Yesterday from 4PM until 9:30PM, I attended along with so many of you, the Scoping Session for the Columbia University Draft Environmental Impact Study at the Roberto Clemente Middle School.
I officially presented Community Board 9 Manhattan's framework for the technical comments to be made by Ms. Pat Jones, my 2nd Vice Chair who heads the 197-a Plan and our Technical Consultants, which they did very professionally.
First out of respect and duty and then because my empathy with the members of the Board, both Appointed and Public and because of the District 9 residents commenting I was glued to my seat. I am not ashamed to say that I love our diverse communities in Distric 9, but last night with only one posible exception I was so proud of being CB9M Chair and so extremely proud of our community and the way that they expressed themselves in a thoroughly caring, honest way, with so much conviction and real facts that now not only do I love District 9, I am also in love with District 9.
All of those who commented, you have my respect and gratitude, but remember you have until January 6, 2006 to put your pertinent factual comments in writing and submit them to New York City Department of City Planning, without being restricted to the 3-minute rule that so many of you rightfully broke.
As you may already know, after some personal concerns, I decided to run again for CB9M Chair. I made this decision after much consultation with my fellow Board members and with the conviction that I have the responsibility to the District 9 community to finish the task of getting our 197-a Plan adopted and addressing the Columbia Expansion plans under our 197-a. From all indications I expect to be re-elected and as in the past I will be looking at the District 9 community members participation, advise and support as we bring our 197-a to New York City Council for approval.
I knew, on an intellectual level that the community was solidly behind our 197-a Plan. Last night I realized how strongly devoted our community is to our 197-a Plan. Almost one hundred persons signed-up to speak, way over 70 actually spoke, as some had to leave due to the lateness of the process in which everyone who wanted got their say. Not one speaker spoke in support of the Columbia University 197-c Action. To those who had to leave, please express yourselves in writing, do not miss this opportunity.
After the session ended I thanked Robert Dobruskin and the DCP officials for being flexible enough to allow some proxy comments and fairly lenient with the 3-minute rule that so many disregarded. I asked Bob if he did these type of hearings often, he replied that yes as he is the DCP person so responsible; I then asked him how often does he preside on these hearings and after over 70 people speaking, there was no a one comment in favor of the project, Bob told me this was the first time, I asked him to make sure to remark on that when he reports to the City Planning Commission.
Last night I asked those who commented to e-mail me their written comments to include them in my Blog, so here they are. I will be adding others as received.
JRM
DCP Scoping Session on Columbia University Draft Environmental Impact Study
Subject: Scoping Statement
Date: 11/16/2005 6:44:14 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: AKappner
To: Reysmontj
STATEMENT FOR SCOPING SESSION on Columbia's Plans 15 Nov 05
RE: Alternatives, Framework for Review (analysis years, study & areas, Avoidance rather than Mitigation, Tasks 3,4, & 10
In this area of NYC, housing is the most important and fundamental issue. On it hinges the very survival of what community remains. In Community District 9, Columbia University has been THE major contributor to the housing crisis.
Their past expansions have created an economically and ethnically homogenized Institutional Company Town, at times through the most brutal methods. They have eliminated thousands of low and moderately priced rentals, and continue to do so. As Columbia prepares to move North of 125th Street, it is worth looking at what they have done South of 125th.
More than half of the residential buildings between 110th and 125th Streets are owned by Columbia with well over 6000 apartment units. Less than 750 -around 100 of them on our block-remain occupied by long term community residents. Other than Public Housing and Morningside Gardens and 3333 Broadway, now under threat, these units remaining within Columbia housing are the last enclaves of stability and diversity, and indeed of a neighborhood that is still a community. Our block has more diversity in economic and ethnic terms than any other census tract, other than Public Housing, between 110th and 125th Streets.
That is why when we talk of affordable housing, the most important, indeed critical task, is to focus on preserving what remains. Otherwise, we lose a hundred units to every one that may or may not be created. It is also the most cost efficient way of providing affordable housing. It costs a whole lot less to preserve what exists, than to build new units.
Moreover, Columbia University must not be left off the hook or allowed to buy its way out of meeting its responsibility for creating the housing crisis we now face in this community. As called for in the community's 197A Plan, Columbia should first set aside the community housing stock that remains under its control, and only then provide more units to offset those that have been lost.
