8, 2008

With their patched zinc roofs and graffiti-covered walls, the auto repair shops are the most visible and unsightly presence in the bedraggled industrial triangle known as Willets Point. Squeezed between the Mets’ new stadium and the Van Wyck Expressway, near the No. 7 line’s penultimate stop in Queens, the area has no sidewalks or lights to brighten its unpaved roads, no sewers, piped water or heat.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/09/09/nyregion/20080909_WILLETS_GRAPHIC.jpg

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/09/09/nyregion/09willets-2.650.jpgRichard Perry/The New York Times
Jorge Sabando works at New York Auto Repair, one of many businesses that would be displaced by a city development plan.

In most of the shops, and in the junkyards speckled among them, buckets double as toilets and kerosene torches serve as radiators, while the constant trickle from a hydrant functions as a communal sink. It gets so cold in winter that men who have worked there for a while, like Jorge Sabando, 56, a mechanic from Ecuador, wind up with arthritis and take over-the-counter painkillers to carry them through the day.

“This,” Mr. Sabando said, “is not a place for the frail.”

No one seems to disagree that Willets Point needs help. But when Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/michael_r_bloomberg/index.html?inline=nyt-per) unveiled a plan last year to overhaul the area with a hotel, school and convention center, homes, offices, parks and retail stores, two distinct groups rose up in opposition.

One comprises the owners of the area’s largest businesses, who own half the land in Willets Point and who have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on lobbyists, consultants and political contributions to the City Council members who will vote on the city’s plan.

The other consists of auto shop workers and shop owners who rent space in Willets Point. They are, for the most part, poor and Latino, and can afford to do little more than print T-shirts denouncing the project.

In public, the two groups present a picture of perfect unity, waving signs and chanting, “Justice for Willets Point.” But in reality, each side is motivated by different concerns and fears about its survival.

The Bloomberg administration has stepped up efforts in recent weeks to find new space for the big-business owners, offering above-market prices for some of their land.

But most owners say they will not leave Willets Point and will fight the city should it try to seize their properties by eminent domain. The small-business owners, on the other hand, are willing to move, but city officials said that they could not relocate the renters until the city had acquired all the land in Willets Point. And even then, there may not be a place to put all of them.

The small-business owners say they feel neglected by the deep-pocketed big-business owners and are unsure of their future.

“This is a power game, and we’re the weakest player,” said Arturo Olaya, an immigrant from Colombia who has run an auto body shop for 15 years at a rented garage on 36th Avenue.

There are an estimated 255 business in Willets Point and about 90 percent of them are thought to operate from rented space, according to city figures, which are imprecise because of the patchwork nature of the neighborhood.

The larger companies employ about 1,200 people and have held billions of dollars in contracts with the city over the years — to provide sewer and water pipes, repair bridges and roads, and clean up the World Trade Center site after the Sept. 11 attacks.

But now the owners say they feel betrayed by city officials.

“The very hands that fed them are the hands they’re going to shoot,” said Daniel Feinstein, owner of Feinstein Iron Works, which produces most of the structural steel used in public school construction in the city. “But guess what: We’re fighting back.”

The Bloomberg administration is already facing hurdles. In a letter to the city’s Planning Commission, 32 City Council members said they would reject the plan if the city did not take eminent domain off the table. And just as the city reached a handshake agreement with the owner of a waste management company, a previous deal with a junkyard owner hit a roadblock when it was discovered that zoning rules did not allow that kind of business at the site where it was to relocate.

The area’s largest business owners, who have formed a group called the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association, have held weekly meetings to discuss strategy and, one person familiar with the meetings said, to compare offers they have received from the city.

Since 2006, when the Bloomberg administration asked developers for proposals to revamp the area, Mr. Feinstein and the other members of the association have paid almost $200,000 to the lobbying firm of the former City Council speaker Peter F. Vallone (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/v/peter_f_vallone/index.html?inline=nyt-per) Sr. and hired the public affairs firm that employs the former mayoral candidate Fernando Ferrer (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/f/fernando_ferrer/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who will try to persuade the Council to reject the project this fall. The association also filed a federal lawsuit against the city in April for failing to provide basic utility and public works services in Willets Point.

The group’s members have contributed almost $180,000 since 2006 to the campaigns of eight City Council members from Queens, including $45,000 to Melinda R. Katz (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/melinda_r_katz/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who chairs the Council’s Land Use Committee, and $60,000 between January and July to Councilman Hiram Monserrate, whose district includes Willets Point and who has been one of the development plan’s most vocal opponents.

The auto repair shop owners and their workers, for their part, have had little beyond determination and $4,000 in cash to press their point. Earlier this year, Mr. Olaya, the Colombian immigrant, and Sérgio Aguirre, a community organizer who once repaired cars in Willets Point, started their own group, the Willets Point Defense Committee, with 40 paying members who contributed $100 apiece to finance their efforts.

They have used the money to buy the white-and-green shirts they wear at protests, print signs and rent a bus that took them to a public hearing held last month by the Planning Commission, which will vote on the project on Sept. 24.

One of the group’s members, Blas Olivares, an arthritic 52-year-old from Chile who has an auto-glass repair shop on 36th Avenue, said some of the lobbyists working for the big-business owners’ association have offered their services. “Five thousand dollars a month is one of the prices that I recall,” he said. “We wish we could have the help, but we can’t afford it.”

Meanwhile, the city has set up a job training program that will be available even to illegal immigrants, who are believed to make up about 40 percent of the work force in Willets Point — an area that Mayor Bloomberg once called a “euphemism for blight, ” but which represents a lifeline to the barely trained men and women who toil in its automotive shops and to the vendors who peddle juice, socks and cellphone holders along its pockmarked streets.

Robert C. Lieber, the deputy mayor for economic development, said the city was still in the “relatively early stages” of devising a relocation plan for the Willets Point tenants. For now, Mr. Lieber said, the priority is negotiating with owners of businesses and property in the area. Finding adequate land for the types of business found in Willets Point had been one of the biggest challenges, in part because of a scarcity of heavy manufacturing zones in the city, Mr. Lieber said.

Another city official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the project, said that the city would probably not be able to relocate all the auto repair shops. The reason, he said, was that some neighborhoods might simply not want them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/nyregion/09willets.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=nyregion

Copyright 2008 (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html) The New York Times Company (http://www.nytco.com/)

NYC4Life

September 22nd, 2008, 06:09 PM

New York Daily News

Queens pols see Mayor Bloomberg pressing for support on Willets Point

BY JOHN LAUINGER
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Sunday, September 21st 2008, 6:55 PM

For seven years, Councilman Tony Avella (D-Bayside) (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Tony+Avella) requested a meeting with the city Economic Development Corp. president to discuss traffic congestion caused by the College Point Corporate Park.

And for seven years, the agency refused.

But the agency came calling last week - yet all its president, Seth Pinsky (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Seth+Pinsky), wanted to talk about was whether Avella would support Mayor Bloomberg (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Michael+Bloomberg)'s controversial plan to develop Willets Point (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Willets+Point).

With the City Council set to take a make-or-break vote on the project in November, some members of Queens' Council (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens'+Council) delegation say the administration is starting a full-court press for support.

