Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
INTRODUCTION
The neighborhood of Flushing, Queens has had a long and rich history. Founded in 1645,
Flushing was the first permanent settlement in Queens, and is often seen as the birthplace of
religious freedom. In the 1980s, a wave of immigration transformed the community and today,
more than half of our residents were born outside of the United States. In recent years, our
population and economy have continue to grow, and Flushing has become a destination of
choice for many tourists, small businesses, developers, and families.
The Flushing West Rezoning Proposal would build upon Flushings success and could
potentially bring Flushings downtown all the way to the Flushing Creek. It is clear that the
Department of City Planning has put a great deal of work into the proposed zoning for the study
area, taking into account the large parcels, waterfront access, FAA height limits, and the need for
commercial parking. This proposed zoning could result in much better urban design compared
with the current zoning. However, before we can move forward, we must take into account the
context of the proposed rezoning and what currently existsor doesnt exist.
My number one priority is making sure that there are enough investments in housing,
schools, infrastructure, transit, and environmental remediation to meet the needs of present and
future Flushing residents. Better zoning is only one piece of the planning process. Unlike many
other neighborhoods, Flushing is already full of people and private real estate investment. The
challenge in this neighborhood is not getting the market to invest, but making sure that
investmentsespecially capital investmentsmeet the needs of the community.
Analysis Framework
I am concerned that the analysis framework, as presented in the scope of work, does not
present a realistic no-action condition. The no-action condition predicts 293,600 square feet of
hotel development and 2,612,203 square feet of residential development. The with-action
scenario actually predicts an increase in hotel development with 303,847 square feet of hotel
space.
There are three major recent hotel developments in the rezoning area, and the Department
of City Planning in its presentations has stressed that the C4-2 zoning incentivizes hotel
development over residential development this is one of the justifications for the rezoning to the
proposed C4-4A. If this is the case, then why does the no-action condition have such a small
amount of hotel development when compared with residential development, particularly in light
of all the recent hotel developments in the area?
We need to reexamine the analysis framework and create a more accurate no-action
condition and assumes much lower levels of residential development absent a rezoning. If we fail
to undertake this more conservative analysis the no-action to with-action increment will be
unrealistically small and mitigation will not be sufficient to address the needs of the new
residents.
Flushing Creek
We need a real plan for the remediation of Flushing Creek. Bringing Flushing downtown
to the Creek sounds nice, but putting new residents next to a polluted waterway might be a
challenge. Dealing with the Creek means not only developing green infrastructure for the future
and disinfecting CSO outfalls, but also reducing CSO volumes and mitigating the current state of
the creek.
Affordable and Senior Housing
I expect the administration to develop a comprehensive housing plan that addresses all
levels of income, especially low and middle incomes, as well as senior housing. Flushing needs
much more affordable housing, particularly affordable senior housing. The administrations
Mandatory Inclusionary Housing tool could be an important tool for the community. Mandatory
Inclusionary Housing is only one piece of the puzzle, as the incomes that MIH target may not
adequately match the wide variety of incomes found in downtown Flushing. Many people in
Flushing simply cant afford MIH as currently proposed. Senior housing is also very important.
Schools and Childcare
Education is also a major priority. Since coming to office I have spent almost $16 million
of my member funds on schools. However, Flushings schools are overcrowded today. According
to School Construction Authority data, 85% of Community School District 25 students are in
overcrowded schools, with over 6,400 new seats needed. When new residential development is
proposed, school capacity needs to be seriously considered.
Subway Access
Like current residents, many new residents will take the subway. The Flushing Main
Street subway station is hard to enter and exit, especially during rush hour. While the MTA
capital budget has proposed some improvements to the station, the biggest need is for more
entrances and wider stairwells.
Bus Transit Center
The subway is only one part of the problem. The intersection of Main Street and
Roosevelt is the third busiest intersection in New York City, after Times and Herald Squares.
With close to 30 bus lines in Flushing, our community suffers from terrible congestion from
buses and passengers, leading to roads and sidewalks that can be dangerous. Downtown Flushing
has experienced three pedestrian deaths in just over a month, which shows how dangerous the
situation is. This is why Flushing needs a Bus Transit Center. I am happy that DCP is creating
zoning that will support a Bus Transit Center in the rezoning area and that the MTA will conduct
a study on locating a Bus Transit Center in the area. These efforts need to result in real action.
Road Quality
However, getting buses and passengers off the street is only one part of the solution. The
roads and sidewalks in downtown Flushing are in very poor condition. This is a major priority of
mine. Since taking office I have spent $800,000 of my member funds on improving streets. Bus
traffic, current development, and ease of access to many major roads and highways have resulted
in many heavy vehicles on our streets. The scope of work needs to take into account this traffic,
the type of traffic, and the need for road resurfacing and reconstruction.
Again, I am excited to be part of this process, and I look forward to working with the
community and with the administration to make sure that this neighborhood plan fully addresses
the communitys needs.
What follows are comments on specific areas of the Scope of Work where analysis may be need
to be expanded or modified to take local conditions into account.
