Construction of large, out-of-context houses in Queens will be stopped when the rezoning process is completed. One Vote, One Voter Ultimately, the vote by CB11 will not have a binding impact on the outcome of R2A and the revised zoning map for the community. Though the entire rezoning proposal for Bayside remains open to revision and reconsideration by City Planning officials, including R2A, once the plan is certified sometime next month, CB11 will be limited to an advisory vote. The only binding vote of authorization will come from the City Council, where lawmakers traditionally vote in sync with the local council member—in this case, Avella. In an interview this week, Avella stood firmly behind the proposal by City Planning and blasted neighborhood critics of R2A. “The bottom line is that what City Planning has will address overdevelopment in Bayside, and it needs to move ahead,” he said. “There is no question in my mind that this needs to be done.” Asked if a negative vote by members of CB11 would alter his position, Avella resolute. “I don’t think the community board will vote against it,” he said. When informed of critical statements by CB11 Chair Jerry Iannece, Avella still stood firm. “They are listening to extremely bad advice at this point,” Avella said of the community board critics. “If Jerry Iannece were to say he’s against it, I’m still for it. He’s not a zoning expert.” Avella said that he had submitted the proposal for R2A to the independent land use experts on the City Council staff. “They took several weeks and did a substantial review,” he said. “I was assured by them that what City Planning is doing is correct and will solve overdevelopment.” Last Minute Changes? In recent weeks, critics of R2A have argued that city planners could better serve the interests of Bayside homeowners by correcting the problems in the existing R2 zoning designation, which already covers large segments of Northeastern Queens. Many homeowners blame the overly flexible loopholes in R2 for the spread of out-of-context development, but believe such flaws could be easily fixed. The imperative to get it right, regardless of the form taken by the final zoning solution, deeply concerns Iannece. As a civic activist with decades of experience, he understands just how rare opportunities for reform are. “This is the kind of thing that is not coming back again. Once we do it, we better do it right, or we have to live with the consequences,” Iannece said. As for the specific complaints lodged by community members at the recent meeting with Queens City Planning Director John Young, it appears that there may be some room for reconsideration. In an email to the Tribune, Young acknowledged the criticism of the proposed 35-foot maximum height in the R2A zoning. Such a proposal “is a raising of height,” Young admitted, “but a lowering of current height regulations under the existing R2 zone. It is the same maximum building height that applies to new one- and two-family houses in the R3X and R3A contextual zones that we are proposing to designate in portions of Bayside, and the community has no problem with the designation of these zones.” Even Avella, with his enduring support of R2A as the best solution for Bayside, allowed that things might change once again before the zoning changes are finalized. “It is way over my head, I admit that,” he said, stressing that he would continue to seek counsel from independent analysts. In the end, however, the community should rally around the best available solution in order to save as much of his district as possible from the threat of overdevelopment, Avella stressed. “It’s never going to be perfect,” Avella said. “You can’t look at a proposal that way.”

[Feature Archives]