"The very fact that the president met with me is an indication they are really putting on pressure," said Avella, an opponent of the project.

A staffer for another Queens Council member said the agency has been calling every two weeks asking for sit-downs - even though two meetings have already taken place.

"They are really lobbying pretty hard," the staffer said, noting that meetings are now being offered with top administration officials. "They are essentially bringing out the big guns."

In a letter to the administration last month, 32 of 51 Council members - including nine of Queens (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens+County)' 13 representatives - said Bloomberg's plan has a "doomed fate" unless eminent domain is taken off the table.

Avella said Pinsky gave him no reassurances that eminent domain would not be used. Avella added that Pinsky said "five or six" Willets Point businesses would be relocated to the College Point Corporate Park and that others would be spread out throughout properties under the city's control.

Last week, the agency announced its fifth property acquisition - 44,500 square-feet owned by MA Realty (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/MA+Realty). Still, the city controls only a fraction of the 62-acre industrial zone.

Agency officials would not comment on claims of hard-charging lobbying.

"The administration doesn't have to talk eminent domain," said Councilman John Liu (D-Flushing) (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/John+Liu). "It's in the best interest of everybody for the administration to make progress to the point where eminent domain can be taken off the table."

NYC4Life

September 23rd, 2008, 06:32 PM

Updated On 09/23/08 at 05:18PM

Willets Point workforce assistance begins

The first initiative in forming the Willets Point workforce assistance program was announced today by Mayor Michael Bloomberg; Robert Lieber, deputy mayor for economic development; and Peter Ward, president of the New York Hotel and Motel Trades Council, which prepares hotel union members for employment. The program hopes to help the 250 businesses and 1,300 worker (http://www.queenstribune.com/feature/TheWaitingGameWilletsPoint.html)s who could lose their jobs if the city develops the area. The council's hotel employee benefit fund will be open to non-members for the first time so Willets Point workers can participate in food and beverage service training programs. The workers will also have the opportunity to use the council's referral program for job placement. TRD

NYC4Life

September 24th, 2008, 06:50 PM

Updated On 09/24/08 at 05:06PM

Will Willets Point pass City Council?

The City Planning Commission approved Mayor Michael Bloomberg's plan (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/bloomberg-says-willets-point-plan-must-go-forward) to redevelop Willets Point today which will create a convention center, 5,500 units of housing, and office and retail space. The plan will now go before the City Council for formal approval, but many council members have pledged to vote against it if it doesn't include a higher percentage of affordable housing. They also object to the use of eminent domain (http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080924/FREE/809249974/1058&category=FREE&nocache=1). Other critics of the plan want to know who the developer will be, what kind of public subsidies will be provided and where the money to develop the site will come from, according to Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum's blog. Lastly, reporter Stephen Stirling from the TimesLedger Newspaper just started IronTriangleTracker.com (http://irontriangletracker.com/), a news blog for Willets Point, to cover the controversial development. TRD

Char

September 27th, 2008, 11:39 AM

Would anybody know when the Cement Factory on College Point Blvd will close? I realize they need the water to operate, however they have begun cleaning the Flushing Bay.
I really need to know and would appreciate any input that you have.
Or if you can lead me to the office that I may contact for this information.
THANK YOU.

ZippyTheChimp

September 29th, 2008, 11:21 AM

Contact the Community Board (http://www.nyc.gov/html/cau/html/cb/cb_queens.shtml)

NYC4Life

October 1st, 2008, 03:22 AM

New York Observer

Queens Business Leaders: ‘Historic Opportunity’ at Willets Point

Queens Business Leaders Line Up Behind Willets Plan

by Eliot Brown (http://www.observer.com/2007/author/eliot-brown) | September 30, 2008

http://www.observer.com/files/imagecache/article/files/willets_4.jpg
Willets Point.

In a push for the redevelopment of Willets Point, a group of 75 business leaders, elected officials, industry representatives and others wrote the City Council this week a letter that urged the body to approve the city's proposed rezoning, an act it must take up within the next two months.

The letter, reported this morning in the Post (http://www.nypost.com/seven/09302008/news/regionalnews/willets_rehab_push_131395.htm), said that, "after more than 50 years of unsuccessful attempts the clean-up of Willets Point is at hand and we as community leaders face a historic opportunity."

The letter came in response to a statement of opposition to the plan by the majority of the Council. Check out the PDF here (http://www.observer.com/files/willetscouncil.pdf) and here (http://www.observer.com/files/signatures.pdf).

NYC4Life

October 8th, 2008, 02:36 PM

NY Daily News

Price tag a sticking point in Willets Point project

BY JOHN LAUINGER
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Tuesday, October 7th 2008, 6:34 PM

As the Bloomberg administration attempts to sell its plan to redevelop Willets Point (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Willets+Point), the price tag for the controversial project has become a major sticking point for the City Council.

Mayor Bloomberg (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Michael+Bloomberg) earmarked $400million in this year's fiscal budget for Willets Point, but the city has refused to provide details about the five land deals it has inked at the gritty industrial zone near Shea Stadium (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Shea+Stadium).

The city also has rejected a Daily News request under the Freedom of Information Law seeking information on the deals, saying it would harm ongoing talks.

But Council members are wary of casting a make-or-break vote Nov. 12 without knowing how much the city has spent to acquire the land in question, or where the businesses on it will be relocated to.

As of now, the administration has inked deals with five property owners - about 3 acres of the 62-acre industrial zone.

"Ultimately, we don't know what those costs are going to be," said City Councilman Hiram Monserrate (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Hiram+Monserrate), who has introduced a bill to require financial transparency for city projects involving eminent domain. "Fleshing those numbers out through a hearing or a financial impact statement would be a good thing."

Monserrate (D-Jackson Heights (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Jackson+Heights)), whose district includes Willets Point, said the 32 Council members opposed to the plan are also skeptical of voting for the project because a developer has not been named.

Business owners who have yet to sell are seeking leverage in contentious talks with the city. The business leaders have recently begun to attack the plan as an unnecessary expense during a time of economic turmoil.

"It is irresponsible for this administration to continue to promote a project that will cost the city upwards of $3 billion at a time when budgets are being slashed and services are being curtailed," said Jerry Antonacci (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Jerry+Antonacci), who is talking with the city about selling his Willets Point land.

In his weekly radio address on Sept. 27, Bloomberg said the Willets Point plan would create jobs and turn an "underutilized" area into a "much-needed boost to our local economy."

"City government can't solve the problems on Wall Street (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Wall+Street)," Bloomberg said in his address. "But we can take steps to ensure that even as the financial services industry stumbles, New York City (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/New+York+City) continues to move forward."

Dan Sambucci (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Dan+Sambucci), the first Willets Point business owner to sign a deal, said he sold his salvage yard to ensure it would survive.

"I would rather work with them than against them," he said.

John Maltz (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/John+Maltz), president of the commercial real estate brokerage Greiner-Maltz, said divulging the specifics of those deals would only drive up the asking prices for other businesses.

"They can't start talking about prices," he said. "They have to protect the city against a blown negotiation."

