On Planning: Columbia v. Penn?
[The sad heart of the matter here is that Columbia, a tax exempt institution, has made no serious or credible suggestions for community benefits to be incorporated into its massive take over of lower West Harlem with its inevitable destruction through gentrification of the viability for life of those now living and working thereabouts.
Were there not examples of other comparable institutions such as the University of Pennsylvania developing their neighborhoods synergistically with those living there -- and other universities scattered here and there -- one might not have the critical standards by which to condemn Columbia for what looks to be a shell game in process -- I skipped its meeting now in process on 125th St., but will undoubtedly hear more of the same that I have witnessed in previous such meetings. Here is a succinct comment on a previous one.
Below is the Penn plan in contrast which utilizes empty spaces without displacement of existing users. Perhaps Columbia should explore the rail yards up for grabs down the West Side or out of city locations? Compare the reports respectively of the Columbia and Penn plans below.
Ed Kent]
*************************************8
COLUMBIA'S PLAN
http://www.adhocmag.com/
PLANNING THE INVISIBLE CITY
The Battle Over Manhattanville
-by Jonathan Blitzer
"She must be from the University," an elderly woman
said to me as we sat, straining to hear above the fan,
at a meeting of Community Board 9 on July 31. "She
keeps saying 'we.'"
The woman was right: speaking at the front of the room
was Maxine Griffith, Executive Vice President for
Government and Community Affairs at Columbia. She had
wrested control of the microphone just moments before
from a visibly frazzled representative of Skidmore,
Owings & Merrill the architectural firm overseeing
Columbia's plans for expanding into West Harlem.
Marilyn Taylor, who heads up the firm's design team,
had just finished her presentation and was accepting
questions from the community. As questions turned
increasingly into comments, Taylor grew quiet, and
Griffith promptly took control. She responded
forcefully at times--this is about the university and
its needs," she explained in no uncertain terms to an
incredulous questioner--but was insistent that the
university and the community would cooperate as things
moved forward.
The meeting was meant as an update from Skidmore,
Owings & Merrill's on its most recent revisions to
so-called Phase 1 of the university's plans. Taylor
had set out to show the community exactly how its
recent criticisms were incorporated into the latest
modifications of the 17 acre construction site a site
that will open for renovation in the next ten years,
if all goes according to planned for Columbia.
The community wasn't buying it. "All these changes
you're describing," charged one man in the back of the
room, "are being made in response to Columbia's needs,
not ours." Another woman scoffed at what she called
the presenter's "architectural semantics," asserting
that "We don't want our lives to be caught in the
whirlwind of Columbia's commercial ambition!"
At the core of this debate are two fundamentally
incompatible plans for the neighborhood's future the
community's 197a plan and the university's 197c plan.
The problem with the two, explains Columbia Urban
Planning professor Elliot Sclar, is that they've never
been reconciled. Put simply, 197a is a general
revitalization plan for West Harlem, and includes all
the neighborhoods represented by CB9: Hamilton
Heights, Manhattanville, and Morningside Heights. 197c
is Columbia's plan for the development of the
Manhattanville site specifically; in stark contrast to
197a, it is concerned only with how the university
will turn a swath of land in Manhattanville into an
arm of the Columbia University campus.
Fifteen years ago, Professor Sclar helped Community
Board 9 begin the drafting process of its 197a
Community Development Plan, a plan that was to
establish guidelines for city agencies as they
considered future development in the area. CB9's 197a
plan does not preclude Columbia's expansion into
Manhattanville. What it does do is establish standards
for how any kind of development--regardless of the
developer--should proceed so that the needs of the
community are considered and protected. The plan
protects existing housing and creates new affordable
housing; it rules out the use of eminent domain as a
tool to evict residents and local businesses; it
creates long-term jobs for residents; establishes a
"zero-waste" environmental zone; calls on institutions
to set aside remaining rent regulated apartments for
long term residents, and aims to preserve the
architectural and historical integrity of the area.
