Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Walk To A Park topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks seeks authority to acquire up to 37 Queens sites to close "walk‑to‑a‑park" gaps
Summary
The New York City Department of Parks and Recreation asked the Queens Borough President’s Land Use hearing for ULURP acquisition authority for seven primary (vacant) and 30 secondary (under‑built) sites in Community Board 2 to address walk‑to‑a‑park gaps; Parks stressed it would work only with willing sellers and that authority would include a 10‑year sunset.
Get email alerts on the Parks Walk To A Park topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The New York City Department of Parks and Recreation asked the Queens Borough President’s Land Use public hearing for authority to acquire up to 37 privately owned parcels in Community Board 2 as part of the city’s Walk to a Park initiative.
"This is a continuation of the Parks Department's Walk to a Park initiative," said Julia Dowling, a project planner at New York City Parks, as she outlined the ULURP application. She said the initiative aims to get 85% of New Yorkers within a 5‑ to 10‑minute walk of a park and that the city is currently at 84.2%, leaving "about 63,000 New Yorkers" outside that target.
The application (ULURP C260089PCQ) seeks acquisition authority for seven primary sites — vacant parcels of at least 5,000 square feet — and 30 secondary sites that are under‑built relative to zoning (generally built to 50% or less of maximum allowable FAR). Parks said acquired sites would be pursued only from willing sellers and that the authority would include a 10‑year sunset after approval.
Why it matters: The sites fall inside Queens Community Board 2, which includes Sunnyside, Woodside and Long Island City — neighborhoods the department identified as having a low open‑space ratio and higher poverty rates. Parks said the list is intended to give the agency the ability to move quickly if owners become willing sellers, rather than wait for a separate ULURP for each acquisition.
Process and environmental review
Dowling told the chair that even before acquisition Parks performs a Phase I environmental analysis to identify past uses and potential cleanup needs. "We would do the phase one analysis and then we would just need to... work with DEP to make sure that sites have limited hazardous potential," she said, adding that Parks maintains "very high safety standards" for sites that will be used by children and families.
On the question of whether rezonings or new building permits would remove properties from eligibility, Dowling said properties that pull Department of Buildings permits or are otherwise no longer meeting the criteria would be ineligible for acquisition under the program.
Property‑owner concerns and program limits
A property owner who identified himself during the hearing objected to having his lot listed and asked to be removed. "I’m not willing to sell," he said; Parks staff replied that the program seeks only willing sellers and that pulling permits would remove a parcel from eligibility. Colleen Alderson, described in the presentation as the Parks chief of planning and real estate services, added that the department prioritizes vacant primary sites before engaging owners of secondary sites.
The Parks team also said that inclusion on the ULURP list does not mean Parks intends to acquire every parcel; rather, the list preserves options in the event an owner is willing to negotiate within the 10‑year authorization window.
Next steps
If approved by the Queens Borough President’s office, the ULURP will proceed to the City Planning Commission and then to the City Council. Dowling said that if a site advances, Parks would follow its standard public outreach and design process to shape any future park amenities.
Key program details and clarifications discussed at the hearing included the 10‑year sunset on acquisition authority, the minimum size requirement for primary sites (5,000 sq ft), the distinction between primary (vacant) and secondary (under‑built) sites, and Parks’ insistence that purchases would be limited to willing sellers.