© Copyright 2008 NYDailyNews.com. All rights reserved.

ramvid01

October 8th, 2008, 03:26 PM

Speaking of which Flushing Commons appears to be cosntructing one of the four tower apartments. The steel on the southeastern tower seems to be at least 4-5 storeys over the mall/base portion.

NYC4Life

October 9th, 2008, 08:21 PM

Queens Crap (Yes, This is The Source...LOL)

Updated On 10/09/08 at 04:30PM
Council member speaks out against Willets Point

http://council.nyc.gov/d20/image/john_liu_bio_pic.JPG

Liu's letter to Lieber

Dear Mr. Lieber,

With a month to go before the Willets Point redevelopment plan comes before the City Council for consideration, I am greatly concerned that the Economic Development Corporation (EDC) has reached agreement with only a small number of the existing businesses with regard to the City's plans for relocation and/or compensation. Even more problematic is my understanding that the agreements reached are non-binding on the EDC.
The EDC and this administration have consistently maintained that "one or two holdouts" should not impede progress. I can agree with that approach and application of eminent domain to condemn private property for greater public good. However, it appears at the moment that almost everyone at Willets Point is a "holdout". At the moment, it appears the plan would invoke eminent domain to seize over 90% of properties at Willets Point.

This is patently indefensible. I implore you and the EDC to kick negotiations into high gear immediately.

After two years of what the City has described as "best efforts", more binding agreements should have already been reached. Nonetheless, it's not too late. There's still a month left for negotiations. Engage the business owners 'round the clock if need be. Just don't ask me and my colleagues to support a plan that would take land wholesale.

Good public policy sometimes necessitates invoking eminent domain to make progress. Coming to agreement for the acquisition of 90% of the land for this redevelopment and condemning the remaining holdouts probably makes sense. Seizing 90% of the land would be wrong an inexcusable, and I cannot in good conscience support a plan that amounts to that.

I am available to assist you and the EDC in any discussions and negotiations to get the job done.

Sincerely,

John C. Liu
Council Member
20th District

brianac

October 17th, 2008, 02:04 PM

In Willets Point Pitch, City Unveils New Property Deals To Council

by Eliot Brown (http://www.observer.com/2007/author/eliot-brown)
October 17, 2008

http://www.observer.com/files/imagecache/article/files/willets%20hearing%201.jpg Eliot Brown.
At the City Council hearing today, Hiram Monserratte, right, whose Queens district includes Willets Point.

Testifying before a packed hearing at the City Council this morning, Deputy Mayor Robert Lieber announced a set of new property deals in the Bloomberg administration’s bid to redevelop Willets Point, including ones involving two members of the main opposition group.

In testimony before a Council subcommittee, Mr. Lieber said the city had reached agreements with three new landowners, with the amount of land controlled by the city up to 12 percent of the private property at the 61-acre site.

Two of the three new deals were done with members of the main opposition group, the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association (http://wpira.com/). The group has fueled opposition on the part of many council members, who have spoken out against the large-scale use of eminent domain. (The deals today were with T. Mina Supply, the Parts Authority and Willets Point Property LLC, together composing three acres on the site.)

With respect to property deals, the city still has a ways to go: With the three deals today, the city has reached agreements with eight out of 74 property owners, and the Council must reject or approve the more than $3 billion project by Nov. 18 the political uncertainty on the plan for this week's print [I]Observer[/COLOR] (http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/showdown-willets-point)].

Mr. Lieber also announced a new job program for the existing workers, for which the Greater New York Automobile Dealers Association and LaGuardia Community College will create a new training program to put workers in the repair shops of car dealerships.

We'll have more from the hearing later today

http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/pitch-willets-point-city-unveils-new-property-deals-council

© 2008 Observer Media Group

Char

October 21st, 2008, 05:50 PM

Contact the Community Board (http://www.nyc.gov/html/cau/html/cb/cb_queens.shtml)
Thank you so much. :)

Char

October 21st, 2008, 06:25 PM

Hi Wired New York.

First post though I've been trolling for a while.

I live in Flushing and pass this site every day. The progress is astounding. But being a life-long resident of Flushing, I cant help but ask myself:

Who's going to pay to live six feet from the landing gear of airplanes every couple of minutes? The noise and vibrations get horrible the farther west in Flushing you go and presumably its incredibly loud on higher floors. Just walking around on the street the noise of the jets is stupendous, so I cant imagine who would want to live on a 12th floor by the airport and have their whole apartment convulse every few minutes. :D

Any news on the progress in the Iron Triangle. Place is disgusting but I hope the city goes about handling it in an evenhanded and fair manner.

Maybe I can help your curiosity. I've been selling this development.

We are selling a bit faster then most, the reason must be that they have been to the others and find that Sky View Parc does satisfy their lifestyle needs: There is nothing similar on any level built in NY. Many come here and find the apartment sized very generous. "REAL LIVING" and not match box living, they also find the Common Charges that include many amenities to be very very low in comparison to others that do NOT offer as much and cost more. Last but not least this Developer has a great reputation and that too is very important to buyers.
I do recommend that you check us out at www.SkyViewParc.com (http://www.SkyViewParc.com) then call me for an appointment, or e-mail me - charlotte@muss.com
If you live in Flushing and do not require a house what we offer will let you live like a king.

NYC4Life

October 21st, 2008, 07:49 PM

New York Observer

Thompson Pushes Willets Point Plan Amid Financial Crisis

by Eliot Brown (http://www.observer.com/2007/author/eliot-brown) | October 21, 2008

http://www.observer.com/files/imagecache/article/files/willetsrendering.jpg

City Comptroller Bill Thompson this morning endorsed construction of planned mega-projects, including Willets Point, as a means to "prime the economy."

As the debate over term limits rages on (Mr. Thompson is opposed to extending term limits and said he plans to mount a mayoral bid regardless), Mr. Thompson turned his attention to the financial crisis at a Crain's breakfast forum this morning. His broad, three-pronged solution for the local economy: tighten budgets, spur economic development and diversify the economy.

In the speech, according to prepared remarks (http://www.comptroller.nyc.gov/press/speeches/10-21-08-crains-speech.pdf), he took a tangent to endorse the city's plan to redevelop the 61-acre industrial zone of Willets Point in Queens (the Council must vote on the contentious proposal by Nov. 18 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.observer.com%2F2008%2Freal-estate%2Fshowdown-willets-point&ei=mgb-SMbrLI6OuwXT0e15&usg=AFQjCNGiXSiLQvOV9aqfpb31OzsYU4WA6g&sig2=KlMy4sbJxIEEtrlW4Qlcng)), though he said that affordable housing and business relocation issues must be addressed.

From his remarks, per the Comptroller's office:

"Today, its proximity to La Guardia Airport and public transportation makes Willets Point a prime location for a larger convention center, a successful model that other cities have developed....Over time, this convention center could replace the Javits Convention Center entirely, freeing up valuable land.
Such an investment would not only create good jobs and give northern Queens a shot in the arm, but it would take advantage of the enduring strength of our tourism industry.
...
But development of Willets Point must place a priority on the proper relocation of the valuable enterprises now operating on the site....Their owners have built solid businesses in a previously neglected area, providing jobs and important services....At a time when we want to keep and grow our small businesses, they must not be cast aside.