The University has made no concrete commitment to work
197a into its own proposal, meaning it will not
guarantee the defining features of the community's
demands: protection of existing housing, the creation
of new affordable housing, the maintenance of
manufacturing jobs as well as the creation of viable,
long-term jobs. Add to this the tragic consequences of
secondary displacement and community members have a
lot to worry about. As Columbia edges into their
community, many who aren't immediately pushed out face
the prospect of rising costs of living--pressures that
will likely force them out of neighborhoods in which
they can no longer afford to stay. This threat comes
in the midst of a wave of gentrification sweeping much
of the city, with rents in Harlem and other low-income
communities soaring.
These fears make the university's promise of open
public spaces, the vibrant street life, and an
accessible marketplace ring hollow. "What about us?"
asked one woman at the July 31 meeting. "You keep
saying you'd be inviting everyone to these new spaces,
but we won't be here, we won't be around to enjoy
these changes at all."
But what made the meeting an "insult" to the
community, according to Nellie Bailey of the Coalition
to Preserve Community (CPC), was that the university
presenters could speak at length about changes
relating to their own plan--the 197c plan--while
flouting the most basic priorities of 197a. Chief
among such priorities is the issue of eminent domain.
The university has refused to rule out the use of
eminent domain in securing the remaining 20 percent of
the proposed construction site, and President
Bollinger has said that anything less than complete
control of the site would be unacceptable.
"The first step in negotiations is for the university
to take eminent domain off the table because if they
don't, then what's the point? They could do whatever
they want," explained Bailey.
According to Mercedes Narciso of the Pratt Institute,
local businesses stand to lose the most if the
university takes the remaining land through the use of
eminent domain. "Current businesses," said Narciso,
"employ a lot of workers from Manhattanville and other
local areas. Workers live within close distance of
Manhattanville; many of them live in parts of CB9."
One of the most important goals of 197a is to
encourage the development of businesses that could
employ local labor.
Two businesses--Hudson North America and Tuck-It-Away
Self-Storage--have continued to hold out against the
university's plan. At the recent CB9 meeting, the
owners of both businesses, Anne Whitman and Nick
Spreyregen, presented development plans of their own,
consistent with 197a and that would leave the
neighborhood largely intact. Details of these 197c
plans are forthcoming but their viability and their
popularity among members of CB9, may mean that the
city will consider Whitman's and Spreyregen's plans
alongside the 197a and c plans that have already been
under review.
It is hard to comprehend the magnitude of what is at
stake for the community.
Issues of immediate concern, like job loss, only tell
part of the story. A study in 2000 showed unemployment
in this community ran at a dismal 18%--double the
unemployment rate of Manhattan--and with 15% of the
district already employed in the industrial sector,
the prospect of work during and after the university's
expansion looks bleak at best. The university expects
to create some 7,000 jobs related directly to the
enlarged Manhattanville campus, mostly in academic,
technical, maintenance and support positions. But
these are only estimates projected over a 25 to 30
year period. It is not entirely clear whether or not
these jobs will even go to people who currently work
in the area. And by the time the university creates
most of these jobs, it may be too late for some of
Manhattanville's current residents to take advantages
of them.
Proponents of 197c tend to emphasize just how poor and
underdeveloped Manhattanville currently is. They point
to the unemployment numbers and describe unused lots,
largely unfrequented public spaces, land that is being
put to no good use. And herein lies the logic behind
the university's expansionist rhetoric. Columbia
argues that it will be "making something" of a
community in desperate need of change. But when
Columbia talks about developing this otherwise
underdeveloped area, the university is not actually
proposing to develop the community for the residents'
benefit. To say, as many have, that the university
will be doing Manhattanville a favor, is to ignore the
real debate. The university is not trying to
revitalize Manhattanville--that, after all, is the
goal of the 197a plan the university has repeatedly
ignored. Instead, the university is going to make use
of the neighborhood in ways it, alone, sees fit. It is
false to label expansion as revitalization since the
development is defined and measured entirely by
Columbia and its beneficiaries.
Brett Murphy, a senior studying urban studies and a
member of the Student Coalition on Expansion and
Gentrification (SCEG) speaks of "expansion with
accountability," a principle SCEG encourages students
to think about when evaluating the university's
dealings with the community.
"What it mostly boils down to is this," she said. "Is
Columbia going to live up to its mission--its talk
about working with the community--and provide things
like affordable housing, preservation of neighborhood,
or its it going to be like Columbia going into the
community and taking it over entirely for its own use.