Columbia's practices have had a devastating impact on the socio-economic make-up and on the very character of the neighborhood. It is bad enough that they have been able to do so through acquisitions and using their not for profit status. It is simply inexcusable for City Planning to aid and abet Columbia's further attempts to destroy our residential and economic community, when THE COMMUNITY's 197A PLAN CREATES A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. We do not need to destroy to develop. CITY PLANNING MUST INSIST ON �AVOIDANCE� RATHER THAN �MITIGATION.� The 197A allows for Columbia and the community to coexist. Why not do what the City Charter mandates? Make Columbia's plans adhere to the 197A framework, rather than support their thinly disguised attempts to take over and push out.
***************************************************
Subject: Fish
Date: 11/16/2005 2:09:24 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: south@nyc.rr.com
To: Reysmontj@aol.com
CC: south@nyc.rr.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Environmental Assessment Statement
Walter South
As a student of American Literature I would like you to know how much I appreciate having had a chance to read The Environment Assessment Statement being discussed today. Matter of fact, I have been keeping it on my bedstand next to Moby Dick. Moby Dick has been described as the biggest fish story ever told. But, after having read the EIS I have to say, in all candor, it puts Moby Dick under water.
You may think I exaggerate, but let�s look at the document itself for a few laughs!
Need:
Page 14 States that the rezoning action is �to allow Columbia University to fulfill its role as a leading academic Institution�, and alleges on Page 1d that it �has less than half the square footage per student of peer institutions�.
There is, though, a disconnect between this alleged justification and the proposed action. What needs to be stated is: how many students there in their undergraduate and graduate studies at this time? In which schools are the students studying and in
what numbers? Has there been a growth or decline in each school over the past ten years and what is expected in the next ten years? What numbers and what percentages?
Secondly, which of these schools of study are being built in the proposed business park? Are they planning to, for example, bring in their School of Dentistry, or Nursing?
In short, where is the proof they need more academic space.
Use:
Page 2 of the EIS Scope states that the Academic Mixed Use Subdistrict A would contain, academic buildings laboratory/research facilities, housing, administrative offices etc, and the letter of 3 Oct 05 from DEP says the need is for � new academic facilities and related uses� but Chart 5b has for Subdistrict A 2,683,234 sf Research, 1,230,348 sf for other uses, and 1,318,708 for academic. Academic sf is 19.3% of the total. If non academic uses are driving the program and academic uses are a poor after thought, why cannot the EIS be truthful and clearly state the purposes in rank of importance? Why are academic uses listed first? This seems deceitful. It is clearly not the motivation here.
The EIS is not truthful not only about motivation but also about what is being proposed to be built. Look at Table 5, on Page 5c. It claims that 6,831,424 sf are proposed. But where is the Studebaker Building and where is Subdistrict C and where is �Other Area� the block on Broadway and 135th Street?
We need a complete list of the sf for Subdistrict A Sites 1-17 (Including the omitted Studebaker Building) and Subdistrict C, and �other Area�.
Subsidies:
How much of the total area is under the streets and sidewalks? (Percentage and sf) Page 1c calls for Eminent Domain to obtain this property.
How much is the area under the streets and sidewalks worth? How was this amount of property calculated? What does the applicant expect to pay for this land?
How much will it cost to relocate or replace the utilities in this area?
How was this figure derived?
How much is the applicant going to pay for the relocation of utilities?
And other queries come to mind:
If the entire area of Subdistrict A ,C �Other Area� and the Sites south of 125th were totally built out what would the appraised value be for property tax purposes if these sites were built by the private market? What would the City receive in income from real estates taxes for the next 40 years for all of these sites?
How much will the applicant pay each year for 40 years in real estate taxes?
Furthermore:
How much will the applicant save by obtaining financing from the NYS Dormitory Authority for a build out?
What other forms of subsidy does the applicant expect from the City, State or Federal Government? For example are they seeking Empowerment Zone or any other anticipated sources of subsidies?
How much federal funding is applicant expecting from where, for what and when?