We must also endeavor to create low, moderate and middle-income housing there."

© 2008 Observer Media Group, All Rights Reserved Worldwide.

NYC4Life

November 3rd, 2008, 05:17 PM

NY1

Updated 9:34 AM

City Buys Large Property In Willets Point

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/4595/33425965or1.jpg

The city has made a major deal in its effort to transform the Willets Point area.

City officials say they have reached an agreement to buy the property of Indian food distributor House of Spices.

The four-acre deal gives the city ownership of 39 percent of the total site.

This is the largest land acquisition deal by the city at the 62-acre site.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration has unveiled plans to build a hotel, thousands of apartments and dozens of stores in the area which is now primarily used for auto shops and warehouses.

A City Council vote on the proposal is expected in less than two weeks.

Critics contend the mayor is trying to push out lawfully-owned businesses for luxury housing and unnecessary stores. But City officials say they are working to support pre-existing businesses, while expanding.

Copyright © 2008 NY1 News. All rights reserved.

NYC4Life

November 7th, 2008, 09:38 PM

Crain's New York

November 07. 2008 3:21PM

Willets Point down to the wire

Thursday’s Council vote hangs in the balance as key housing and land issues have yet to be resolved.

http://cnimg.sv.publicus.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=CN&Date=20081107&Category=FREE&ArtNo=811079966&Ref=AR&Profile=1058&maxw=319&border=0

With less than a week remaining before the City Council votes on the contentious Willets Point redevelopment project, the Bloomberg administration has made some progress on buying up land at the Queens site. But it’s still unclear if the city has the votes it needs to see the measure pass. To prevail, it may have to strike additional deals on land and one on affordable housing.

The Economic Development Corp. announced Monday that it agreed to terms with House of Spices—one of the leading Indian food manufacturers in the country —to buy its 4-acre property. The manufacturer had been the second largest member of the association leading opposition to the city proposal.

Another agreement, for auto salvage company Prevete Brothers’ 12,000-square-foot parcel, brings the total amount of private land under city control to 439,131 square feet, or about 10 acres. The city still needs to acquire another 38 acres of privately held land—including nine acres owned by Tully Environmental, Inc., the largest landowner in the area, and 3.3 acres owned by Fodera Foods, another major business. Owner Anthony Fodera says he has not had substantive talks with the city in more than a month.

“We remain committed to working with the remaining land owners and businesses to reach as many negotiated acquisitions as possible as the project moves through the public review process,” said EDC President Seth Pinsky.

The EDC is also in negotiations with an affordable housing coalition—comprised of ACORN, Queens for Affordable Housing and the Pratt Center for Community Development—which has insisted the city raise the proportion of affordable housing from 20% to 50%. Sources say a compromise of 30% prior to the vote is likely.

City Councilman Hiram Monserrate, who represents the area, continues to insist that he is opposed to the project in its current form and that more land deals, an affordable housing agreement and a plan to relocate 260 tenant businesses must all be reached before Thursday’s scheduled vote.

A spokesman for Mr. Monserrate says the city must reach deals for at least 60% of the privately-held land before the councilman would even consider voting in favor of the plan.

The mayor wants to rezone the 62-acre industrial area for a large mixed-use development that would include housing, a hotel, a convention center and retail and office space. The city says the land is contaminated and needs to be cleaned up.

A majority of Council members have vowed to reject the proposal Thursday over concerns about use of eminent domain and lack of affordable housing. City officials have intensified efforts in recent weeks to tilt the members’ opinions in favor of the plan.

Last week, Mayor Michael Bloomberg met personally with each borough’s Council delegation to press his case. The mayor and his staff also met with some Council members individually. Opponents of the project say the delegation meetings were unprecedented and indicate the mayor is worried he doesn’t have the votes to get the project passed.

“That’s never been done before,” said a Willets Point Realty and Industry Association spokeswoman. “In his seven years, the mayor never once did it, not on congestion pricing, not on term limits. If they had the votes, they wouldn’t have dragged him out.”

There have been rumblings the Council could break from tradition and not follow Mr. Monserrate, the local Council member, in the vote. But Council members have expressed grave reservations about the use of eminent domain, and their votes could end up being decided by how many deals the city signs in the next week.

“We’ve got six days,” said Mr. Monserrate’s spokesman. “I gather it’s going to be a very long weekend for the administration.”

© 2008 Crain Communications, Inc.

NYC4Life

November 13th, 2008, 03:04 PM

Crain's New York

November 13. 2008 10:31AM

City backs down on Willets Point

Three of the largest businesses, House of Spices, Fodera Foods, Tully Construction and Tully Environmental, will stay—at least temporarily—as part of revised deal.

http://cnimg.sv.publicus.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=CN&Date=20081113&Category=FREE&ArtNo=811139983&Ref=AR&Profile=1058&maxw=319&border=0

Daniel Massey (http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcs.dll/personalia?ID=69)

The city has reversed course and will allow Willets Point’s three largest owner-occupied businesses to remain in the gritty northeast Queens neighborhood.

The Bloomberg administration is likely to present a redevelopment plan to the City Council today that still includes a 62-acre redevelopment zone, but allows the three largest businesses to stay, at least temporarily.

House of Spices, which owns more than four acres; and Fodera Foods, which owns 3.3 acres, would remain in their current locations as part of the revised plan. Tully Construction and Tully Environmental, which owns nine acres would be permitted to stay on parts of its land.

The change in plans was confirmed by City Councilman Hiram Monserrate, D-Queens, and the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association, which represents the business owners.

The Economic Development Corp, which is handling the project for the city, said there was no reversal and that the city would continue with its plan to redevelop the 62 acres. A spokesman said the only change was that House of Spices and Fodera would be allowed to remain in the area during the initial phases of the project because their locations are “minimally invasive.”

He said the two businesses would then be able to sell at some point in the future to a private developer. Tully would be allowed to stay on portions of its land as part of an undetermined transition period.

“The last-minute twist in negotiations with the city reflect the administration's admission that relocation of major businesses requiring large parcels of manufacturing zoned land is next to impossible,” WPIRA said in a statement. “And to proceed with a $3 billion dollar mega-development is fiscally irresponsible in the face of our City's economic crisis.”

The businesses are all located on the perimeter of the site, with Tully and Fodera on Northern Boulevard and House of Spices on Willets Point Boulevard.

From the outset of the debate over Willets Point, the area’s largest landowners urged the city to include them in the redevelopment of the area. They proposed a corporate park that would include existing businesses, but their plan never gained any traction as the city insisted the 62-acre site was contaminated and needed to be cleaned up.

It’s unclear how the city would remediate the site with the three businesses remaining in place. In an interview with NY 1 last week, Mayor Bloomberg shied away from the administration’s long-held insistence that the area was blighted. “To take an area which, it’s not fair to say it’s blighted,” he said “It’s seen its better days is a fair way to phrase it.”

Now, it appears the three largest business owners will get their long-sought wish, though it is unclear how long they will be able to stay.

“It’s a credit to the administration,” said City Councilman Hiram Monserrate, D-Queens. [Deputy Mayor for Economic Development] Bob Lieber thought out of the box and we all came up with solutions to ensure we had agreement.”

