Council Approves 125th Street Rezoning
2008 April 15
125th at Adam Clayton Powell, originally uploaded by R D.
Despite the efforts of organizations like The Coalition to Save Harlem, a subcommittee of the City Council has voted to approve the proposed 125th rezoning plan with some modifications. Cheers, jeers and fears are welcome in the comments section.
For more details visit the links below:
Panel Approves Rezoning of 125th Street [City Room]
Harlem Plan Moves Forward [Gotham Gazette]
Harlem Vendors Protest 125th Street Rezoning [Village Voice]
Shrugs and Rallys after decision [Observer]
Related: Zoning restricts bank branches on 125th Street [City Room]
Stumble It!
From Today’s New York Post (4/15/08) – A moderate victory:
Facing fierce opposition to its rezoning plan for 125th Street, the Bloomberg administration agreed today to reserve an astonishing 46 percent of new housing units in Harlem for low- and moderate-income residents.
“The amount of affordable housing that is going to be provided by this rezoning is unprecedented,” declared Amanda Burden, chairwoman of the City Planning Commission, after a key City Council committee voted 9-1 to approve a revised plan for the historic thoroughfare.
City Council member Inez Dickens (D-Manhattan), who negotiated the record-setting deal, pointed out that it also included height restrictions so developers couldn’t build luxury apartment towers that speed gentrification.
The limits were set at 195 feet on the north side of 125th Street and 160 feet on the south side.
“My community said it did not want housing in the core,” said Dickens, “because of the possibility of high-end condos being put there, which meant that those of us who [grew up] in Harlem would no longer be able to remain there.”
Officials said that 1,785 of 3,858 of the apartments planned for Harlem would be “income-targeted,” with 900 set aside for those earning $46,000 or less a year for a family of four, and 200 for families earning a maximum of $30,750 a year.
Dickens had so much clout she was even able to demand that 50 percent of the affordable units had to be two bedrooms or larger to “allow young people with growing families” to remain in the community.
Activists charged that the city’s original rezoning plan would have destroyed the character of the nation’s pre-eminent black community.
Without Dickens’ support, the administration had no chance of winning approval from the entire council, which generally follows the lead of the legislator whose district is being rezoned.
We have just allowed them to take away the Harlem we know and love. Inez Dickens acts as if she cares about Harlem, but she doesn’t. Ask Ms. Dickens what happen to her piece of Harlem her dad left her. Her answer is going to be that she sold it. Just like she just sold 125th street, but with everyones approval. People YOU have been sold, and don’t even KNOW it!!! WAKE UP PEOPLE, PLEASE!!! USE YOUR VOTE WISELY!!!!!!!!!!!
C Virginia Fields sold out Harlem property for One Dollar, now Council Woman Dickens has sold out the Harlem Residents for ?????, which will be awarded at a later date.
Hello? Nice. Income targeted housing is much better and more appropiate than the smoke and mirror gaming bulls*t of the “affordable housing.” The latter of late had become a trick pony for some of the azz hole developers. And our properties values will continue to appreciate!!!!!!!!!!!!!! REAL NICE!
Narmer I dunno. I’m certainly no fan of C. Virginia Fields and thank God she was not elected
mayor. As to Inez, I think she did the best with what she had to work with. This ‘freight train’ of development was going to go on regardless of her stand in my opinion. So she had to make a deal. That’s politics. Plus, she’s new to the political game. One has to look at her predecessors for the current demographic conundrum in the hood. On the other hand, I do wish they could have, or would, in the future, for increased the allocation of income targeted housing. But overall, I think the plan, of what I’ve seen to date, is alright by me.
Areas in Harlem already rezoned:
Fredrick Douglas Ave.
145th St.
Area covered by Columbia’s Morningside campus.
125th St. was the last domino to fall in this chain. The affordable housing concessions made by the City are a major victory as these types of developments have created an enormous amount of wealth for lower income families that are willing to work within the system. For those that resist, deride and belittle the significance of these concessions or for those wish to “return Harlem to the ‘glory days’” they will never benefit. One thing is for sure, Harlem will continue to metamorphasize, hopefully those born and raised here will jump on the bandwagon, or risk being run over by it.
This is a great thing for Harlem. People opposed to this victory in affordable housing for our people are ludicris. The jobs, educational opportunities and housing now being given to our community because of this rezoning is bar none across the US.
Maybe Harlem will begin to turn around and reject the stereotypical violence and drugging that has marred our people in this neighborhood for decades.
West Harlem and James, I absolutely agree with both of you. But the “Affordable Housing” game has been busted. For the last few years, folks have been developing stuff and calling it affordable. But it was affordable only for folks from “downtown” as per some of my sources on the community board. That is, the affordablity critieria was truly expensive, for say a Harlem family of four compared the with income referenced in the ‘targeted income’ group currently. The latter is much more appropiate and aptly descriptive. Now we need more of the latter or income targeted designated housing before the lowlifes twist this up to where its unreconizible.