The 197a plan is so much more of a compromise than
people realize &it's mostly about preserving the
community's that there now."
Columbia students seem to have major misconceptions
about the 197a plan evidenced by a Columbia Spectator
poll that showed 70% of students knew little to
nothing of expansion. "197a is about forming a
collaboration with the community &so that people who
aren't immediately displaced can still live there,"
suggests Murphy. People tend to think about 197a and
197c as proposals opposed on the single issue of
whether or not the university has the right to expand.
The reason for this appears, in part, to be the result
of Columbia's public relations campaign, which leaves
those with stakes in the university feeling as though
the university has no choice but to expand.
What's at issue then, is the community's right to
determine its own future by solving its own problems,
and Columbia's designs on the area are only the latest
of many obstacles. 197a's troubles go back further
than Columbia's plan. "City officials have never
really embraced 197a," Sclar argues, "because it
empowers community boards and hence it undermines
their [city officials'] political ability to make
final decisions &The strategy then is to ignore it to
the extent that they can." A plan recommended by the
community board is just that--recommended. The
community boards have little legal power.
Community members fear that their neighborhood will be
transformed into a sprawling college campus, replete
with tall buildings, chemical research facilities with
uncertain environment impact, and an economics and
demography all its own. "CB9 and the greatest majority
of our community," says Jordi Reyes-Montblanc, Chair
of CB9, "is not against the 'expansion' per se; what
the community has expressed very loudly &is that they
prefer that the expansion follow the CB9 197a plan
guidelines." It is only with 197a, community members
rightly maintain, that the community can retain any
shred of its present identity given the university's
aspirations for its future. And if Columbia is ever to
persuade the community that it can be a committed and
considerate neighbor, it must show that the well-being
of Manhattanville's residents is not merely incidental
to the university's own goals of erecting an
attractive campus that can keep it competitive with
the nation's other top-tier institutions.
This is a community in search of a future," posited
Taylor at the recent CB9 meeting. But according to
Columbia's logic, the university knows better than the
residents themselves what it is the community needs as
their neighborhood hangs on the brink of a major
upheaval. But for now, as the university appears to
ignore 197a almost completely, the community's
greatest opportunity is to wrest some concessions from
Columbia in the form of what's called a Community
Benefits Agreement (CBA).
In a joint announcement mid-June by CB9, Councilman
Robert Jackson (D-CD7), and the New York City Economic
Development Corporation, a group of community
representatives indicated its readiness to enter into
discussions with the university over community
benefits. This group of community representatives,
known as the Local Development Corporation (LDC),
includes "highly recognized, civic motivated and
committed individuals [who] have been selected through
a very open process," explained Reyes-Montblanc, one
of the nine current members of the recently assembled
LDC. Their backgrounds and positions are designed to
span the interests of the community so that community
members feel fairly represented. The Community
Benefits Agreement is aimed at mitigating the impact
the university's expansion will have on residents, and
both the university and the LDC seem genuinely hopeful
about the possibility of a CBA that can address
residents' needs.
"We're ready to listen and be responsive," said
Griffith, as she spoke of upcoming talks between
Columbia and the LDC. "This is a process that is
new-ish on both sides and there really aren't any
parameters as talks move forward." Griffith sees a CBA
as an opportunity for the university to do what it can
despite the fact that conflicts over 197a and c remain
largely unresolved. Referring to the incompatibility
of the two plans, she maintained "that doesn't absolve
us of responsibility for doing what we can."
As for what a possible CBA might look like - it may be
too early to tell. Reyes-Montblanc says he doesn't
expect 100 percent agreement between the university
and the LDC, but expects agreement "closer to 90
percent than not." His goals for the negotiations are
ambitious:
"I expect that we'll cover all issues," he wrote in an
email, "including the full spectrum from jobs
(construction, technical, professional, academic)
&[to] an affordable housing trust fund &(so that the
LDC can develop housing affordable to the community
and in accordance with our 197a plan)...to educational
and training components &. [We'll also cover] &the
permanent protection of rent regulated apartments and
many other issues."
For all of Reyes-Montblanc's optimism, the
establishment of the LDC and the start of CBA
negotiations in some way represent the beginning of
the end of opposition to the university's expansion.