© 2008 Crain Communications, Inc.

EnergRecrui

November 19th, 2008, 12:29 PM

Flushing Council on Culture and the Arts was founded in 1979 by Jo-Ann Jones, a classically trained musician and board member of the Oratorio Society of Queens, and Aaron Weiss, a businessman and social activist, to promote and develop the visual and performing arts in Flushing. The organization operated initially under the name Arts and Culture Committee of the Downtown Flushing Development Corporation and its office (one desk) was located in the Downtown Flushing Development Corporation Office on 39th Avenue, Flushing. Working with the DFDC, the Committee quickly began to raise the profile of the arts in Flushing by sponsoring performing arts events and visual arts exhibitions featuring Queens artists at various locations throughout the borough.

avngingandbright

December 5th, 2008, 06:38 PM

Hey, anyone know anything about this:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=downtown+flushing,+ny&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=61.328812,113.203125&ie=UTF8&ll=40.756355,-73.829457&spn=0.003446,0.013819&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.756355,-73.829457&panoid=2Hcp3Ab1rBBLh3apZPnaHg&cbp=11,163.14368025912222,,0,-22.548571138774495

I drive by it whenever I'm in Flushing and I gotta say, it sure catches the eye. Gaudy or not, it's still pretty awesome!

antinimby

December 5th, 2008, 10:43 PM

That's old news (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?p=189085).

devinkc

February 24th, 2009, 10:13 AM

Yes,, It is Victoria Tower Condominium in Flushing on Sanford ave......You can check out Fizber.com for the price

http://www.fizber.com/new-york-buy-condo-townhome-co-op-home-9986186.html

Derek2k3

October 3rd, 2009, 04:07 AM

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3105/3122519666_737d90a2b1_b.jpg
CAPTURED...XC (http://www.flickr.com/photos/capturedxc/3122519666/sizes/l/in/set-72157607077676149/)

Derek2k3

November 24th, 2009, 09:19 AM

Here's that new mixed use proposal in Flushing that recently received some stimulus money. They're working on the foundations and community members and politicians are disappointed they never had a chance to water it down. boo hoo.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2750/4131020672_939f61029f_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2689/4131020676_81d3e12c9f_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2517/4131020680_c1ec086116_o.jpg

Leesard Group
http://www.lessardgroup.com/web/module/portfolio/pid/99/portfolio.html

Queens, New York
This elegant building features 112,916 square feet of residential space and 46,305 square feet of community facility for a total of 159,221 square feet. 60 residential and 83 apartment / hotel units take up the bulk of the building’s upper floors while offices and restaurants command the lower levels. There are 2 levels of below-grade parking.

Posted by BrooklynLove in the Downtown BK thread.

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5840&page=94

November 9, 2009, 6:05 pm

Five Development Projects to Receive Stimulus Money

By Patrick McGeehan City officials have chosen five more development projects, one in each borough, to receive tax-free financing through the federal stimulus program.

The five projects, which include a hotel, a medical facility and a cement depot, would receive up to $87 million by selling “recovery bonds” through the city’s Capital Resource Corporation. City officials estimate that the projects would create about 600 construction jobs and about 300 permanent jobs, said David Lombino, a spokesman for the city’s Economic Development Corporation.

One of the chosen projects is a 117-room hotel to be built on the former site of the Pepper & Potter car dealership on Flatbush Avenue in downtown Brooklyn, which would borrow $20 million. That project was passed over in September, when the first recovery bonds were approved for the City Point apartment and shopping complex in downtown Brooklyn and another shopping center on Rockaway Peninsula in Queens.

Those projects received a combined $36 million in financing, which left the city with about $90 million in additional borrowing capacity through the stimulus program. Of the $87 million approved, the biggest piece — up to $28 million — would go to a terminal and pier on Staten Island that would receive imports of cement by ship for distribution around the city.

An additional $19.8 million would help finance a parking deck at St. Barnabas Hospital in the Bronx. Up to $17 million of bonds would be issued on behalf of Fleet Financial Group, which plans to build North Queens Medical Center, an 80,000-square-foot treatment facility with a parking garage on Union Street in Flushing. The last $2.2 million would go to My Image Studios for outfitting an arts and entertainment studio in the Kalahari Condominium on West 116th Street in Harlem.

Construction on each of the projects must get under way by the end of next year or the developers could lose the financing, under the rules of the stimulus program, Mr. Lombino said.

“There is no significant construction lending taking place right now,” he said. “But for this program, these projects wouldn’t go forward.”

http://yournabe.com/articles/2009/11/19/queens/queensgkgqnaf11182009.txt

Plan for Flushing building catches officials off guard

By Connor Adams Sheets
Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:12 AM EST
Comment (No comments posted.)
Email To a Friend

Work on the Eastern Mirage mixed-use project is expected to begin at 42-31 Union St. in Flushing by March. Photo by Christina Santucci
Ground is to be broken by March on a tall glass building to be used as a medical center and residential complex in downtown Flushing, according to a designer working on the project, but several elected officials said they had notheard of it until this week.

The Eastern Mirage project is on track to be built with the help of $17 million in tax-exempt stimulus bonds on three plots at 42-31 Union St. between Franklin and Sanford avenues, a fact that is drawing the ire of area politicians and experts who say they were not notified about the plans by city officials or the project’s developer, Flushing-based mortgage broker Fleet Financial Group, Inc.

“What a mess it’s going to be,” said Marilyn Bitterman, district manager of Community Board 7, who first heard about the project Monday,referring to the anticipated reactions to news of the plans. “If it goes in as an as-of-right development, there’s nothing we can do.”

North Queens Medical Center is a proposed 80,000-square-foot commercial diagnosis and treatment facility that will occupy one portion of the site. The Eastern Mirage Tower portion is slated to have 62 market-rate apartments, 100 apartment hotel rooms, 200 underground parking spaces and nearly 20,000 square feet of community facility space for amenities such as a restaurant and pool, according to Fleet Financial documents.

Janel Patterson, a city Economic Development Corp.spokeswoman, said the residential tower will not benefit from the stimulus money.

The project is in its final approval stages, according to Xi Zersenstein, a project designer for an architecture consultant hired by Fleet.

“We’ve got Buildings Department approval. We’re still doing some minor adjustments to the final layout before doing foundation work,” Zersenstein said. “From what we have, the approval right now, we can start construction right now, we can start construction already. We just want to be more coordinated first before we start, but we’re thinking to start the project by March 2010.”

State Sen. Toby Stavisky (D-Whitestone) called the opaque nature of the process thus far “disgraceful” and said she did not know about the plans until Monday.

“I know we have secrets, but I don’t think this proposal should be a secret,” she said. “I have no idea who the North Queens Medical Center are.”

The project is controversial in large part because the developer is awaiting $17 million of triple tax-exempt bonds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The EDC’s Capital Resource Corp. will hold a public hearing on the bond issuance Dec. 9.

“It’s a private development, private health care facility, and meanwhile Flushing Hospital and New York Hospital Queens are both struggling for their lives to stay afloat,” said Paul Graziano, a Flushing planning and zoning consultant. “So where’s the $17 million for those?”

