Comments on: Council Approves 125th Street Rezoning

By: narmer

narmer — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:13:58 +0000

The City Council has voted in favor of Rezoning Harlem. The vote was 47 for and 2 against.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:56:34 +0000

” 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 That’s like saying, “I like the broken down out of date look of the old Uptown Flavor, please Uptown Flavor never expand, develop, actually attract paying advertisers, never get more sophisticated and attract a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.

By: MMP Brownstoner

MMP Brownstoner — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 03:23:44 +0000

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.

By: anon

anon — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:44:44 +0000

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.

By: JJ

JJ — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:45:22 +0000

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.

By: GDAWG

GDAWG — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:56:33 +0000

Illoquentgent, Well said!

By: illoquentgent

illoquentgent — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:41:17 +0000

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.

By: GDAWG

GDAWG — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:39:24 +0000

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.

By: West Harlem

West Harlem — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:24:17 +0000

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.

By: James

James — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:57:54 +0000

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.