12 councilmembers say they oppose Special Flushing Waterfront rezoning plan
/
The developers behind the Special Flushing Waterfront District plan have highlighted the benefits to the community. Rendering courtesy of FWRA
By Rachel Vick
A dozen councilmembers have come out against a plan to rezone a piece of the Flushing Creek waterfront for residential use, delaying a crucial committee’s hearing on the land use measure before it heads for a full Council vote.
The rezoning would allow developers to create a 1,700-unit housing complex, alongside a hotel and retail space on the waterfront site and adjacent land they own and can build on as-of-right. The project is known as the Special Flushing Waterfront District, or SFWD.
Councilmember Francisco Moya drafted a letter, signed by 11 other members Tuesday, opposing the SFWD rezoning, citing insufficient community benefits and minimal affordable housing. Moya chairs the subcommittee on zoning and franchises, which was scheduled to vote on the plan Wednesday. That vote has been postponed until Dec. 7.
“We believe that it would be irresponsible to approve the application without deep community benefits like real affordable housing and commitments to provide good jobs for local community members,” wrote the members, including Moya’s fellow Queens Councilmember Jimmy Van Bramer.
Other term-limited councilmembers seeking new offices, including comptroller candidate Brad Lander and mayoral candidate Carlos Menchaca, also added their names.
Their opposition comes despite support from local Councilmember Peter Koo, who said at the council hearing earlier this month that “whatever is ultimately built will need to enhance the Downtown Flushing community and open up the accessible waterfront as best as is possible.”
The 12 members’ opposition signals a potential break from the Council’s tradition of “member deference,” where the other 50 members tend to vote in lockstep with the local member.
Menchaca spearheaded successful opposition to a recent rezoning of Industry City, located in his Brooklyn district. He criticized colleagues, including outgoing Councilmembers Donovan Richards and Ritchie Torres, for backing the Industry City plan despite his opposition. Interestingly, Torres signed the letter challenging the Flushing waterfront plan.
“Member deference is now dead,” Menchaca tweeted Wednesday in response to a journalist.
The rezoning proposal would extend a larger project put forth by a trio of developers who own much of the adjacent land.
The coalition, known as FWRA LLC, say they will build a mixed-use residential and commercial development as-of-right on the property around the site that they have applied to rezone , regardless of whether the Council approves the land use application for the strip along the waterfront.
Because that project could be built as-of-right, there are no minimum standards for developing affordable housing units. A rezoning would mandate that the developers set-aside 20 percent of space for affordable units under the city’s Mandatory Inclusionary Housing land-use policy.
FWRA LLC — made up of F&T Group, United Construction & Development Group and the Young Nian Group — blasted the letter from Moya and the other members in a statement to the Eagle Wednesday.
Their opposition “ignores the many immediate benefits the Special Flushing Waterfront District will bring to Flushing,” including thousands of permanent and construction jobs and affordable housing that meets Mandatory Inclusionary Housing requirements, a FWRA LLC spokesperson said.
“It is antithetical of the Council Members to support affordable units and simultaneously fight against the very zoning enhancement that would allow affordable housing to be brought to the area,” the spokesperson added.
They can build on most of the land as-of-right, without Council approval, but require a rezoning to also develop residential and hotel units on the parcel along the waterfront.
The developers touted public benefits like an accessible waterfront promenade, green spaces, and roads maintained privately “with no impact on the taxpayer’s dime” to be completed by 2025.
“We are dedicated, as we always have been, to providing good paying jobs for the people of Flushing, Greater Queens and New York City,” FWRA said. “Jobs are more important than ever in the current economic climate, which is why we are working with local and citywide stakeholders, to ensure that SFWD benefits all New Yorkers, but in particular the people of Flushing.”
“Supporting the SFWD is supporting Flushing and our collective future - they are one and the same,” they added.
Additional reporting by David Brand.
