In and Out of Expansion Zone, Development Booms in Harlem

As the controversy over the University’s expansion into Manhattanville has raged over the past four years, development in the greater Harlem area has accelerated and faced similar discord.

At the heart of the debate lies a tension between providing improvements for a community and contributing to gentrification and resident displacement because of those improvements. Many developers, including Columbia, say their developments will “revitalize” an area which they characterize as “depressed” or “underused,” pointing to job opportunities, enhanced quality of life, and increased local services. But many who have built their lives in the neighborhood fear that these changes will increase land values and rent costs, and thus drive out the existing community.

To mitigate potential displacement, Columbia has committed to housing for University employees who will work within the Manhattanville area. The University also agreed to provide $20 million toward affordable housing in the area and to rehouse residents who will be displaced because of campus construction.

“If a private developer came in and bought some of those properties that private citizens lived in, there would be no relocation,” non-profit Upper Manhattan Empowerment Zone Chief Operating Officer Hope Knight said.

But some locals say the prospect of Columbia’s expansion has already contributed to displacement. 3333 Broadway, a 1,190-unit apartment complex located immediately north of the expansion area, has seen hundreds of tenants evicted since its landlord opted out of Mitchell-Lama, a state affordable housing program in May 2005. The residents of Morningside Gardens, a six-building housing complex on 123rd Street between Broadway and Amsterdam, opted out of the same program in March 2006, tripling the values of their apartments.

“As the costs of the real estate increase, it makes it very difficult for those at the bottom to hold on because every incentive is on the landlord to drive them out in order to increase their profit margins,” said Nellie Bailey, co-founder and director of the Harlem Tenants Council.

A common thread throughout the community—as well as among urban experts and residents of greater Harlem—is the call for “affordable” housing as a solution. Walter South, chair of the Community Board 9 Housing and Land Use Committee, expressed concern about “middle-income people, earning between 50 to 150 to $200,000 a year, quickly being squeezed out of the market.”

“Those apartments will no longer be affordable to the average Joe——cops, schoolteachers, people who work downtown,” South added.

At the same time, the New York City Housing Authority, which owns two public housing projects near the expansion site, faces a deficit of $220 million, which has set off worries of increased rents and the possibility of sell-offs and privatization. “In the end, all big developments going on—they’re driven by commercial interests. It’s nothing new in New York in a sense, but historically that was kind of balanced off, and that’s why these housing projects exist in the public sector,” said associate professor Reinhold Martin of Columbia’s Graduate School for Architecture, Planning, and Preservation.

University officials deny that Columbia is the cause of West Harlem displacement, drawing on the University’s community commitments. “Gentrification, or an increase in property values, has been sweeping the city, in northern Manhattan in particular, for over a decade,” Senior Executive Vice President Robert Kasdin said. “It preceded Columbia by many years; it will continue long after Columbia’s project is done. We have taken a series of responsible steps to address the implications of our expansion.”

Development in greater Harlem is an ongoing phenomenon, and has been characterized by a drive toward large-scale residential units and away from manufacturing and low-income enterprises. This movement has been facilitated by the Department of City Planning through rezoning projects to allow for larger and higher buildings, such as that of 125th Street, currently under public review, and of East Harlem, approved in 2003.

Following an era of widespread vacant buildings, the area is witnessing a boom in luxury housing, precipitating an influx of newcomers—mostly middle-income professionals—into these neighborhoods.

“Certainly with new luxury buildings being built here you are going to get a different demographic. I think it’s a good thing,” Knight said. “To the extent that it displaces people, it’s not optimal, but I think it’s a part of what happens with change.”

Many long-time Harlem residents claim that gentrification is changing the neighborhood’s character and demographic.

“This is not to say that Harlem should not be inclusive to represent this sort of the rich, ethnic mosaic that everyone loves, but unfortunately it’s lauded at the expense of so many low-income residents who will be pushed out,” Bailey said. “What we’re talking about is the displacement of low-income residents who are overwhelmingly black and brown here in West Harlem and Central Harlem.”

Others maintain that development, and specifically the University expansion, will serve the interests of the community during a time of desperate need. “This is an opportunity for my community that has been devastated, underdeveloped, and I welcome any Council member to come to that area and visit it personally and see the lack of housing,” City Council member Inez Dickens, D-Morningside Heights and Central Harlem, said at December’s Council vote in favor of the University’s plan to rezone Manhattanville.

“This debate between neighborhood preservation and University growth is truly a false one,” said David Stone, Columbia’s executive vice president for communications. “If you want to preserve New York City’s historic role as a place that creates middle-income jobs and the pathways to them, as well as a place where creative people come to think about important ideas, it’s our universities that are doing that right here.”

news@columbiaspectator.com