Copyright Bayswater Civic Association 2015, 16, 19, 20, 22, 23
, 24
Peninsula Hospital Site Redevelopment
Project Documents:
- The Arker Companies’ Draft Enviornmental Impact Statement.
- The Arker Companies’ web site on what they call Edgemere Commons.
- City Planning Commission -
Review Session of the DEIS - 5/6/2019 - start at 1:22:10. - Glenn DiResto has created a Facebook group, Coalition against Peninsula Hospital Overdevelopment Plan that has been renamed Rockaway Residents For Responsible Development.
- Read Glenn DiResto’s Rockaway Times editorial here.
- Here is Glenn DiResto’s letter to Borough President Melinda Katz.
- Read Glenn DiResto’s submission to the City Planning Commission.
- Our response to the Draft Enviornmental Impact Statement. It is available here. Note: It is 73 pages.
- Here is Assemblywoman Stacey Pheffer Amatto’s letter to the City Planning Commission.
- City Planning Commission -
Hearing on the project - August 14, 2019 - 0:9:40 - City Planning Commission -
Notice of Completion of Final Envrronmental Impact Statement - City Planning Commission -
Final Envrronmental Impact Statement - Chapter 24 - Responses to Comments - The City Planning Commission approved the plan on September 25. Now it goes to the City Council.
Some quick questions on the plans for the site (no particular order):
- Parking. Should be the same ratio of parking spots to apartments as in Rockaway as a whole. Probably something like 2 parking spaces per apartment.
- There should be food shopping (supermarket) before any apartments are occupied.
- Can St. John’s Hospital handle the additional residents of Downtown Far Rockaway and this site? By this, I mean as a hospital, not various outpatient facilities and offices.
- What is the impact on NYPD and FDNY? (including EMS).
- Will actual schools be built along with the housing, or only “in the future” as was promised with Arverne by the Sea and never built?
- What is the effect of the population increase (20%?) on emergency evacuation needs and abilities?
- Transportation:
- This, and Downtown Far Rock projects are not going to overburden the “A” trains since they are used so lightly, will it?
- Will they contribute to funding QueensRail™ ?
- What will the effect be on Cross Bay Boulevard / Woodhaven Boulevard?
- What about effect on Rockaway Turnpike?
- Restore Beach Channel Drive to 2 lanes in each direction.
- Restore Rockaway Freeway as a through road with 2 lanes in each direction.
- Make all signal controlled turn lanes controlled by the presence of a vehicle.
- How many shoppers is the project likely to contribute to the Five Towns shopping area?
- What is the likely racial / ethnic mix of the residents? Will it accentuate racial segregation in the area in violation of federal law?
- Will use of federal money for streets be found to be unlawful since it is the policy of the NYC DOT not to comply with the U.S. Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices as required by federal and NYS law, and is a condition of using federal funds for roads.
- The project should be self-
sufficient electrically. No more apartments should be built than can be supported by available solar energy. - Most of the land should be used for 1 or 2 family detached housing “in keeping with existing Rockaway development”, excluding NYCHA projects. There should be an investigation of when G-
d said that the NYC population should be 10 million, and where they should live. - Will apartments be left vacant if they can not be rented at the required market rate ratio?
- Will buildings be owner occupied, or all rental?
- How do these plans compare with HPD’s recent Edgemere study? (I was one of the community participants
Some additional points, primarily by Glenn.
As a Life Long Rockaway resident I am very concerned about the Arker Companies Proposed LARGE SCALE OVERDEVELOPEMT on the old Peninsula Hospital Site.
Under CURRENT zoning the Builder can "as of right" build a little over 568 units of housing and is looking to get the area rezoned so they can cram in 2,200 units.
This proposed Affordable Housing Development would be 17 BUILDINGS up to 19 STORIES HIGH that will consist of 2,200 dwelling units of which 1,910 will be Affordable Housing with MAXIMUM incomes of ONLY up to 80% of Area Medium Income (AMI).
The proposal will have over 6,500 NEW RESIDENTS and parking for ONLY 424 Parking Spaces which is less than 20% . ALL of this will be on ONLY 9.34 Acres of Land.
To get the approval of the rezoning the builder MUST go through the ULURP Process which will bring it before the local Community Board, Borough President, City Planning Commission then the City Council.