The community has no choice but to take advantage of
any opportunity it can to secure benefits from the
university. Negotiating benefits does seem like a
quiet capitulation - an acknowledgement that the
university's plans will move forward and the
community's will not be given equal consideration. Of
course, securing benefits and opposing Columbia's plan
are not mutually exclusive. And if the Atlantic Yards
deal in Brooklyn is any indicator, then perhaps the
negotiation of a CBA portends increased resistance to
development. For now, it's too early to tell.
Columbia, for its part, will have to overcome the
distrust it's engendered in the community over the
last forty years through its consistent secrecy.
The most important decisions to be made concerning the
fate of Manhattanville will occur this year while the
LDC and Columbia hammer out a CBA and come to some
decision about the role of eminent domain. Students,
who make up the largest portion of the Columbia
community, have a major part to play in pressuring the
university to deal openly and fairly with the
community. And a first step, SCEG, Nellie Bailey, and
CB9 seem universally to agree, is that students should
develop a broad and informed consciousness about the
university's expansion plans. They need to understand
how deep residents' worries run.
"There is a great deal of fear in Harlem," Bailey
said. "It is almost palpable, and the fear is from the
very real concern that people will no longer be able
to live there."
*******************************8
PENN'S PLAN
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/article.php?id=982
Contact Tony Sorrentino 215-898-2295 asorrent@pobox.upenn.edu
University of Pennsylvania Unveils 30-Year Campus Development Plan for Former Postal Lands
July 27, 2006
PHILADELPHIA -- The University of Pennsylvania has announced the completion of its Penn Connects campus development plan, a 30-year vision directing the physical growth of Penn's campus, including strategic recommendations for expanding eastward towards the Schuylkill River and Philadelphia's Center City.
This expansion will follow Penn's anticipated acquisition in early 2007 of the U.S. Postal Service's Philadelphia facility, a 24-acre parcel of land on the western edge of the Schuylkill River. The site includes the main post office building at 30th and Market streets and, to the south, its Annex building, a parking garage at 31st and Chestnut streets and 14-acre surface parking lot south of Walnut Street.
"The acquisition of the postal properties by the University will provide an unprecedented opportunity to transform the Penn campus, establish a major physical presence on the Schuylkill River and connect Center City and University City in powerful ways," said Penn President Amy Gutmann. "As a result we have completed a plan illustrating how our campus is poised to leverage this historic moment and grow over the next three decades. Our plan is guiding our land-use strategy for short-term programmatic needs as well as long-term strategic moves that will shape Penn for the 21st century."
The planning study, completed by Sasaki & Associates of Watertown Mass., articulates a long-term vision for development that fosters connectivity within the campus and in the broader communities of West Philadelphia, Center City and the region.
Starting in June 2005, Sasaki undertook extensive site analysis of the entire campus, with emphasis on the new land to the east, and conceived several planning and design opportunities. The focus is on the 14 acres of surface parking lots between Walnut and South streets, the Schuylkill Expressway and the campus. Recommendations call for converting this industrial use into a mix of academic and research buildings, athletics fields and parks, retail shops, office towers and arts and cultural spaces, including:
* Improving gateways between the campus, Center City and surrounding West Philadelphia, specifically at Walnut and South streets.
* Extending Locust Walk eastward into what will be new open fields.
* Converting surface parking lots into new sports and recreation facilities and open parks.
* Creating new plazas east of Franklin Field and providing new public gathering spaces that link the postal lands to the campus.
* Improving physical connectivity that links the campus with the transit hub at 30th Street station and Market Street.
* Accommodating future development in academics and research and future expansion potential between the medical campus and the river.
In addition, infill development opportunities have been identified in the core of campus to support student life and research, including:
* A 400-bed residence hall planned in a quadrangle type setting with open space plan and walkway at Chestnut Street between 33rd and 34th streets.
* A nanotechnology research center for the School of Engineering and Applied Science at 32nd and Walnut streets, which is currently a surface parking lot.
"In adding new contiguous landholding to our campus, we are in a unique position to grow over time as opportunities arise to meet our mission of teaching and research," Gutmann said. "And as we grow we will make West Philadelphia an even more attractive place to live, work and raise families, while expanding job opportunities and economic inclusion."
