CB7 approves Flushing Commons - again

From the Times Ledger:

Community Board 7 took up Flushing Commons, an $800 million mixed-use development project planned in downtown Flushing, for the last time Monday evening and voted to conditionally recommend it to the Queens Borough Board.

The project was approved July 29 by the City Council and Mayor Michael Bloomberg and then headed back to CB 7, which had one final chance to weigh in on the project. CB 7 Chairman Eugene Kelty will take the board’s recommendation to the Borough Board, a body made up of Borough President Helen Marshall, all Queens City Council members and the chairs of all Queens community boards.

CB 7’s Land Use Committee voted Sept. 7 to recommend the Borough Board vote “no” on the transfer of the land where it will be built from the city Economic Development Corp. to the project’s developer, TDC Development. Committee members were upset that the city and developer did not consider some of their concerns about the project.

But last-minute negotiations between CB 7 Vice Chairman Chuck Apelian, the city and the developer led to some new solutions which Kelty insisted rendered the committee’s recommendation obsolete. Since time was running out to make a decision, he suggested an amendment to the recommendation.

The negotiations secured a commitment by the developer to be “100 percent on board and willing to continue working with the community board, business groups and residents” to address remaining concerns they have, according to Apelian. In the week after the Land Use hearing, CB 7 also received other assurances, including ones from city agencies pledging that parking issues with Municipal Lot 2 and police vehicles would be addressed.

James McClelland, a spokesman for City Councilman Peter Koo (R-Flushing), also said he is committed to addressing the remaining issues by bringing a new school or new schools to Flushing in order to accommodate the growing population.

CB 7 board members Joe Sweeney and Arnold Wagner argued that the board should accept the Land Use Committee’s recommendation because they believed the city and developer are not bound to honor their agreements and that they have leeway to back out of them, leaving area residents with the short end of the stick.

“What concerns me is this project is like Swiss cheese right now,” Sweeney said. “I don’t know if I can vote ‘yes’ on this because it’s very ambiguous.”

Kelty contended it is better to be able to suggest changes than to reject the project outright.

Supermarket owner owes a lot of fines

From the Times Ledger:

New York Mart, the new owner of the shuttered Key Food supermarket in Flushing, owes the city thousands of dollars in fines after failing for more than a month to comply with a stop-work order, according to city records.

The supermarket chain, which was busy converting the space into the fifth location of the Asian food market, has been fined $15,000 by the city Department of Buildings since July 27 for a series of violations, the department’s records show. The fines had not been paid as of Tuesday afternoon, a DOB spokeswoman said.

On July 27, the department issued a partial stop-work order on the property at 142-41 Roosevelt Ave. for working without a permit and it mandated that all interior work be stopped, the spokeswoman said. On Aug. 18, the property was cited for not having construction plans its owner submitted to the department on hand at the site, and on Aug. 26 a full stop-work order was issued, barring all work on the property until the fines are paid.

The building was cited on Sept. 1 for violating that order, according to DOB records. On that date, the department inspected the site after area resident Mary Ann Boroz said she and a group of neighbors complained to the agency and local officials about what she described as illegal excavation going on in the basement of the property.

She said she believed the work was being done in order to create a basement parking facility, a concern two local community leaders said they also had. William Chen, general manager of New York Mart, could not be reached for comment Tuesday, but indicated in writing in July that he intended to provide parking at the location “if it is approved by the city.” No new parking has been approved for the site.

“Back in July, I took photographs of what was coming out of the back of the building and it was slabs of concrete and dirt and wood,” Boroz said. “Long story short, he claimed it was debris. It wasn’t debris. Where do you have slabs of concrete just hanging around? I turned the pictures over to the Department of Buildings, Community Board 7 and Peter Koo,” the Republican Councilman from Flushing. The location was also cited for failure to obey the original stop-work order Aug. 31, when the DOB inspected the store and found “men performing concrete work at rear of supermarket,” “work contrary to [stop-work order]” and “failure to protect persons and property affected by construction operations,” according to DOB records.

James McClelland, a spokesman for Koo, said he warned Chen that if he wanted to do work at the Key Food site, he needed to hire an architect who is aware of building codes and other laws.

“I told him, ‘If you’re going to operate, you’ve got to operate above the board because the community is watching you.’ So shame on him,” McClelland said Tuesday after hearing about the stop-work order.

McClelland said that when he heard residents’ concerns about possible illegal work at the site, Koo was quick to meet with the DOB, which McClelland said he advised not to “drag their feet” in responding to the complaints.

Koo will continue to monitor the situation and ensure that any work occurring at the site is entirely legal, according to McClelland.

“I may call him in now and ask him what’s going on,” he said.