I for one believe that a complete halt of the rezoning plan was a lofty goal. I applaud VOTE and other advocate groups for slowing down the process enough to give time for careful consideration of what the rezoning was going to cost Harlem and possible negotiations. I’m glad that Ms. Dickens did step in when she did as her original plan was to avoid getting into the pit to avoid any political drawback for getting in the way a very luccrative development plan. That would have been the political savvy thing to do and let the city planning commission duke it out instead. I’m glad that affordable housing (though I concede is a vague term in itself) was aggressively pursued and better height limits were imposed. I would also like to point out that prior to this plan there was NO type of limitations spelled out for zoning. So while “something is better than nothing” is not always the best strategy, this at least put some sort of curb on out-of-control development as the primary catalyst of rapid gentrification. It was the best that could come out a bad situation where everyone was being shut out to begin with.
Illoquentgent, Well said!
This is no bad thing for the Harlem I love.
The zoning plan does nothing to encourage development. It gives nothing to developers.
It only adds restrictions where none exist today (there are no height limits today along most of the corridor, no requirement for low-income housing). So it is discouraging development, making it less likely, while at the same time protecting the people who need it.
The public debate has been strange. A perfect example of how politicians will tell you anything to gain favor (i.e. “this is the end of Harlem”) and how communities and community boards (mostly) speak out of ignorance.
JJ – Development is not a bad thing. It provides for economic growth, i.e. jobs and tax base. Too bad you have such a limited view on economics and what is actually good for people. These added restrictions will prevent growth, which means less jobs and tax base.
JJ–The rezoning plan increases the FAR (floor area ratio) for most of the affected area. That means that the ratio of square footage to the size of the lot can be greater. Previously, the FAR for most of the area was 4.0 or less, meaning that the square footage of a building could not be more than 4 times the size of the lot. After the rezoning, much of it increased, allowing for bigger (but not necessarily taller) buildings.
” this at least put some sort of curb on out-of-control development as the primary catalyst of rapid gentrification. It was the best that could come out a bad situation where everyone was being shut out to begin with”
_
Where in Harlem is “out-of-control” development? That’s laughable, to suggest that exist. That’s like saying, “I like the broken down out of date look of the old Uptown Flavor, please Uptown Flavor never expand, develop, actually attract paying advertisers, never get more sophisticated and attract a robust community of regular people posting, never get as popular as Curbed and Gawker. After all, Uptown Flavor would lose its sense of community and heritage of 6 posters that talk to each other”.
Now isn’t that silly? UptownFlavor’s goal should be to become as significant and relevant as Curbed and Gawker, as 125th’s goal should be to become as significant and relevant as 14th St. It would be great for 125th St. to have the same reflection of housing, retail, and entertainment as 14th St. river to river.
This mentality to preserve a “ghetto caliber of culture and commerce” is a net lose for Harlem. Reducing square footage for a developer on a street like 125th is nonsensical. This is New York City, not some quaint village.
In real life “everything must change, nothing stays the same” (except the welfare class of Harlem and their refusal to improve themselves and get of welfare). Their sense of entitlement and right to live in the most expensive city in America on social welfare no less is profoundly difficult to justify. No, it’s impossible to justify. It makes no sense.
A standard aspect of life is contending with economics and the reality of things. No one has a right to dine at Nobu, have a Mercedes Benz, have a Yacht, operate a retail store in New York City, or live in Manhattan.
This is a sector of Harlem who resent upward mobility, allowing the market to dictate development. Actual Harlem merchants, boutiue owners, land and condo owners are mostly for allowing grand development on 125th St. Real “stake holders” support grand expansion. Those that don’t are largely not stake holders in where it counts (capital, investment, commerce). Those against the rezoning stake their claim as stakeholders on emotion and culture.
Well Cultures change. The Dutch, Jews, the many cultures that founded Harlem before the Blacks had to deal with change of their culture in Harlem. Guess what, they dealt with it. I suggest the current crop of Cultural Stake Holders take a page from the Dutch, the Jews, etc. and do the same. Contend with the realities of change.
Should we roll back 125th st. to a time when there was 1 bank? All we would have to do is roll back to ‘95 or so. Is Harlem better off with the many financial services businesses that line 125th St. today? Or us the “Culture” ruined by all these banking choices?
How about Old Navy? H&M?, K&G?, Max Cosmetics?, Starbucks? Blockbuster? Staples, Fedex? Is Harlem better off with these businesses on 125th St?
Keep in mind, there was a Black woman that had a stationary store basically where Staples now sits. Imagine that same broken down stationary store instead of Staples, is that what you want?
Let the market drive development. You cannot socially engineer 125th St. Makes no sense even trying, all you do is let investment, money, see it’s not worth it.
125th St. does not belong to Black people, deal with that basic fact. The street belongs to investors, those willing to risk capital, let them do their thing unrestrained, Harlem will be better off (or at least those that realize this is a City and roll up their sleeves and work hard every day).
The welfare class that enjoys their social welfare housing and foodstamps? Well 125th St. gentrifying runs counter to their lifestyle as they won’t be able to participate in it. NYC is not a place for those who want anything to stay the same.
The City Council has voted in favor of Rezoning Harlem. The vote was 47 for and 2 against.