The executive summary of Penn Connects is available at the Executive Vice President's Office.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net
Were there not examples of other comparable institutions such as the University of Pennsylvania developing their neighborhoods synergistically with those living there -- and other universities scattered here and there -- one might not have the critical standards by which to condemn Columbia for what looks to be a shell game in process -- I skipped its meeting now in process on 125th St., but will undoubtedly hear more of the same that I have witnessed in previous such meetings. Here is a succinct comment on a previous one.
Below is the Penn plan in contrast which utilizes empty spaces without displacement of existing users. Perhaps Columbia should explore the rail yards up for grabs down the West Side or out of city locations? Compare the reports respectively of the Columbia and Penn plans below.
Ed Kent]
*************************************8
COLUMBIA'S PLAN
http://www.adhocmag.com/
PLANNING THE INVISIBLE CITY
The Battle Over Manhattanville
-by Jonathan Blitzer
"She must be from the University," an elderly woman
said to me as we sat, straining to hear above the fan,
at a meeting of Community Board 9 on July 31. "She
keeps saying 'we.'"
The woman was right: speaking at the front of the room
was Maxine Griffith, Executive Vice President for
Government and Community Affairs at Columbia. She had
wrested control of the microphone just moments before
from a visibly frazzled representative of Skidmore,
Owings & Merrill the architectural firm overseeing
Columbia's plans for expanding into West Harlem.
Marilyn Taylor, who heads up the firm's design team,
had just finished her presentation and was accepting
questions from the community. As questions turned
increasingly into comments, Taylor grew quiet, and
Griffith promptly took control. She responded
forcefully at times--this is about the university and
its needs," she explained in no uncertain terms to an
incredulous questioner--but was insistent that the
university and the community would cooperate as things
moved forward.
The meeting was meant as an update from Skidmore,
Owings & Merrill's on its most recent revisions to
so-called Phase 1 of the university's plans. Taylor
had set out to show the community exactly how its
recent criticisms were incorporated into the latest
modifications of the 17 acre construction site a site
that will open for renovation in the next ten years,
if all goes according to planned for Columbia.
The community wasn't buying it. "All these changes
you're describing," charged one man in the back of the
room, "are being made in response to Columbia's needs,
not ours." Another woman scoffed at what she called
the presenter's "architectural semantics," asserting
that "We don't want our lives to be caught in the
whirlwind of Columbia's commercial ambition!"
At the core of this debate are two fundamentally
incompatible plans for the neighborhood's future the
community's 197a plan and the university's 197c plan.
The problem with the two, explains Columbia Urban
Planning professor Elliot Sclar, is that they've never
been reconciled. Put simply, 197a is a general
revitalization plan for West Harlem, and includes all
the neighborhoods represented by CB9: Hamilton
Heights, Manhattanville, and Morningside Heights. 197c
is Columbia's plan for the development of the
Manhattanville site specifically; in stark contrast to
197a, it is concerned only with how the university
will turn a swath of land in Manhattanville into an
arm of the Columbia University campus.
Fifteen years ago, Professor Sclar helped Community
Board 9 begin the drafting process of its 197a
Community Development Plan, a plan that was to
establish guidelines for city agencies as they
considered future development in the area. CB9's 197a
plan does not preclude Columbia's expansion into
Manhattanville. What it does do is establish standards
for how any kind of development--regardless of the
developer--should proceed so that the needs of the
community are considered and protected. The plan
protects existing housing and creates new affordable
housing; it rules out the use of eminent domain as a
tool to evict residents and local businesses; it
creates long-term jobs for residents; establishes a
"zero-waste" environmental zone; calls on institutions
to set aside remaining rent regulated apartments for
long term residents, and aims to preserve the
architectural and historical integrity of the area.
The University has made no concrete commitment to work
197a into its own proposal, meaning it will not
guarantee the defining features of the community's
demands: protection of existing housing, the creation
of new affordable housing, the maintenance of
manufacturing jobs as well as the creation of viable,
long-term jobs. Add to this the tragic consequences of
secondary displacement and community members have a
lot to worry about. As Columbia edges into their
community, many who aren't immediately pushed out face
the prospect of rising costs of living--pressures that
will likely force them out of neighborhoods in which
they can no longer afford to stay. This threat comes
in the midst of a wave of gentrification sweeping much
of the city, with rents in Harlem and other low-income
communities soaring.