A Capital Resource Corp. document said the bonds are issued for “projects that promote community and economic development” and create jobs. Patterson said the project is expected to create 100 permanent positions and 250 construction jobs.

“The purpose of the bonds is to spur construction of projects that are otherwise stalled because of the economy, because of lack of financing and the economic conditions,” Patterson said.

Fleet Financial first filed a building application in January for a 20-story mixed-use building, according to city Department of Buildings records.

That proposal was turned down in June. Foundation work has been approved, but another application must be filed and approved before work can begin on a building, according to DOB spokeswoman Ryan Fitzgibbon.

Reach reporter Connor Adams Sheets by e-mail at csheets@cnglocal.com or by phone at 718-229-0300, Ext. 138.

ramvid01

November 24th, 2009, 01:11 PM

Where you able to look at other projects in Flushing? How about the one on Main St. and Franklin Ave.?

I know you posted that a long while ago, but I am happy to inform you that steel is going up on this lot. I am not sure however it will be that building in the initial render.

BrooklynLove

November 24th, 2009, 09:48 PM

Bring ... It ... On

sunnyguy

May 4th, 2010, 06:14 PM

sunnyguy

May 4th, 2010, 06:21 PM

The developer of an 11-story, 124,000-square-foot mixed-use building proposed for downtown Flushing requested a zoning change at Tuesday night’s Community Board 7 meeting.

Lawyers and an architect for the United Construction and Development Group asked the board to support changing the proposed site at 134-03 35th Ave. from industrial zoning to allow for mixed-use residential.

The company argued that residential zoning better reflects the current character of the area surrounding the site near the intersection of Prince Street and 35th Avenue.

The developer also said the community benefits of the project, called the New Millennium building, will make it a net positive for downtown Flushing.

The project, as proposed, would provide 87,000 square feet of residential space — most likely condominiums — 17,000 square feet of commercial space, a 14,900-square-foot senior center and about 5,000 square feet of doctor’s offices. It will also include at least 189 new parking spaces.

Paul Graziano, a Flushing-based urban planning consultant, said he supports the project as proposed, but wants assurances that the city will require the developer to build the senior center.

“This is a thoughtful project, there is more than enough parking,” he said. “It’s a good project and it certainly has the ability to work.”

The senior facility, called the SelfHelp Prince Street Senior Center, is a longtime member of the Flushing community currently located at Ebeneezer Baptist Church, which it has long since outgrown. It was slated to be accommodated in the redevelopment of the RKO Keith’s Theatre, but that project has stalled.

Some CB 7 members expressed concerns, however, that the developer would be able to fill the condos, as the Flushing housing market has taken a hit since the economic downturn.

CB 7 Vice Chairman Chuck Apelian summed up some of those concerns.

http://adsys.townnews.com/9865026/creative/yournabe.com/queens+instory/224023-1270344650.gif (http://adsys.townnews.com/c6484699/creative/yournabe.com/queens+instory/224023-1270344650.gif?r=http://www.dignetnycli.com/)
“There are a number of buildings in the area that are vacant,” he said.

A lawyer for the developer responded that the company believes that as the market rebounds, it will be able to fill the spaces.

Another concern by a CB 7 member was that high-rent condos might be particularly hard to sell in Flushing.

“Right now, it’s planned to be condos. That could change, but right now it’s planned to be condos,” Eric Palatnik, an attorney for the developer, said. “It’s going to be priced for the market.”

The community board did not hold a vote on the zoning change.

Merry

June 24th, 2010, 07:08 AM

Flushing Commons gets City Planning OK

June 23, 2010

The City Planning Commission voted today to approve Flushing Commons (http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/flushing-commons-gets-the-go-ahead-from-community-board-republican-gov-candidate-slams-cuomo-on-subprime-bust-and-more), the Rockefeller Group's five-acre mixed-use development (http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/flushing-business-improvement-official-jim-gerson-resigns-over-five-acre-development) in Queens, and the nearby Macedonia Plaza affordable housing project. Plans for the $850 million Flushing Commons complex call for 600 residential units and 420,000 square feet of office and retail space. Macedonia Plaza, a project of the Macedonian African Methodist Episcopal Church, is slated to have 140 affordable housing units, ground-floor retail and a YMCA. In a statement, Mayor Bloomberg praised the outcome, which he said "moves us one step closer to reinvigorating downtown Flushing with new housing and retail options, hotel or office space and much-needed additional parking for the area's residents and visitors." Bloomberg added that the projects will create 2,000 permanent jobs and 2,600 construction jobs. The pair of development proposals will now move on to the City Council for final approval.

http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/flushing-commons-and-macedonia-plaza-get-city-planning-approval

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/06/23/queens_project_not_flushed.php

Merry

July 27th, 2010, 06:51 AM

Final Round for Flushing Commons

Long-delayed Queens megaproject gets planning commission approval as locals vow to fight on

by Matt Chaban
http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/image/Flushing1
The 1.1 million-square-foot complex, designed by Perkins Eastman, is to contain 600 units of housing
and 420,000 square feet of retail and office space.

Getting off the No. 7 train at its terminus in Flushing, Queens can be like stepping into another world. Founded in 1645, Flushing was once one of the oldest Dutch settlements in the city. It became home to affluent whites and a large African-American population at the turn of the last century before its more recent transformation into a Chinatown. It is also the largest business district in Queens, and the fourth largest in the city.

The Bloomberg administration is hoping to leverage the area’s consumer status with the creation of Flushing Commons, a 1.1 million-square-foot mixed-use complex on the site of a municipal parking garage. But local businesses and community groups fear the project will overwhelm them, driving out mom-and-pop shops that have made Flushing a thriving place for immigrant start-up businesses, turning it into another Bloombergian landscape of glass boxes choked off by traffic.

The plan, developed by local outfit TDC and the Rockefeller Group, won an RFP in 2005 and was designed by Perkins Eastman. It includes 600 units of housing, 420,000 square feet of retail and office space, a 62,000-square-foot Y, 36,000 square feet of community space, and 1,600 parking spaces. It’s aiming for LEED Silver status.

One of its biggest sticking points has been parking, namely that it lacks enough. In 2005, then–City Council representative John Liu indicated to then–Deputy Mayor for Development Dan Doctoroff that he would not support any project with fewer than 2,000 parking spaces, with a permanent cap on rates. Since many Flushing visitors come by car, particularly because public transit is limited, the current lot with its 1,101 spaces is actually seen as an asset.
http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/FlushingCommonsPlaza.jpg
The project, planned to achieve LEED Silver certification, will also include community and recreation spaces,
along with 1,600 parking spaces, all set around a central plaza.

The council has final say on all land-use projects, so Flushing Commons was considered dead until this January, when Liu became comptroller and Peter Kuo, a booster for the project, took his place on the City Council. Three weeks after Kuo’s swearing in, the Planning Commission certified the project on January 25.

So far, the local community board and Borough President Helen Marshall have supported the project, albeit with 17 modifications that range from more parking to inclusion of a bookstore, basically returning it to the phase agreed upon by Liu and Doctoroff five years ago. “At least with these changes, it’ll go from devastating to horrific,” said Paul Graziano, a planner and community activist.