Pinky's comeback

From the Queens Chronicle:

Since he resigned, Gallagher, a Middle Village resident and father of two boys in college, has conscientiously kept a low public profile. In an exclusive interview with the Chronicle last week, he detailed his family-focused life outside the scandal-drenched spotlight. Gallagher works for a national insurance company and continues to sell vintage collectibles and memorabilia, a business his father started.

“The idea of putting in a nice, hard day’s work and coming home to dinner with the family is something I’ve come to relish and enjoy,” Gallagher said, adding that keeping himself and his family out of the public eye has been a priority.

“I could never see myself again running for public office,” he confidently declared. “When you go into politics and government, it takes a lot of time out of your life.”

But the Republican has not completely exited the political arena. Gallagher has remained a volunteer consultant to Councilman Peter Koo (R-Flushing) after helping the pharmacy magnate in November win the District 20 seat vacated by Democrat John Liu, who is now city comptroller.

“Dennis is a friend and was a great asset to the campaign,” said James McClelland, Koo’s press secretary.

Gallagher explained that he helped devise Koo’s campaign strategy, briefed him on legislative issues and aided in his transition into office.

“I respect and admire Peter Koo for giving me an opportunity,” Gallagher said. “I’ve always been impressed with him. His story is the story of the American dream. Somebody like that is a symbol of what the Republican Party should be looking for.”

Gallagher said he still keeps in touch with several colleagues on the City Council and in the local and state GOP.

“These types of friendships span beyond politics,” he asserted.

While he doesn’t follow the city political scene as closely as he used to, Gallagher was quick to point to burgeoning leaders like Councilman Eric Ulrich (R-Ozone Park) as future fixtures in municipal government.

“He’s a very impressive young legislator who has grown into the role better than anyone could’ve anticipated,” Gallagher gushed.

Gallagher said he stays informed of the civic events and issues of Middle Village and surrounding communities. He admitted that he misses “the activism and involvement with the community more than the elected role,” and that he’s looking forward to sharing his political expertise.

“I’d like to do, somewhere down the line, political consulting of some sort, but not full time, though,” Gallagher concluded.

Apelian defends TDC; CB7 to vote tonight

QUEENS CRAP ROVING REPORTER #2 -- DATELINE APRIL 1, 2010
FINAL CB7 LAND USE COMMITTEE & VOTE ON FLUSHING COMMONS

Unfortunately, it was not an April Fool’s Day gag. CB 7’s Land Use Committee wasted a whole evening to, in the end, approve every single one of the many exceptions to land use policy requested by Rockefeller/TDC (Michael Lee) and Bloomberg’s EDC. Some committee members apparently think that total capitulation gives them leverage in further negotiation with the BEEP’s office (she thinks it’s wonderful, boys) and the city (which has already shown how much it gives a crap). Yeah, like capitulation gave Czechoslovakia so much leverage with Hitler.

On the other hand, when has this community board ever voted against ANY development in downtown Flushing? Some of them complained it was too big-- a total of 69 stories and 1 million square feet-- and a couple thought the Macedonia Church affordable housing project should have been a separate vote (aaaand actually, it is! Keep reading...), but mostly they were your average lemmings.

A great deal of time was spent creating stipulations to be added to the city’s agreement with Michael Lee & Rockefeller, which recapitulated the terms of the letter by then-Deputy Mayor Doctoroff and then-Councilman Liu. Even those had some trouble being approved. One of the key conditions added in by CB7 was putting the capped parking rates back in. Rob Goldrich of the Deputy Mayor’s office assiduously took notes (or at least scribbled a lot) but of course, once he gets back to City Hall, they’ll just tear it all up, and why not, since anything a community board says is just advisory anyway.

Flushing BID chair Jim Gerson is a member of the CB7 land use committee. When Gerson raised the issue of the number of parking spaces (1,600) being less than previously agreed by John Liu and Dan Doctoroff (2,000), and also said that he had personally spoken to Liu to confirm this, committee chair Chuck Apelian told Gerson, "Liu did not tell you that", insisting that nowhere within the Liu-Doctoroff agreement are 2,000 parking spaces explicitly required for the project as presently contemplated. Apelian repeatedly insisted "that is mistaken".

Also, when Gerson later pointed out that the DEIS is predicated upon a proposed one-way Flushing traffic pattern which NYCDOT has recently decided not to implement, and that the DEIS therefore does not accurately depict the traffic conditions that will result from the Flushing Commons development, Apelian said "I don't care what an EIS says. I don't care about it. I go by my gut." So, per Apelian, it is acceptable to approve a project which generates significant adverse traffic impacts, even though there is no EIS on the record which relates to the actual conditions that relate to the proposed project.

Also, as currently proposed, rates to park will become market rates after 5 years. They are not capped in perpetuity as was to be the case under the aforementioned agreement.