These fears make the university's promise of open
public spaces, the vibrant street life, and an
accessible marketplace ring hollow. "What about us?"
asked one woman at the July 31 meeting. "You keep
saying you'd be inviting everyone to these new spaces,
but we won't be here, we won't be around to enjoy
these changes at all."
But what made the meeting an "insult" to the
community, according to Nellie Bailey of the Coalition
to Preserve Community (CPC), was that the university
presenters could speak at length about changes
relating to their own plan--the 197c plan--while
flouting the most basic priorities of 197a. Chief
among such priorities is the issue of eminent domain.
The university has refused to rule out the use of
eminent domain in securing the remaining 20 percent of
the proposed construction site, and President
Bollinger has said that anything less than complete
control of the site would be unacceptable.
"The first step in negotiations is for the university
to take eminent domain off the table because if they
don't, then what's the point? They could do whatever
they want," explained Bailey.
According to Mercedes Narciso of the Pratt Institute,
local businesses stand to lose the most if the
university takes the remaining land through the use of
eminent domain. "Current businesses," said Narciso,
"employ a lot of workers from Manhattanville and other
local areas. Workers live within close distance of
Manhattanville; many of them live in parts of CB9."
One of the most important goals of 197a is to
encourage the development of businesses that could
employ local labor.
Two businesses--Hudson North America and Tuck-It-Away
Self-Storage--have continued to hold out against the
university's plan. At the recent CB9 meeting, the
owners of both businesses, Anne Whitman and Nick
Spreyregen, presented development plans of their own,
consistent with 197a and that would leave the
neighborhood largely intact. Details of these 197c
plans are forthcoming but their viability and their
popularity among members of CB9, may mean that the
city will consider Whitman's and Spreyregen's plans
alongside the 197a and c plans that have already been
under review.
It is hard to comprehend the magnitude of what is at
stake for the community.
Issues of immediate concern, like job loss, only tell
part of the story. A study in 2000 showed unemployment
in this community ran at a dismal 18%--double the
unemployment rate of Manhattan--and with 15% of the
district already employed in the industrial sector,
the prospect of work during and after the university's
expansion looks bleak at best. The university expects
to create some 7,000 jobs related directly to the
enlarged Manhattanville campus, mostly in academic,
technical, maintenance and support positions. But
these are only estimates projected over a 25 to 30
year period. It is not entirely clear whether or not
these jobs will even go to people who currently work
in the area. And by the time the university creates
most of these jobs, it may be too late for some of
Manhattanville's current residents to take advantages
of them.
Proponents of 197c tend to emphasize just how poor and
underdeveloped Manhattanville currently is. They point
to the unemployment numbers and describe unused lots,
largely unfrequented public spaces, land that is being
put to no good use. And herein lies the logic behind
the university's expansionist rhetoric. Columbia
argues that it will be "making something" of a
community in desperate need of change. But when
Columbia talks about developing this otherwise
underdeveloped area, the university is not actually
proposing to develop the community for the residents'
benefit. To say, as many have, that the university
will be doing Manhattanville a favor, is to ignore the
real debate. The university is not trying to
revitalize Manhattanville--that, after all, is the
goal of the 197a plan the university has repeatedly
ignored. Instead, the university is going to make use
of the neighborhood in ways it, alone, sees fit. It is
false to label expansion as revitalization since the
development is defined and measured entirely by
Columbia and its beneficiaries.
Brett Murphy, a senior studying urban studies and a
member of the Student Coalition on Expansion and
Gentrification (SCEG) speaks of "expansion with
accountability," a principle SCEG encourages students
to think about when evaluating the university's
dealings with the community.
"What it mostly boils down to is this," she said. "Is
Columbia going to live up to its mission--its talk
about working with the community--and provide things
like affordable housing, preservation of neighborhood,
or its it going to be like Columbia going into the
community and taking it over entirely for its own use.
The 197a plan is so much more of a compromise than
people realize &it's mostly about preserving the
community's that there now."