Kuo’s chief of staff, James McClelland, said many of these issues should have gone into the RFP but it’s too late to include them now. “We’d like to see all of them, but there’s a bunch the city and the developer have taken off the table,” he said. “They have an agreement, and there’s not much we can do about it.” Still, Kuo has promised to press the city on traffic mitigation measures, parking, workforce training, and small-business subsidies.

For Jim Gerson, a founding member of the Flushing BID whose family has owned a building there for three generations, this is a slap in the face. “None of us are against development,” Gerson said. “A parking lot, other than an economic engine, is not an attractive part of Flushing. But it’s better to build something that supports the community than something that divides and potentially even destroys it.”

Having passed the Planning Commission on June 23, the project will come to a council vote by the end of August and likely pass given Kuo’s support. Gerson and Graziano anticipate a long fight ahead, including legal challenges.

http://www.archpaper.com/e-board_rev.asp?News_ID=4710

sunnyguy

September 13th, 2010, 12:25 PM

Anyone know who is the developer of this new condo on Prince street?

sunnyguy

January 17th, 2011, 08:32 AM

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kulnm8Gjhh8/TS_oofyQpZI/AAAAAAAAWPg/LqohJ61aElE/s320/qns_cb_7_meet_20110113.jpg (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kulnm8Gjhh8/TS_oofyQpZI/AAAAAAAAWPg/LqohJ61aElE/s1600/qns_cb_7_meet_20110113.jpg)
From the Times Ledger (http://www.jamaica-times.com/articles/2011/01/13/queens/qns_cb_7_meet_20110113.txt):

Downtown Flushing’s skyline will gain two new towers if a pair of developers move forward with the plans they presented before Community Board 7 Monday night.

Their plans are to start building two 12-story buildings in the downtown corridor within the next year if they get final approval from the city Board of Standards and Appeals, which will now make a final ruling on the projects.

Leavitt Street LLC plans to put up the first building on a vacant lot at 39-16 College Point Blvd. that used to be a gas station. Jia Ye Realty LLC plans to replace a two-story building at 36-27 Prince St. with its tower.

The buildings did not undergo a full vetting by CB 7 or the BSA since the hotels are to be built as-of-right, with only one sticking point that needed to be reviewed. As eight-story buildings, they would have been able to go up without any community review, but in order to build 12 stories, their developers were required to get a Federal Aviation Administration waiver because of their close proximity to LaGuardia Airport.

The city Department of Buildings approved the projects, with the stipulation that the waivers must be approved, and on Monday CB 7 voted on whether or not to approve the height restriction, a formality of sorts given the FAA’s approval of it.

Board members were not allowed to base their votes on any other considerations, such as the impact on traffic, schools, the economic viability or appearance of the hotels. The members voted to support the FAA’s decision to grant the waiver by unanimous vote, clearing one of the final hurdles for the buildings to move forward. A couple of board members grumbled about voting to approve the waiver before casting their votes, saying the projects would have a negative impact on the downtown area.

Sid

April 15th, 2011, 07:46 AM

Are there any kind of plans to build something like a pedestrian bridge to connect downtown Flushing with Willets Point?

ralphrepo

May 6th, 2011, 04:55 PM

New mall to replace blight spot

BY Leigh Remizowski (http://www.nydailynews.com/authors/Leigh%20Remizowski)
DAILY NEWS WRITER
Thursday, April 29th 2010, 10:50 AM

THE SITE OF a shuttered department store in downtown Flushing (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Flushing+%28New+York%29) is undergoing a makeover after more than 10 years of vacancy.

The former site of Caldor, a now-defunct chain of clothing stores, is being transformed into a three-story shopping center with a restaurant, supermarket and other shops, according to a manager for the project, which is currently under construction. Developers are shooting for a September grand opening for the center at 136-20 Roosevelt Ave. - to be dubbed the New World Mall. The list of retailers, located mostly on the first and second floors, has yet to be finalized, said the project manager, who asked not to be named. "There are prospective franchises, but those are still in negotiations," he said, adding that the third floor will be a buffet-style restaurant with karaoke. Some locals have reservations about the type of merchants that will inhabit the new mall. "We don't want a flea market," said Community Board 7 Chairman Gene Kelty (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Gene+Kelty). "That doesn't complement the area." He said Flushing residents would welcome a shopping center like Queens Center Mall in Elmhurst (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Elmhurst+%28New+York%29). "If you want a mall, put a mall in there with decent stores," Kelty said. Developers do not need to present their plans to the community board because it conforms to the existing zoning. Kelty said the last he heard of any development at the vacant site was about eight years ago, but plans never came to fruition. Contractors filed for permits to renovate the three-story building last August with the city Department of Buildings, said an agency spokeswoman. Developers, which include high-end hotel bigwig McSam Hotels LLC (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/McSam+Hotels+LLC), did not return calls for comment. The project is one of several new developments slated for the area, which locals say is already overcrowded and inundated with traffic. The area is the third-busiest pedestrian hub in the city after Manhattan (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Manhattan)'s Broadway and 44th St., and Eighth Ave. between 33rd and 34th Sts., according to the city Transportation Department. "My concern is how it's going to affect traffic circulation," Kelty said. "Where are people going to pick their groceries up?" The new mall is already equipped with a 350-spot underground parking garage, which will offer valet parking, the project manager said.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2010/04/29/2010-04-29_new_mall_to_replace_blight_spot.html?r=ny_local&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nydnrss%2Fny_local+%28NY+Loca l%29#ixzz0mzu624IE (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2010/04/29/2010-04-29_new_mall_to_replace_blight_spot.html?r=ny_local&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nydnrss%2Fny_local+%28NY+Loca l%29#ixzz0mzu624IE)

The above was posted in this thread almost exactly one year ago, and I'm sad to report that just about all the feared "negatives" that critics had, have been realized in full.

The entire mall is devoted to the same Chinese no-name brands that can be found in any one of those hole in the wall Asian mini-malls along Main Street, and there is not one single main stream American branded store or franchise. On the ground floor there is a carbon copy of Hong Kong Supermarket (very similar to the one on Main Street) except that it's newer and a lot nicer. The second floor is 90% Chinese branded clothing for women, children, and cosmetics, or hair salons. In fact, most of the stalls here have been rented by those formerly of the mini-malls that are obviously moving into better digs. My wife, who prowls those places, even recognized some of the new shopkeeps as previous tenants of either "this or that" mini-mall. The third floor is a huge Chinese eatery very similar in style and slightly more expensive to the Jade Asian Restaurant (formerly called Gum Fung, one block away on 39th Avenue). The basement food court (to open of 15 MAY), from the names that I saw, is filled with Asian style cuisine that is the same fare found in places like the Golden Shopping Mall on Main Street, and the (soon to be demolished) Flushing Mall on 39th Avenue. The parking lot is the unchanged from the lot inherited from the previous tenant a decade ago; it remains dark, narrow, dingy, confusingly marked, and without any sign of security. Driving in and out of there is a real hassle as you have to enter or exit from the very busy intersection on Main Street right next to the Long Island Rail Road overpass. Oh, and park there at your own risk (to both vehicle and owner as this place looks like a mugger's paradise). In a word, is this anything like the Queens Center Mall? NOT!

