By Kenneth Kowald
But there, smack in the middle of the block, was a building that quite obviously was a new small apartment house. How could this be, I wondered? Wouldn't zoning regulations prohibit this? Was the building illegal? If so, would anything be done about it?That made me think about the zoning problems in Queens. Hardly a neighborhood has escaped having McMansions built on small plots where other smaller and more suitable homes once stood. Not only are almost all of these monstrosities (if I were an architect, I wouldn't want my name on the plans) huge and ugly and certainly wrong for the area in which they are built, but they raise the question of whether or not they are legal.Questions arise over whether they are too close to other buildings, if they illegally extended the footprint and what can be done if that is the case, as well as if zoning regulations permit this building and whether or not they should. Does anyone care?In addition, we are faced in Queens with too many one-family dwellings being converted for multiple-family use. Are all of these legal? And what about apartments that are obviously overcrowded with just too many people sharing the space?Last year City Councilman James Gennaro (D-Fresh Meadows) got $35,000 in city money to pay for 50 new trash baskets with small openings to be placed around Kew Gardens Hills. Why? It seems it is a “local custom” to put household waste in litter receptacles. The new baskets are designed to prevent this practice. Doing this dumping are the occupiers of illegal apartment conversions in one-family homes who, according to the councilman, are encouraged to do this by their greedy landlords.And this July City Councilman Leroy Comrie (D-St. Albans) used $70,000 of his discretionary funds to purchase 168 similar bins to be used throughout southeast Queens. One of the reasons cited for getting the bins, the TimesLedger Newspapers reported, was because the old bins were used to dump household garbage from illegally converted houses.And you and I are paying for this kind of barbaric behavior. It's fine that the new baskets may cut down on this terrible practice. But the question remains: Why do the city and the borough permit these illegal conversions to go on?A recent profile of Ozone Park in The New York Times quoted one local community leader saying that crime is not a big problem in the area, but illegal conversions of homes to multifamily dwellings are a problem. They caused a series of concerns, including too many cars, too much garbage and not enough classroom space.In addition, there are instances in which wetlands are being destroyed, as may be the case in College Point, by other greedy people. Do we turn our eyes away from these problems until another fire sweeps through an overcrowded house or apartment, causing deaths and injuries? Oh, yes, then the elected and appointed officials will wring their hands and express sorrow. But what is being done about this now? Does anyone care?I know the city government is strapped for money for many things. I also remember some officials – although not lately – saying they really couldn't easily tell which were illegal conversions to multifamily dwellings just by looking at them. Those who look, apparently are incapable of spotting multiple electric or gas meters or more than one mailbox per house. What's the old saw? None are so blind as they who will not see.How about this idea for stopping the illegal activity in building: If you build it without proper permission, you tear it down and build it right or not at all. Small fines alone for violations will not stop this kind of practice – the violators figure it into the cost of doing business. The only way to stop illegal activity is to make the cost of violating the law prohibitively expensive. And don't neglect criminal prosecutions, where warranted, either. Workers have been killed and injured on building sites that have been cited, after the facts, for building violations that should never have happened. Too often we look the other way about a lot of things. But that is not what quality of life is all about. It is about having sensible laws obeyed and enforced. Zoning and building regulations have been enacted for good public reasons. If we don't enforce them, we have chaos.Do we want to see more body bags coming out of houses that have been illegally converted to multiple dwellings and that have suffered fatal fires?There seems to be some hope, however. The City Planning Commission is considering zoning changes that would protect the existing low- and medium-rise character of neighborhoods such as Bayside, College Point, Kew Gardens, Richmond Hill, Woodside and Maspeth. Let us hope the changes are made soon and that they will be applied in a sensible manner throughout our borough. In June the mayor, borough president and Queens City Council members spoke publicly about the need for change. The proof, as always, will not be in the rhetoric but in the action.The TimesLedger Newspapers reported this spring that state Sen. Frank Padavan (R-Bellerose) and state Assemblyman Brian McLaughlin (D-Flushing) were proposing legislation that would eliminate tax breaks for those who demolish houses and build larger ones on the same site. It seems that our tax structure actually has been an encouragement for this type of barbarity. That is ridiculous.Zoning is a system that regulates land use in order to protect public health, safety, morals and the general welfare. New York City created the first modern zoning code in 1916. Have we given up our leadership in this important aspect of urban life?All of us should have a voice in what we want for our city and borough – safety and quality of life or chaos?I think the choice is clear.
