Jackson Heights Life

Although the article has two different addresses, the proposed site is where the car wash is currently located. There will be around 220 parking spots in the garage and 18,000 square feet of "community space" whatever that is. It's a big change for that part of the neighborhood, and the design of the building is out of character when compared to the rest of the area. On the other hand, the car wash and the oil change facility are not exactly cherished landmarks (actually, they are pretty big polluters especially for the homes that border the property). I just wish it was smaller.

Oh man, do we need those parking spots for all the Long Islanders who slow-cruise the 73/37 intersection. I just fear those grocery shopping suburbanites are too lazy to walk to Northern for their parking.

Some thoughts:

Let's not kid ourselves - "community space" absolutely means medical offices of one sort or another. That's where the demand is. Not that there is anything particularly wrong with that, but it's not being built with a museum (or whatever) in mind.

That's an ugly building. Like a suburban office park, not part of an urban neighborhood. Of course, it's replacing even uglier buildings. So, net gain? A rooftop garden on top of the setback would do a lot to soften the soullessness of it.

It seems to me whether it adds to the community at all depends a lot on what moves into the retail space. But I guess anything but a giant Duane Reade is wishful thinking, right? Better than car dealerships, I guess.

Development itself should not be opposed just for being development. Yes, the West Village preserved its historic buildings, but those are dense residential buildings, not car washes. And it's surrounded by newer development.

I wonder about the logic in the plan of this building as it planned to be 8 floors. The general height of buildings has been restricted to 6 floors due to the landing concerns for La Guardia Airport. While 74th Street is notdirectly in a possible flight path, it is close. Therefore, there should be consideration for this also.

Quote from: dssjh on February 11, 2017, 04:15:15 PM

ossification has worked quite well for the neighborhoods that have clung to the concept -- from the west village to brooklyn heights. exactly what do we have to gain by adding ugly buildings with minimal use for the community?

Exactly what do we have to gain?  Well let me enlighten you.  Platinum scenario:

1st floor: an enormous combination pharmacy/99 cent store, a store so enormous that not even light could escape,
2nd & 3rd floor parking:  SUV only, and none of those sissy crossovers.  I'm talking Pilot or bigger for all the serious off-roaders who live around here,
4th floor community facilities: Western Queens STD clinic (required for extra 1.4 FAR)
5th floor: Breitbart News regional office,
6th floor: Mormon Missionary Training Center/Capital One Cold Calling Credit Card Call Center,
7th floor: The Mark David Chapman Museum of Music Appreciation,
8th floor: Residential penthouse for Melania where she can live when Trump comes to NYC.

I think it's pretty reasonable to have bulk development on Northern, especially if that helps make the HD expansion more viable.  Small pockets of neighborhoods can ossify and look pretty.  Having large swaths do it is a long term disaster.

Quote from: toddg on February 11, 2017, 11:37:49 AM

Personally, the aspect I object to the most is the 219-space, above-ground parking garage.  We should demand that any parking be located below grade.  I also think we should push for a residential building with no more than one space per unit, instead of an office building designed to draw traffic from outside the community, which would really be out of place here.

That parking is required as per the zoning resolution for scenario 1.  I'd prefer scenario 2, which sounds like the one the council member is advocating.  If it goes c4-3, then it is as of right, so is there a mechanism to require the developer to build out scenario 2?  Like a quid pro quo for the zoning change?  While I can appreciate the planning leverage of rezoning in this manner, I'm not a fan of spot zoning.  I'd like to see the C-8 rezoned to something more appropriate for the area.

Mormon missionary training center joke? So much for being PC- or is that only for certain groups?

  Something that seems to rarely be done in JH development is to ask the people who are most likely to use the space what would help them in that neighborhood. No big town hall meetings but a survey with human contact to ask what people surrounding the area and using the commercial space would like/need the most. Yes, I am qualified to speak here living close by. These are a few thoughts for now. Agree that the proposed development is a behemoth and needs to be scaled back by two + floors at least. Above ground parking is a travesty. See the medical center on 72nd for their underground parking 2 blks away. The car wash does a good business some of the hours of the day but the space could be used in a much better way for the community 24/7. Am glad that this conversation is taking place though as the car wash and car dealer strip here seems more and more out of sync with the neighborhood and its needs.

  This particular area could use:
  - A decent sized grocery store - doesn't have to be huge but maybe like the Natural Foods store.
  - Not urgent but a decent shoe store would be great too. Others have mentioned a bread shop, cheese store specialties
  - No more medical offices as Northern now has lot's of them now and we have many areas of service covered. The facility   on 72nd and Northern is really great and provides excellent physical therapy, MRI and strength and bone related med services.
  - Not another pharmacy please! CVS does fine.
  - A new Queens Library with long lease is fantastic!!
  - There are plenty of restaurants too so not particularly needed really.
  - A senior center/rec center is urgently needed as we have loads of seniors and have a disproportionate amount of middle schoolers who could use activities indoors for those 200+ days when being outdoor for long is an issue.

Quote from: earbears on February 13, 2017, 11:02:18 AM

I wonder about the logic in the plan of this building as it planned to be 8 floors. The general height of buildings has been restricted to 6 floors due to the landing concerns for La Guardia Airport. While 74th Street is notdirectly in a possible flight path, it is close. Therefore, there should be consideration for this also.

Apartment buildings often top out at 6 stories due to economics and gravity.  Residentials north of that have to be fireproof and require a water tower/pump system.  While setback requirements and sunlight plane exposures do limit building height in a sense, the zoning resolution generally limits bulk by Floor Area Ratios (FAR's) to encourage generous floors heights.  In this case, however, given the c4-3 zoning, setback requirements and build plan, it could have went higher, but LGA flight path considerations limited elevation to the proposed height.

Regal Heights, the rehabilitation and nursing facility on 35th Avenue and 70-71 Streets, received a zoning variance (or whatever the technical term) and is 8 stories tall. That building is literally directly under the landing path.

And speaking of zoning heights, unless something has changed, the zoning for 73, 74, 75 streets between 37th and Roosevelt allow for up to 12 stories. I wish more people shared my concern about this, not that getting it changed would be easy or even possible at all.

Quote from: Miss Chatelaine on February 15, 2017, 03:14:19 PM

Regal Heights, the rehabilitation and nursing facility on 35th Avenue and 70-71 Streets, received a zoning variance (or whatever the technical term) and is 8 stories tall. That building is literally directly under the landing path.

The Regal Heights building is 88' high meshing with the project's proposed height of 83'.  What was the zoning variance for?  They built out a little bit bulkier then what zoning calls for, so perhaps it was for that.  A variance to build into a flight path seems unlikely.

---
The zoning variance was to build 8 stories instead of 6. I don't believe the 6-story zoning in the neighborhood has anything to do with LGA, and more to the point, if that building can go up to 8 stories directly under the landing path, it certainly wouldn't be an issue for the one on 74th and Northern.

There are a heck of a lot higher obstructions closer to the runways.

https://flightaware.com/resources/airport/KLGA/IAP/ILS+OR+LOC+RWY+04