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x73/ralphrepo/ILoveChinatown/JMartStoreNewWorldMallFlushingNYViewFromUnderEscal atorLookingEastPC02110430xsm.jpg

JMart Supermarket, Ground Floor, New World Mall, Flushing, New York. Taken 30 APR 2011. Photograph is a composite of five separate images stitched together to produce a panoramic. View is from under 2nd floor escalator looking east.

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x73/ralphrepo/ILoveChinatown/2FloorNewWorldMallFlushingNYPC01110428xsm.jpg

Mall Shops, Second Floor, New World Mall, Flushing, New York. Taken 28 APR 2011. Photograph is composite of several images stitched together to produce a panoramic. View is from southwest corner (near elevator bank) looking southeast.

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x73/ralphrepo/ILoveChinatown/GrandRestaurantNewWorldMallFlushingNYPC02110428xsm .jpg

Grand Restaurant, Third Floor, New World Mall, Flushing, New York. Taken 28 APR 2011. Photograph is a composite of four separate images stitched together to produce a panoramic. View is from third floor elevator bank looking southeast.

Oh, and lest anyone think I'm being racially biased; for the record, I'm Chinese and have lived in Flushing for more than a quarter century.

All photographs copyright 2011 Ralphrepo; All rights reserved.

antinimby

May 6th, 2011, 06:30 PM

ASchwarz

May 6th, 2011, 06:45 PM

This looks much nicer and more interesting to me than Queens Center Mall.

The mall certainly doesn't look junky from the pics. I see a nice catering hall, a big supermarket, and a fairly expensive-looking mall.

The developers did a good job, IMO.

antinimby

May 6th, 2011, 08:23 PM

^ Agreed although it's too bad they didn't put housing on top. I mean, the 7 train station is right there for Christ's sake!

ralphrepo

May 6th, 2011, 09:51 PM

Thanks for the update ralphrepo however you seem too disappointed in the outcome. I think how it turned out is actually for the better. Why would anyone want another boring chain-filled mall? Queens Center Mall is boring. Flushing is mostly Asian now so it should be geared towards the Asian community. This is what works for Flushing. I love it. BTW, I haven't been there since last November, so how is that project on the NE corner of Franklin and Main St. looking right now? If you can take pics that would be great.

Hi, Antinimby, no offense, but I think you've missed my point; my disappointment or problem with the new place is that all the other stores around it are selling exactly the same things for blocks around. For me, it's sorta like everyone is already selling grapes, and a new store opens, you hope it sells oranges, apples, bananas, whatever; but no, it sells (you guessed it) <sigh> ...more grapes. Thus, whenever I want something that those chains in QCM has, I already have to drive about 30 minutes each way (depending on traffic), look for parking, not to mention the gas prices and aggravation. If a little piece of QCM moved up the block next to me, I would not mind it in the least. As for putting housing on top, I'm not sure that they wanted to do that or even could; they sort of built the mall into the pre-existing structure, at least that's all their permit allowed for from what I understand by following the paper.

But, with all considered, I find that the supermarket is pretty decent. The much older Hong Kong Supermarket and several others like it are a bit run down. They're also always crowded, so I know that this new JMart is going to find customers regardless. I heard a rumor that the old Keyfood (Dans Supreme) Supermarket at the corner of Roosevelt Avenue and Bowne Street, now converted to another Asian style Chinese supermarket (called New York Marts), is also owned by the same entity that owns New World Mall. How true this is, I don't know. But there's certainly food for thought.

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x73/ralphrepo/ILoveChinatown/NewYorkMarts002FlushingNY110428PCxsm.jpg

New York Marts Supermarket Entrance, Flushing, New York. Taken 28 APR 2011. Photograph is a composite of six separate images stitched together to produce a panoramic. View is from northwest corner of Roosevelt Avenue and Bowne Street looking northwest.

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x73/ralphrepo/ILoveChinatown/EastBuffetRestaurant005EntryFlushingNY110506PCWAxs m.jpg

East Buffet Restaurant Entrance, Flushing, New York. Taken 06 MAY 2011. Photograph is a composite of three separate images stitched together to produce a wide angle image. View is from east side of Main Street looking southwest.

As for Franklin Avenue and Main Street, the site of that former Chinese restaurant is still scaffolded with bare cement blocks showing (see right side of photo above, partially blocked by tree). I'm assuming that they're still in the midst of construction. I'm just hopeful that it doesn't turn out into another "out of money" project that then sits partially completed looking for rescue like the empty building next to the Saint Michael School on 41st Avenue.

All photographs copyright 2011 Ralphrepo; All rights reserved.

antinimby

May 7th, 2011, 11:19 AM

Maybe grapes is what sells at that location?

We live in a free market. If people in the area wanted oranges, apples and bananas, then I'm sure they would be there, too.

Sid

May 7th, 2011, 11:53 AM

What do you guys think of some sort of wide, landscaped, pedestrian bridge to attach Willets Point to Flushing. This could create one large, heavily-retailed walkable area. It would pass under the Van Wyck. Would this be feasible? I think something like this is necessary so you don't just have two dense, lively areas that are very close, but not directly accessible on foot from one another.

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i406/maximan99/willptflushingbridge.png?t=1304779869

ralphrepo

May 7th, 2011, 03:54 PM

Maybe grapes is what sells at that location? We live in a free market. If people in the area wanted oranges, apples and bananas, then I'm sure they would be there, too.

There no sense arguing about as it's already a done deal. I just hope that when Flushing Commons opens it won't be another ritzy version of Beijing in Flushing. I purposely moved from Chinatown years ago to live in a neighborhood with a better mix. Little could I have imagined that all my kinfolk decided to follow me out here. The only area of Flushing that hasn't been gentrified is ironically the Bland Houses City Projects. And, as my missus is fond of saying, that's the worst piece of real estate in Flushing, and it's also the best. Could you imagine what a developer would make off of a parcel like that?

What do you guys think of some sort of wide, landscaped, pedestrian bridge to attach Willets Point to Flushing. This could create one large, heavily-retailed walkable area. It would pass under the Van Wyck. Would this be feasible? I think something like this is necessary so you don't just have two dense, lively areas that are very close, but not directly accessible on foot from one another.

I'm not so sure that I could buy into that. There problem here is that unless there is something on the other side of that toxic Flushing Creek, no one in his right mind is going to want to walk anywhere near there. I know that the city has been trying to get the Willets Point body and junk shops to leave the area but when that actually happens is anyone's guess. If that were to happen, then the Roosevelt Avenue elevated rail and road bridge over the Van Wyck would do just fine with a bit of refurbishing. Right now, there is almost zero traffic going across that bridge to begin with (2 lanes in either direction with pedestrian walkway). IMHO, passing under the Van Wyck at the point that you indicated wouldn't be possible unless one learns to duck walk. The water levels sometimes comes almost up to the bottom of the roadway with high tide.

Alternatively, I think that in the future (probably long after either of us) someone's going to come up with a grand plan for reclamation of that section, permanently fill the creek in with cement, and then open up that entire area for development.