Columbia students seem to have major misconceptions
about the 197a plan evidenced by a Columbia Spectator
poll that showed 70% of students knew little to
nothing of expansion. "197a is about forming a
collaboration with the community &so that people who
aren't immediately displaced can still live there,"
suggests Murphy. People tend to think about 197a and
197c as proposals opposed on the single issue of
whether or not the university has the right to expand.
The reason for this appears, in part, to be the result
of Columbia's public relations campaign, which leaves
those with stakes in the university feeling as though
the university has no choice but to expand.
What's at issue then, is the community's right to
determine its own future by solving its own problems,
and Columbia's designs on the area are only the latest
of many obstacles. 197a's troubles go back further
than Columbia's plan. "City officials have never
really embraced 197a," Sclar argues, "because it
empowers community boards and hence it undermines
their [city officials'] political ability to make
final decisions &The strategy then is to ignore it to
the extent that they can." A plan recommended by the
community board is just that--recommended. The
community boards have little legal power.
Community members fear that their neighborhood will be
transformed into a sprawling college campus, replete
with tall buildings, chemical research facilities with
uncertain environment impact, and an economics and
demography all its own. "CB9 and the greatest majority
of our community," says Jordi Reyes-Montblanc, Chair
of CB9, "is not against the 'expansion' per se; what
the community has expressed very loudly &is that they
prefer that the expansion follow the CB9 197a plan
guidelines." It is only with 197a, community members
rightly maintain, that the community can retain any
shred of its present identity given the university's
aspirations for its future. And if Columbia is ever to
persuade the community that it can be a committed and
considerate neighbor, it must show that the well-being
of Manhattanville's residents is not merely incidental
to the university's own goals of erecting an
attractive campus that can keep it competitive with
the nation's other top-tier institutions.
This is a community in search of a future," posited
Taylor at the recent CB9 meeting. But according to
Columbia's logic, the university knows better than the
residents themselves what it is the community needs as
their neighborhood hangs on the brink of a major
upheaval. But for now, as the university appears to
ignore 197a almost completely, the community's
greatest opportunity is to wrest some concessions from
Columbia in the form of what's called a Community
Benefits Agreement (CBA).
In a joint announcement mid-June by CB9, Councilman
Robert Jackson (D-CD7), and the New York City Economic
Development Corporation, a group of community
representatives indicated its readiness to enter into
discussions with the university over community
benefits. This group of community representatives,
known as the Local Development Corporation (LDC),
includes "highly recognized, civic motivated and
committed individuals [who] have been selected through
a very open process," explained Reyes-Montblanc, one
of the nine current members of the recently assembled
LDC. Their backgrounds and positions are designed to
span the interests of the community so that community
members feel fairly represented. The Community
Benefits Agreement is aimed at mitigating the impact
the university's expansion will have on residents, and
both the university and the LDC seem genuinely hopeful
about the possibility of a CBA that can address
residents' needs.
"We're ready to listen and be responsive," said
Griffith, as she spoke of upcoming talks between
Columbia and the LDC. "This is a process that is
new-ish on both sides and there really aren't any
parameters as talks move forward." Griffith sees a CBA
as an opportunity for the university to do what it can
despite the fact that conflicts over 197a and c remain
largely unresolved. Referring to the incompatibility
of the two plans, she maintained "that doesn't absolve
us of responsibility for doing what we can."
As for what a possible CBA might look like - it may be
too early to tell. Reyes-Montblanc says he doesn't
expect 100 percent agreement between the university
and the LDC, but expects agreement "closer to 90
percent than not." His goals for the negotiations are
ambitious:
"I expect that we'll cover all issues," he wrote in an
email, "including the full spectrum from jobs
(construction, technical, professional, academic)
&[to] an affordable housing trust fund &(so that the
LDC can develop housing affordable to the community
and in accordance with our 197a plan)...to educational
and training components &. [We'll also cover] &the
permanent protection of rent regulated apartments and
many other issues."
For all of Reyes-Montblanc's optimism, the
establishment of the LDC and the start of CBA
negotiations in some way represent the beginning of
the end of opposition to the university's expansion.
