The Wedding of Towns

Depending who you ask, the annexation of Queens into the city was either the saving grace of a defunct conglomerate of villages or an unholy union of townships forced to give up their sovereignty.

Like most things in life, the truth is perhaps somewhere in the middle.

"Just looking at the history of development in Queens, we see annexation into the city was a good thing. It opened the area up to new investments and commerce, and gave it access to the benefit of many public works projects," said Charles Dolita, a retired history teacher for the New York City school system.

But according to Kathleen McGrath, a self proclaimed expert in local lore, the 'Consolidation Plan' for the Greater City of New York also brought about the destruction of a haven here in Queens.

"It's unrecognizable now, but this area was a bucolic playground for the elites of that time. There were beautiful beaches, forests, wetlands, really anything you'd need to escape the hectic pace of Manhattan," she said, stressing, inclusion into the city plan drastically altered this Queens lanscapes.

Pointing specifically to the history of the Brooklyn Ash Dumps, which used to occupy Flushing Meadow Park, McGrath made her case.

"When you look around the area today you can't help wonder, where are the beaches and what happened to all the forested hills from which the Matinecock, who inhabited the area long before it was New York City, derived their name?" McGrath said.

However, Dolita emphasized that the benefits of inclusion into the city far out weighed the drawbacks and created what he called a model for the 'Megalopolis.'

"There's no debating that things like the Midtown Tunnel and Queensboro Bridge would probably not have been built were it not for the incorporation of these five boroughs into one city. It allowed for them to pool their resources for the greater community good," he said.

But McGrath strongly disagreed.

"If that were the case, then how did the Holland or Lincoln tunnels get built? or the Outer Bridge Crossing for that matter? Half of them sit in an entirely different state. So I don’t really buy that argument," she said.

Although, Dolita pointed out that even the people living back then recognized the wealth of public utility benefits that would come with annexation into the city.

“When you dig through the archives at the library, you see a significant number of editorials written by local papers on the subject and a great number of them list the wide range of benefits for inclusion, among them, lower taxes,” Dolita said.

Still for McGrath, she will always question the decision of the local politicians and people back then who supported the formation of New York City.

"All you have to do is look back at the city’s response to last December blizzard and it becomes increasingly clear that the outer boroughs always have and always will take second seat to Manhattan,” she said.