And, although CitiField is to become a detour location for long term MuniLot parking, and the City's EDC representative mentioned that the rate there is $4.00/day, the fact that parking there on game days costs $19.00 was never mentioned. Drivers who divert from MuniLot 1 to CitiField are going to be in for a very rude awakening, when they discover that they will pay $19.00 to park at CitiField on game days (already an increase of more than 5% in less than a year).

Here's the real deal about the parking:

During the RFP process, the developers kept raising the # of parking spaces that they would provide, with the winner, TDC, and two others bringing it to 2,000.

The letter of agreement signed by EDC and Liu does NOT specify # of parking spaces by a definitive number, only that they had to replace the existing spaces (1,101) and add the right amount for zoning. However, a 2005 EDC press release DOES state 2,000 spaces, as well as other amenities which are now absent from the plan.

Part of the reason that it was 2,000 spaces is that the original proposal that was won by TDC had less apartments and more retail/commercial, which would have generated more required parking.

When they changed the mix - added over 100 apartments but removed several hundred thousand square feet of retail - the net loss of parking spaces correlates closely.

The problem is that they can't arbitrarily change the mix without rewriting that pesky contract.

One more thing: The topic of converting the existing YMCA into a school came up. A letter from Deputy Mayor Robert Lieber apparently addresses this, by making vague reference to a different school that is to be built as an element of another "nearby development" which the letter does not identify. During last week's committee meeting, when the letter was discussed, someone asked Bob Goldrich, representing the Deputy Mayor's office, if this different school to which the letter refers is the school that will be built at Willets Point. Goldrich appeared disturbed, as if the site of the school was not supposed to be identified at this time. He may not have explicitly answered the question, but said "A school in a development that will be nearby". I was left with the impression that EDC is saying that you don't need to convert the YMCA building into a school, because residents of Flushing Commons/Macedonia will be able to attend the school in Willets Point.

Perhaps, they will walk across the pedestrian bridge connecting downtown Flushing with Willets Point, to do this...

However, with the Willets Point project in limbo (and with the school possibly not being in "Phase One" anyway), is it prudent to rely on Flushing students attending a Willets Point school? It is likely that development of the MuniLot site will be complete (and the YMCA ready to be repurposed) long before a Willets Point school is available, if it ever is?

And what will happen when the Wilpons build on the Citifield Municipal Parking Lot, which everyone seems to forget is part of the Willets Point Redevelopment plan? Apparently the CB7 land use committee forgot to ask about that little detail.

THE VOTE

The only three who consistently showed some spine among the jellyfish, consistently voting NO, were Yang-Hee (Sunny) Hahn, Jim Gerson and Ikwhan Rim.

Voting YES, over and over again, were Land Use chair Chuck Apelian, Arthur Barragan, Tyler Cassell, Bob LoPinto, Kim Ohanion, Millicent O’Meally, Terence Park, Lynda Spielman, Linna Yu, Raymond Chen and Gene Kelty. John Byas’s and Pablo Hernandez’ YES votes are pending legal approval, since they are with the church and the Y respectively, which might be conflicts of interest (ya think?).

Basically, just like every other moronic development decision they have made, they voted yes when they meant to vote no so as not to piss off the City. However, they are supposed to be watching out for the community, not for the government or developers. Clearly, it is time to flush the crap out of CB7 of Flushing!

CB 7 Chair Kelty vented some after the vote, complaining that once more, the city had given the board no time before the ULURP clock started counting down. Rob Goldrich gave him the classic civil servant's impassive, "screw-you" look. TDC’s Michael Meyer spent the whole evening with a shit-eating grin on his face, diddling with his...cell phone.

James McClelland, Councilman Peter Koo’s chief-of-staff, made two revealing comments. Early, he asked that the evening be short, as he had to get to confession before Holy Thursday mass: “I have a lot to confess.” When the discussion went to whether DOT Queens Borough Commissioner Maura McCarthy would try CB 7’s one-way plan if her traffic test failed, someone commented that she took her orders, after all, from Manhattan. Said McClelland, “Now she takes her orders from us.” Meaning McClelland, Dennis Gallagher, and Councilman Koo...
If the EIS is uncorrected by the time this gets to the Council, that fact alone may be a fatal flaw. But why is the City promulgating a project using an EIS that does not contain a proper traffic study? And why is CB7 not calling them out on the carpet for that? Just because the board feels the outcome is inevitable doesn't mean they can't take a stand against a bad project in their district.

Let's see how I am doing so far with my predictions from an earlier post:

- CB7 will make a long list of demands for approval...Check
- TDC will add the extra parking deck and that will be enough to placate CB7...Damn, I was wrong here. (That's how lame Chuck is as a land use chair, he couldn't even find the balls to ask for this.)
- CB7 will approve it...Check!