When all of the local, state and federal subsidies are added together how much is involved yearly during the build out period? And how much are the total subsidies over 40th years on a year by year basis?
The answers to these questions are important as it seems the applicant is sucking deeply at the tit of the taxpayers.
Zoning:
Does the C6.2 Proposed Rezoning include Communities Facilities Bonus? If so what is the bonus? According to code the FAR is 7.2 with bonus. Is this bonus being waived in the rezoning application? If it is not being waved and if all of the applicant�s sites qualify why is not the field being leveled with a request for 7.2 regardless of the owner? This looks to me to be nothing more than spot zoning which probably not legal.
Why is Manufacturing Use in Subdistrict A, B and C being limited to an FAR of 2? (Page 2, Appendix A). Isn�t this just another attempt to restrict manufacturing for the applicant�s personal benefit?
Why is Residential Use in Subsection A an FAR of 3.44? (Appendix A, Page 2) In C6.2 Districts According to The Zoning Handbook by DCP or �Code� a Residential FAR in C6-2 zones is 0.94 to 6.02 or R8 Equivalent.
And why is Subdistrict C proposed for FAR 6.02.
Likewise why is �Other Area: East of Broadway� an FAR of 6.02(Page 2 Appendix A) with an R8A Zoning (Page 5).
What is the proposed Communities Bonus in Subdistrict C and the �Other Area�?
In Summary:
Since the need for their proposed action has not been proved: and
Since the intent of this proposed action ie: Academic Expansion is clearly misleading, and this proved by their own incomplete figures which show that intended academic use is only 19% of total builtout space (Table 5 Page 5c):and
Since the proposed rezoning of C6-2 is clearly a sham as their intended buildout for their use with Community Facilities Bonus gives them an FAR of 7.2, and while the intended FAR for manufacturing is 2(Appendix A, Page 2) which clearly only benefits them: and
Since the EIS is silent on the total actual cost of this proposal to the public: ie in lost real property taxes, lost of City Property, in additional new infrastructure expenses, in interest subsidies on State and other loans, and other public tax dollars this �nonprofit� is requesting:
Therefore the only logical conclusion that can be reached is this EIS is really not really a keeper. It smells more like a dead fish, and it, and its authors should be thrown back into the Hudson.
**********************************************
Subject: Coalition to Preserve Community
Date: 11/16/2005 4:34:26 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: BFrappy24
To: Reysmontj@aol.com
THE SCOPING DOCUMENT: COLUMBIA WANTS IT ALL
The scoping document submitted by Columbia on the impact of its massive rezoning request is written in technical language and that makes it a little hard to understand. But what is clear is that if Columbia gets what its wants, the future of West Harlem will not include most of us.
City Planning has acknowledged that huge differences exist between the community plan for development -197A plan - and Columbia's. They have suggested that there be discussions. That's usually a good idea, but let's look at the reality of the situation. The community has been talking for well over two years with Columbia in meeting after meeting but every major hurdle is still there. When President Bollinger announced his expansion plan at CB 9 in April 2004 he stated that this was an all or nothing situation. We learned why he said that about a year and a half later when it was revealed how extensive the demolition above and below ground would be. Columbia wants it all - the complete destruction of all buildings but one north of 125th St. to 133rd street, from Broadway to 12th Ave. (The only building to remain would be the Studebaker building, and Columbia is asking the public to subsidize the renovation of it with $52 million of tax money, state Dormitory Authority bonds.) Not only do they want to knock it all down, but they also want to dig it all up. Almost all of seventeen acres will be leveled and a warren of underground tunnels and sub-structures called "the factory" (some 70 feet deep) will be excavated.
The 197A plan allows for Columbia to expand, but to do so in the context of the community presently there. It prevents evictions of residents and offers protections from secondary displacement. It supports the development of current businesses who represent the last vital manufacturing zone in Manhattan, rather than demanding their removal. It prevents the creation of a canyon of tall buildings, as high as 26 stories, and respects historic preservation. It controls the 25 years of construction disruption since most of the proposed underground excavation - especially under the streets - would not occur. It would be limited to Columbia's properties. In short, with the 197A, Columbia can't have it all.