The community has no choice but to take advantage of
any opportunity it can to secure benefits from the
university. Negotiating benefits does seem like a
quiet capitulation - an acknowledgement that the
university's plans will move forward and the
community's will not be given equal consideration. Of
course, securing benefits and opposing Columbia's plan
are not mutually exclusive. And if the Atlantic Yards
deal in Brooklyn is any indicator, then perhaps the
negotiation of a CBA portends increased resistance to
development. For now, it's too early to tell.
Columbia, for its part, will have to overcome the
distrust it's engendered in the community over the
last forty years through its consistent secrecy.
The most important decisions to be made concerning the
fate of Manhattanville will occur this year while the
LDC and Columbia hammer out a CBA and come to some
decision about the role of eminent domain. Students,
who make up the largest portion of the Columbia
community, have a major part to play in pressuring the
university to deal openly and fairly with the
community. And a first step, SCEG, Nellie Bailey, and
CB9 seem universally to agree, is that students should
develop a broad and informed consciousness about the
university's expansion plans. They need to understand
how deep residents' worries run.
"There is a great deal of fear in Harlem," Bailey
said. "It is almost palpable, and the fear is from the
very real concern that people will no longer be able
to live there."
*******************************8
PENN'S PLAN
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/article.php?id=982
Contact Tony Sorrentino 215-898-2295 asorrent@pobox.upenn.edu
University of Pennsylvania Unveils 30-Year Campus Development Plan for Former Postal Lands
July 27, 2006
PHILADELPHIA -- The University of Pennsylvania has announced the completion of its Penn Connects campus development plan, a 30-year vision directing the physical growth of Penn's campus, including strategic recommendations for expanding eastward towards the Schuylkill River and Philadelphia's Center City.
This expansion will follow Penn's anticipated acquisition in early 2007 of the U.S. Postal Service's Philadelphia facility, a 24-acre parcel of land on the western edge of the Schuylkill River. The site includes the main post office building at 30th and Market streets and, to the south, its Annex building, a parking garage at 31st and Chestnut streets and 14-acre surface parking lot south of Walnut Street.
"The acquisition of the postal properties by the University will provide an unprecedented opportunity to transform the Penn campus, establish a major physical presence on the Schuylkill River and connect Center City and University City in powerful ways," said Penn President Amy Gutmann. "As a result we have completed a plan illustrating how our campus is poised to leverage this historic moment and grow over the next three decades. Our plan is guiding our land-use strategy for short-term programmatic needs as well as long-term strategic moves that will shape Penn for the 21st century."
The planning study, completed by Sasaki & Associates of Watertown Mass., articulates a long-term vision for development that fosters connectivity within the campus and in the broader communities of West Philadelphia, Center City and the region.
Starting in June 2005, Sasaki undertook extensive site analysis of the entire campus, with emphasis on the new land to the east, and conceived several planning and design opportunities. The focus is on the 14 acres of surface parking lots between Walnut and South streets, the Schuylkill Expressway and the campus. Recommendations call for converting this industrial use into a mix of academic and research buildings, athletics fields and parks, retail shops, office towers and arts and cultural spaces, including:
* Improving gateways between the campus, Center City and surrounding West Philadelphia, specifically at Walnut and South streets.
* Extending Locust Walk eastward into what will be new open fields.
* Converting surface parking lots into new sports and recreation facilities and open parks.
* Creating new plazas east of Franklin Field and providing new public gathering spaces that link the postal lands to the campus.
* Improving physical connectivity that links the campus with the transit hub at 30th Street station and Market Street.
* Accommodating future development in academics and research and future expansion potential between the medical campus and the river.
In addition, infill development opportunities have been identified in the core of campus to support student life and research, including:
* A 400-bed residence hall planned in a quadrangle type setting with open space plan and walkway at Chestnut Street between 33rd and 34th streets.
* A nanotechnology research center for the School of Engineering and Applied Science at 32nd and Walnut streets, which is currently a surface parking lot.
"In adding new contiguous landholding to our campus, we are in a unique position to grow over time as opportunities arise to meet our mission of teaching and research," Gutmann said. "And as we grow we will make West Philadelphia an even more attractive place to live, work and raise families, while expanding job opportunities and economic inclusion."
The executive summary of Penn Connects is available at the Executive Vice President's Office.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net
posted by Ed Kent at 2:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home