Now, look closely at the application status report for CB7. The Flushing Commons/Macedonia developments have a number of applications for actions that must be taken in order for this project to proceed. CB7 could vote only for Macedonia's plan by voting yes on application C100207 ZMQ (last item on page 3) for the rezone of the entire block but no on all the rest of the items before them.

Will they do that? Certainly not. They will do what they are told in order to keep their pathetic status as the "voices of Flushing". And TDC will laugh all the way to the bank.

Being psychic, this reporter predicts that on Monday, April 5, the community board as a whole will approve every detail of Flushing Commons, down the line. Usher them into the Invertebrates’ Hall of Fame.


Ah, excellent reporting by #2! This type of B.S. coming from Apelian and CB7 is nothing new, as readers of this blog know full well.

P.S. Where is Claire during all this?

CB7 asking all the wrong questions about Flushing Commons

QUEENS CRAP ROVING REPORTER #2 – DATELINE MARCH 24, 2010
CB7 LAND USE COMMITTEE MEETS AGAIN ON FLUSHING COMMONS

Well, the vote of the full Community Board will be Monday, April 5. The final land use meeting will be tonight, Thursday, 4/1 – April Fool’s Day! Since the mayor wants the project, we know it will go through regardless, but give the members credit for staying late at lots of meetings.

Don’t give them credit for asking the right questions this night let alone understanding the issues. Maybe they realize it’s all a sham and just can’t be bothered anymore. Exception: CB7 chair Gene Kelty, who asked astute questions and wouldn’t take bullshit for answers.

And credit to Land Use chair Chuck Apelian, who must have been having a frustrating evening, as members completely missed the point over and over. Several thought the letter of agreement between the City and then-councilman John Liu stipulated keeping the same exact parking rate forever. Wrong. As it says in the letter – a “cost of living” elevator or 3% annual increases are built in under the cap. Duh, guys.

But no one even seemed sure what document had been the template for CB7’s initial approval of the City’s proposal for Muni Lot 1. Was it the letter? Or…what? If not, what had CB7 spent 2 years’ work on?

And why didn’t most CB7members at the table care about the city abrogating a signed agreement? If Bloomberg’s cabal break their word on this, what can you ever trust them on? Why isn’t that a problem?

Another issue that apparently didn’t rate discussion: the impact on school overcrowding. One thing that did come out: the Environmental Impact Study is specifically designed NOT to measure any impacts that matter or might be negative. That’s why, over and over, the EIS said a one million square foot project would have no impact on the nabe. Oh, and check this out – that measly $2M for the poor, screwed local merchants? They might never see a dime; it may all go to consultants for “an advertising campaign to bring in shoppers.”

It seemed to occur to 2 or 3 folks that the Y will get a sweet deal selling off its Northern Blvd property (to TDC?) and the community will offer Flushing the same programs it offers anywhere else. None of the money the Y gets from the City will be specifically targeted for Flushing. Plus, the Northern Blvd site is as-of-right, so, as Apelian said, CB7 could inherit a problem there, with layout, design and parking concerns. Paul Christian of the Y assured everyone that “the Y knows you’re concerned and we will make sure you are heard during the process.” Uh-huh.

And look who crawled out from under a rock, representing Councilman Koo: James McClelland, ex-councilman Dennis Gallagher Anthony Como’s chief-of-staff. You remember Como...he replaced Dennis Gallagher who was arrested for raping a grandmother in a room above his district office, and copped a plea (to avoid having to register as a sex offender) for “forcible touching.” Nice company you keep, Koo!

Guess who's back?

From the Forum West:

Lurking at the bottom of the barrel is a “dirty little rumor” that some candidates have reportedly signed on some questionable “help” for their campaigns. Word reached us, from most reliable inside sources that the former councilman and forever sex offender, Dennis Gallagher is back on the political scene in a consulting/advisory capacity. Also rumored is the fact that he was paired with former Como and Ricatto staffer James McClelland.

When we reached McClelland to ask about the supposed affiliation, it took all of two seconds before he was offering complete assurance that there was absolutely “NO PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP” between him and Dennis Gallagher. McClelland did confirm that he is the sole owner and employee of the firm he started in March, J. Mac & Associates Inc. His clients include Peter Koo and possibly Jay Golub, whom he confirmed has in fact enlisted the professional help of Gallagher.

We’re glad that James has averted professional/political suicide by having the good sense to avoid a plague worse than many of biblical proportion. But how about Jay Golub? In fact how about anyone who seeks public office and knowingly takes on someone who disgraced his elected position, broke the law and was banished from his seat for it.

From where we sit that type of poor judgment is a clear and present indicator of who not to elect. We wonder how any candidate could endorse the behavior of a criminal by accepting his professional service or advice. We promise to keep you informed as more information becomes available. We also promise to keep printing extra copies for any that should mysteriously disappear…and yes we’re talking to you.