President Bollinger continues with his imperial approach, ignoring the community completely and avoiding the fact that there has already been significant impact even before the impact from Columbia's plans. The threat of eminent domain is being used against businesses and it has helped chase some out. And the threat of the expansion, just the idea of it, has driven up land values and secondary displacement in regulated housing is already occurring - both on the north and south ends of the area. Now that official steps are beginning for the Environmental Impact Statement, the administration has hired yet another set of staff people as if it expects the community to buy into some new and improved version of dialogue! What would be the point of such discussion or mediation (a tactic encouraged this summer by the Mayor's office which pretends the divide could be mediated)? If Bollinger has stated repeatedly that he wants it all, unconditionally, the discussion is only going one way. Mediate that!
The scoping document reveals the truth. This it is not about stubborn personalities trying to implement a plan, nor is it about making academic choices about an art school or diversity decisions about where a Starbucks might go. This is New York and this is about real estate. This is about the third largest landowner seeing an opportunity to seize a great swatch of Manhattan which will be valuable equity for decades to come - and which will be worth 300 to 500 percent more if Columbia gets the zoning change it wants. It is about the creation of a business park, one that can crank out an occasional patent that could bring in 600 million dollars and one that can take advantage of the huge federal defense funding now available in the biotech field. That is why Bollinger is being so uncompromising. If it was about education, he could expand quite nicely within the confines of the 197A plan - Columbia buildings integrated with the present community. He would not insist on it all because what "it all" means is the eviction of our friends and neighbors - the root shock displacement of this vital Black and Hispanic working class community whose hospitality and liveliness attract New Yorkers of all races; be they residents, business people, tourists, or students.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
3247 Broadway
Block 1997 Lot 30
Joseph A. Zuhusky, Jr.
Peter E. Zuhusky
My name is Judy Zuhusky and I represent DespatchMoving & Storage located at 3247 Broadway, one of theproperties targeted to be bought or condemned anddestroyed by Columbia.
My family has been the owner-operator of DespatchMoving & Storage since 1966 and has been located at3247 in Manhattanville since 1974 when myfather-in-law bought the building.
We have been members of the Manhattanville Communityfor 32 years. We have continuously provided andcontinue to provide both low-cost residential andcommercial moving and storage to the community and, asagents of North American Van Lines, we providenationwide and international moving services. We areartisans in the manufacturing of custom crates forfine art and high value products.
Our industrial use is important to the NEIGHBORHOODCHARACTER and industrial history of the area.
For 3 decades we have employed members of this diversecommunity routinely employing 30 people but swelling annually to 50 from May-October during our busy season.
We also have and continue to utilize the services ofelectricians, plumbers, and neighborhood vendors tomaintain and service our business and facility.
As a 32-year member of the Manhattanville Community, it is our position the Columbia Expansion Plan has anegative impact on the neighborhood character ofManhattanville.
Our Building at 3247 Broadway is prominent and relevant to the 20th century commercial history ofManhattanville. 3247 Broadway has been and is theonly building in Manhattanville in single, continuoususe. Our building is a 10 story brick and stonestorage warehouse built circa 1909 by Thomas McGuire. The fa�ade has widely spaced bays of windows and theentire height is flanked by brick and built like afortress with 18-inch thick walls. The building has served the public as a fallout shelter during the Cold War, was the former home of Chelsea warehouse and is a state of the art, fur and piano storage facility.
It remains an imposing figure in the Manhattanville neighborhood, viewable from the Westside Highway, New Jersey, and the Broadway viaduct.
The moving and storage company we operate, Despatch,was founded in 1816 during the horse and buggy era and is one of the oldest moving and storage companies inthe city. It has been continuously operating as amoving and storage company for 109 years.
My family has been privileged to operate this neighborhood icon since 1966. Its operation currently includes the 3rd generation of our family. WE WANT TO STAY AND BELIEVE WE DESERVE TO BE A PARTOF ANY REVITALIZATION.
Therefore, the EIS MUST address the negative impact onbusiness and its loss to the community.
The EIS MUST address the alternative to Eminent Domainand The EIS MUST address the alternative 197A plan, whichpreserves and respects the community, its NEIGHBORHOODCHARACTER, and its residential and business members.
No comments:
Post a Comment