Manhattanville’s Forgotten Beneficiaries

Hearing about Manhattanville on an almost daily basis, I have come to the conclusion that the reason why it has gained so much political traction is because it is an issue inextricably tied to human welfare. Regardless of whether Columbia proceeds with its current plans, lives will be affected for both the better and the worse. The key to confronting this issue is to determine who the losers and winners are, what the effects will be, and how to value them.

Firstly, I don’t believe that the Manhattanville debate centers on the people living in the expansion zone. As the “Manhattanville in West Harlem” page of the Columbia University Web site states, “There are fewer than 130 occupied residential units on the entire 17-acre area. Columbia has committed to relocate all residents to equal or better housing in the area.” The page further states, “The University will not under any circumstances request the state use eminent domain on residential properties.” Thus, the only individuals who will truly be negatively affected by the expansion are those living in the surrounding neighborhood, which will likely see rents rise to an unaffordable level as a result of gentrification. This is the real question of debate: does Columbia have the right to fundamentally alter a neighborhood and indirectly displace its previous tenants?

If the only people affected by the Manhattanville expansion were the current residents of the neighborhood, the issue would probably be less complex. However, it is important to recognize that there are other groups involved in the situation. The students of Columbia for instance, have a few ways of viewing the topic. One of them is to consider historical precedent, especially as it relates to the University’s development of Morningside Heights 20 years ago. The current neighborhood that we all know and love didn’t always exist in its present form. It was sorely underutilized, to the extent that it made sense for JJ’s to be a bar and the basement of Furnald to be a grocery store. Ultimately, I believe that most students would agree that the development of Morningside Heights conferred upon them many benefits, and I see no reason why the Manhattanville expansion would not do the same.

Now that we see how the lives of one group of people could be changed for the better, let’s move on to another, much larger segment of the population that stands to gain from the development. Manhattanville is currently in its underpopulated state for two reasons: zoning restrictions and rent controls that prevent landlords from earning a decent return on their investment. Through its expansion plan, Columbia has the opportunity to rectify both of those problems. First, as the expansion progresses and the neighborhood improves, the area will not only become more attractive to developers, but zoning commissions will also begin to see the merits of further economic development in West Harlem. This fact, combined with rising property values that allow investors to earn a greater return, will lead companies to invest in residential construction in a city that faces a desperate shortage of housing. Why is this important? Because, by taking the initiative in Manhattanville, Columbia has the opportunity to set in motion a redevelopment wave that could affect large parts of upper Manhattan. This would increase the supply of housing in New York City, and would either make the overall pool of housing in the city cheaper, or at least stop it from appreciating at its current rate.

Ultimately, there will be winners and losers from the Manhattanville expansion, both of whom have strong supporting cases. On the one hand, the development will inflict a large amount of pain on a small group of people by raising the cost of living for some and displacing others. However, it will also provide a relatively smaller benefit to a much larger group of individuals (think in the tens of thousands) through cheaper housing than would otherwise be available in Midtown or lower Manhattan. Which group should have their interests protected? Honestly, I don’t have an answer to this question, and I think it would be presumptuous for anyone to suppose that they do. As a result, the reasonable conclusion that we have to come to is that both sides probably have arguments of similar strength.

If this is the situation though, how are we to move forward on this issue? Here, we need to take a serious look at the founding principles of our society, and use them to guide our decisions. Fundamentally, America is a capitalist society that has become prosperous because of the power of the free market. Government plays an important role in ensuring general social welfare, but as Milton Friedman writes in Free To Choose, “The burden of proof [for government intervention] should be on its proponents. We should develop the practice of examining both the benefits and the costs of proposed government interventions and require a very clear balance of benefits over costs before adopting them.”

Applying this standard to Manhattanville, we can see that because of the ambiguity surrounding the well-being of the current residents juxtaposed with the immense gain that would result from development, there simply isn’t an adequate justification for interference in the market. Fundamentally, the onus is on the residents of Manhattanville to show why the common good would be impeded by Columbia’s expansion, and if they are unable to do so, then the free market should be allowed to decide the matter.

Naturally, there is ample room for compromise and negotiation between the University and the residents of Manhattanville. However, to presuppose that Columbia is inherently in the wrong because its actions threaten to displace people is shortsighted and doesn’t approach the matter from the global perspective it deserves. Manhattanville is about people, but we need to remember that it is also about people living outside of the neighborhood, and that their interests deserve consideration too.

The author is a Columbia College sophomore.