Analysis Framework
The analysis framework calculations of the no-action condition may be problematic. The
no-action condition (Table 1a) may be underestimating hotel development, particularly when
compared to the with-action condition. The no-action condition predicts 293,600 square feet of
hotel development and 2,612,203 square feet of residential development. The with-action
scenario actually predicts an increase in hotel development with 303,847 square feet of hotel
space.
Public statements by Department of City Planning representatives have pointed to the
existing C4-2 zoning as a major cause of overbuilding of hotels in Flushing when compared with
new residential construction. Furthermore, such statements have projected that the rezoning area
will continue to see overbuilding of hotels until the zoning is changed. The 2014 CEQR
Technical Manual requires that a no action analysis take into account the amount and type of
recent as-of-right development in the area as well as recent real estate trends in the area when
conducting an analysis of soft site development. Recent developments in the area include major
hotel developments that are taking advantage of advantageous commercial FARs and parking
requirements in the C4-2 zoning. New projects inside the rezoning area with major hotel
components include the following: One Fulton Square, which has a 200-room hotel; Two Fulton
Square, with a 240-room hotel; and the Parc Hotel, which has 96 rooms.
Fixing this problem with C4-4A zoning has been proposed as a way to diminish hotel
development, as C4-4A, when combined with MIH, will incentivize mixed-income development.
If this is the case, why does the scope state that the with-action condition will actually increase
hotel development? If the new zoning will do what DCP is publicly saying that it will do, then
perhaps the no-action condition overestimates residential development and under-estimates hotel
development?
A more conservative measure of no-action soft site development is required so that a
comparison to the with-action condition can better predict the residential development increment.
The rezoning is, after all, designed to push the market towards building residential and away from
building hotels. A change in analysis framework will then change every analysis within the scope.
Description of the Proposed Actions
For several of the waterfront parcels in the study area, the proposed zoning calls for more
floor area than can be accommodated without height limit waivers from the Federal Aviation
Administration and the Port Authority. While the scope of work includes analyzing the effects of
development that has received such height limit waivers, we need to know whether it is realistic
to expect that such parcels will actually receive height limit waivers.
Additionally, as the below map indicates, the median incomes for the census tracts in
downtown Flushing range from 16% to 61% of Area Median Income for a household of four, and
18% to 68% of Area Median Income for a household of three. Mandatory Inclusionary Housing
needs to be complemented by a meaningful housing plan from HPD to address these low
incomes. Additionally, middle-income and senior housing needs to be included in such a housing
plan. Flushing households tend to be intergenerational, and senior housing needs to be provided
so that three generations do not have to share the same unit.
As a small business owner myself, I believe in making and preserving opportunities for
small business owners, and I encourage the administration to think creatively about how existing
small businesses could be accommodated and supported within the neighborhood plan.
developed to have a material impact on the CSO problem, and in the meantime the rezoning will
allow more residential development adjacent to the Creek. We need to think creatively about
solutions to clean up the creek in its current state and potentially accelerate the installation of
green infrastructure in the area. Additionally, we need additional CSO storage capacity to reduce
the volume of CSO entering the Creek during rain events.
DEP needs to a key partner in any planning work being done along the Creek.
has proposed some unspecified improvements to the station, the biggest need is for more
entrances and wider stairwells.
Pedestrians
Downtown Flushings sidewalks are already severely overcrowded, and crossing the
street can be a hazardous experience. The NYC DOT has recognized the intersection of Main
Street and Roosevelt Avenue as the second busiest pedestrian intersection in New York City, and
third busiest overall. The current scope of work calls for a study of pedestrian volumes and levels
of service. This scope should include a study of pedestrian safety and potential mitigation
measures in line with recent transportation work across the city that has used design measures to
enhance pedestrian safety.
Parking
One of the biggest complaints I hear from constituents is the lack of affordable parking.
The development of two municipal lots (#1 also known as Flushing Commons, and #3 also
known as One Flushing) has severely limited the number of affordable parking spaces. The recent
implementation of Select Bus Service has also further limited the number of on street parking
spaces available. Furthermore, the development of municipal lot #2, which shares a border with
the rezoning area, is under consideration. The lack of affordable parking has resulted in vehicles
circling for hours in downtown Flushing looking for space, and adding to the traffic. The plan
should include adjustments to the on street parking system to ensure a constant supply of
affordable parking on street spaces.
conduct a public health assessment to make sure that new residential development on the
Flushing Creek waterfront does not result in adverse public health impacts.
CONCLUSION
This neighborhood planning process has the potential to transform the Flushing
waterfront into a healthy, economically vibrant, mixed-income community. However, this
planning process will only be successful if adequate investments are made to not only mitigate
the impacts of the proposed increased floor area, but also address the existing capital needs of the
community. The current CEQR framework focuses entirely too much on mitigating the increment
between no-action and with-action scenarios, as opposed to addressing existing community
needs. In Flushing we need to not only mitigate impacts from such increased density, but also
address the housing crisis, the overcrowded schools, the terrible bus traffic, the congested subway
stairs, the deteriorated roads, and the polluted Flushing Creek. This administration has stated
publicly that each neighborhood rezoning will include comprehensive capital budget allocations
to ensure that with increased density comes increased investment. Here in Flushing the City needs
to follow through on such promises with the appropriate investments that will make sure that this
neighborhood is transformed in a positive way.