Change, Development and Growth for the better are always a part of life and should be a part of any neighborhood. We should NEVER oppose change just to oppose of it. We should oppose change that will NOTbenefit our community and that would have a DRASTIC NEGATIVE EFFECT on the quality of life of ALL Current and Future Residents of the Rockaways.
This will become by far the most densely populated portion of the peninsula with the Ocean Bay Houses, Nordec Coop, B41 St Houses, Arverne View in close proximately. The Idea of 6,500 new residents is going to put a huge strain on the area's CURRENT infrastructure and resources as well as to any PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. The density is similar to midtown Manhattan and a narrow sliver of the Bronx. We are not Long Island City, We are not Manhattan, Downtown Brooklyn, or Williamsburg.
Where will the nearly 2,000 school aged children go to school?? They don’t say they will build one for the new residents. Theyll consider it. Residents of Arverne by the Sea are still waiting for a promised new school for over a decade, and there is not even a shovel in the ground as of yet. The two area schools are already crowded and perform below average.
Even if they do PROMISE to build a school, how long will it take to get done??
how many seats will it have ?? And what about middle schools and high schools?
Other than greed of builders or politicians vision to destroy the quality of life of Rockaway residents as they did before, why would they build so many units on a such small piece of land, in an isolated quiet beach community that lacks jobs, has poor transportation options with the longest commute times in NYC in an area where the public beaches are not even open?
We all know rents have jumped throughout the city and there is a need for affordable housing throughout the city. However, The Rockaways has always born the brunt of this type of housing and to make this large-
Has the city not learned from past failures that it is very important to have a range of a mixed income, affordability and market rate housing to balance out incomes and ensure the neighborhood becomes viable to live, work and play?
According to a report by the New York City Planning Commission from November 3, 2003/Calendar No. 2 C 030509 HUQ, half of the subsidized housing in Queens was located on the Rockaway Peninsula and construction of additional low and moderate-
An additional report put out in April 2016 by the Mayor’s office of Environmental Remediation included the following facts apply to the Rockaways:
- ·Edgemere, Arverne, and Hammels is now home to a fairly dense community with a high proportion of low-
income residents. - ·At 16 percent, the unemployment rate of the Hammels-
Arverne- Edgemere NTA is more than five percent higher than the rest of the peninsula, Queens (9.6 percent) and New York City (10.2 percent). - ·Approximately 30 percent of residents in the Hammels-
Arverne- Edgemere are living in poverty. This represents a much greater share of residents living in poverty than the rest of the peninsula and New York City (20 percent). - ·The median household income of residents of the Hammels-
Arverne- Edgemere NTA is $39,373. This is significantly less than the median incomes of residents of the Rockaway Peninsula ($48,171), Queens ($56,780) and New York City as a whole ($51,865).
According the city’s own studies and facts this section of the Rockaways where this Large-
There is a need for real mixed housing and this plan is NOT it!
We need to ensure residents have safe affordable places to live as well as residents will have disposable income to support the retail that is planned as part of the development.
To put 100% affordable housing in an area with very low Area Median Income (AMI) is NOT appropriate for a community that is desperate need of true mix of affordable housing with higher AMI amounts and market rate housing.
The Environmental Assessment Statement states there is a high concentration of public and publicly subsidized housing and long-
Below is a list of the housing they are looking to build
Option 1: 25% of the residential floor area shall be provided as housing affordable to households at an average of 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI), with no unit targeted at a level exceeding 130% AMI, or
Option 2: 30% of the residential floor area shall be provided as housing affordable to households at an average of 80% AMI, with no unit targeted at a level exceeding 130% AMI. It is anticipated that the Project Site would be designated under MIH Option 1.
Why not option 2 or even another option that will better balance out incomes?
When I grew up there were times I lived in a room with my mother and shared a bathroom in the hall way with other residents. I have also been financially supporting my mother for 25 years now and have been fortunate enough to be able to care for her. So I know first hand that not everyone is blessed to be able to afford an expensive apartments and there is a need for affordable housing and we should NOT be against having affordable housing in our community however IT NEEDS TO BE DONE RIGHT.
NYC Planning even stated there is a potential for significant adverse impacts because of the plan, thus requiring that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) needing to be prepared.
I have been contacting MANY community leaders throughout the entire peninsula from East to West and Broach Channel as this is something that affects US ALL and the ONLY way to change what is being opposed is to be united.