3 thoughts on “At Inwood Rezoning Meeting, More Fears of Gentrification

  1. “City officials … expect the proposal to generate up to 4,348 new apartments in the neighborhood, including 1,325 to 1,563 income-targeted units under the MIH requirement.”

    Keep in mind that the 4,348 number is a projection from the EIS of how many of the 14,000 possible new apartments enabled by the rezoning will be built. They could be wildly off and the rapid development of sites that went from zero FAR to 16 to 30 story residential towers might end up with many thousands more units. (Case in point — in the Long Island City rezoning, the city predicted 300 apartments would be built. It ended up being closer to ten thousand.) All without a single new school, park, community center, arts space, etc. and all wildly out of context with an area that already functions quite well as a medium-density midrise neighborhood.

    The fears about context, gentrification, business displacement, traffic, infrastructure, etc. are all mollified or reduced if the city would simply rezone the former industrial areas to something closer to the fabric of the existing residential areas — R7A, R7D, R7X even. But not R8s, not R9s. Why they are choosing the radical path that is causing so much opposition can only be answered by City Hall.

  2. Sen. Espaillat teamed up with Gale Brewer to express with as much empathy and compassion they could muster and a wee bit of regret that the Inwood Library will be the sacrificial lamb to fix the decades old, persistent problem of “affordable “
    housing. How will the proposed 175 units of “affordable“ units save or solve a housing problem synonymous with NYC housing issues? The refusal (by those in power) to even give the library its own ULURP, according to my conversation with Gale Brewer, indicates the library never had a chance. One can assume it was a backroom deal made before the plan was brought to the community for feedback. Shame on our local politicians for pitting an award-winning and heavily used library against housing when the city can find other city-owned lots for housing to be built. Just ask Scott Stringer for the list of 1,100 vacant city lots. Who are the powerful people who refuse to give Inwood Library its own ULURP? Who are the powerful people who determined Inwood Library has to go? Who are the powerful people who say it’s okay for the library to close for 5 years when community schools and students are dependent on the services of the library to fulfill curriculum requirements, get scheduled homework help, and tutoring? The Inwood Library community will be without the pre-school programs, ESL programs, citizenship programs, adult literacy programs and much more. Our children do not have 5 years to spare, while the library is being rebuilt. We will be sent to other libraries, at least one fare away. Libraries that are already heavily used. Gale Brewer talks about her experience. When the St. Agnes Library was closed for renovation the sign on the door entrance directed me and the public to the Bloomingdale Library at West 100th street or to the Riverside Library, between W. 65th and W. 66th street. That was and is her solution to the problem of a closed library. I will add, St. Agnes Library was built in 1903 and was going through a renovation, not a demolition so housing could be incorporated in the rebuilding. Although the upper west of Manhattan desperately hungers for “affordable” housing. Shame on local politicians. I hope Community Board #12 votes down not only the Inwood Library but the entire ULURP.

  3. I for one welcome the change to the neighborhood. There is too much wasted space up here. Rents are going up without rezoning and if more housing isn’t brought in then it will just continue at a more rapid rate.

    Transportation is another story. I would like to see at the very least a ferry stop to be added.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *